[archon1410]

The naming scheme used to be "Claude [number] [size]", but now it is "Claude [size] [number]". The new models should have been named Claude 4 Opus and Claude 4 Sonnet, but they changed it, and even retconned Claude 3.7 Sonnet into Claude Sonnet 3.7.

Annoying.

[martinsnow]

It seems like investors have bought into the idea that llms has to improve no matter what. I see it in the company I'm currently at. No matter what we have to work with whatever bullshit these models can output. I am however looking at more responsible companies for new employment.

[fhd2]

I'd argue a lot of the current AI hype is fuelled by hopium that models will improve significantly and hallucinations will be solved.

I'm a (minor) investor, and I see this a lot: People integrate LLMs for some use case, lately increasingly agentic (i.e. in a loop), and then when I scrutinise the results, the excuse is that models will improve, and _then_ they'll have a viable product.

I currently don't bet on that. Show me you're using LLMs smart and have solid solutions for _todays_ limitations, different story.