The Internet Archive being down helps expose quite how much I rely on their Wayback Machine - I've headed over there are least four times in the past week and been disappointed at not being able to use it
-
The Internet Archive being down helps expose quite how much I rely on their Wayback Machine - I've headed over there are least four times in the past week and been disappointed at not being able to use it
-
Simon Willisonreplied to Simon Willison last edited by
Today people are saying that it's interesting that Anthropic's Claude 3.5 Opus model is no longer mentioned on their models page - but without the archive I can't see for myself if it used to be listed there or not https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/about-claude/models
-
Simon Willisonreplied to Simon Willison last edited by
The Wayback Machine came back long enough for me to snap this screenshot, confirming that Claude 3.5 Opus was listed as "Later this year" on Anthropic's models page a few weeks ago but is no longer mentioned at all
https://web.archive.org/web/20240930124545/https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/about-claude/models compared to https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/about-claude/models
-
Simon Willisonreplied to Simon Willison last edited by
Blogged a bit about this here https://simonwillison.net/2024/Oct/22/opus/
-
Quinn Comendantreplied to Simon Willison last edited by
@simon My conspiracy theory is that the new Sonnet is actually Opus, and they're squeezing all the juice they can out of investors believing something even better is coming soon.
-
Simon Willisonreplied to Quinn Comendant last edited by
@com some kind of investor-related shenanigans does seem possible - but the fact that they've deleted Opus 3.5 entirely from the "coming soon" section makes me think maybe they just had a bad training run and found the model unusable after testing it
(Or maybe it was found to be "unsafe" - that's not impossible given how Anthropic roll)
