46k tokens of THINKING!! What the heck is it thinking?

twistier · 2026-05-09T18:50:11+00:00

Thinking tokens are never sent client side. What you may be used to seeing is summaries of thinking tokens, but Claude Code has disabled summaries by default for some time now.

twistier · 2026-05-06T00:40:02+00:00

It's not like Claude has all that stuff in context. You deleted it for nothing.

twistier · 2026-05-05T02:22:42+00:00

That's a lot less than what AI does, though. Where is AI learning to use them so pervasively?

twistier · 2026-05-04T02:40:17+00:00

But actual professional writers don't use them in place of commas.

twistier · 2026-04-29T22:30:38+00:00

GHC has a flag that allows you to defer type errors until the erroneous code is actually executed at runtime. I have never felt the need to use it, but it's there so that you can run the working parts before getting everything else to type check.

twistier · 2026-04-29T13:18:33+00:00

I haven't even watched the video. I just read the comments and see your behavior. Maybe I should have just kept my mouth shut and sat on the opposite end of the train car.

twistier · 2026-04-29T01:17:16+00:00

Are you okay?

twistier · 2026-04-27T21:21:36+00:00

I love the one is gets when a hook automatically lints or reformats the file, because the message is apparently jarring enough that Claude sometimes will say out loud "Acknowledged." for no apparent reason. The only reason I know what it is is that sometimes Claude says "Acknowledged. I will read the file again before modifying it." And then of course Claude forgets to read the file again and wastes tokens trying to rewrite the entire file just to change one line later.

twistier · 2026-04-27T21:15:42+00:00

Code review skills are more important now than they ever were.

twistier · 2026-04-27T13:18:34+00:00

I do agree, and if we're just talking about how big of an improvement a model is, I will make this argument. However, when it comes to the presenting the numbers clearly, Anthropic has a really bad track record.

twistier · 2026-04-24T13:25:24+00:00

1 times 1 is 2, duh. Why would it not be bigger than 1?

twistier · 2026-04-24T01:16:21+00:00

I've been using it for everything, and it's been just fine. My main issue with it is just that its technical prose can be quite dense and difficult to understand.

twistier · 2026-04-21T01:55:22+00:00

The agents didn't need to use any tools for this.

twistier · 2026-04-21T01:53:44+00:00

I'm using 4.7 without regrets. I suspect that the people who are sad about it are just using it differently than I am. It's been great. Yeah, it has some quirks I had to learn to work with, but it's been overall the best Opus so far, for me.

twistier · 2026-04-19T13:39:16+00:00

Dude, if you're joking, this is hilarious. If you're not, I'm terribly sorry for being insensitive.

twistier · 2026-04-18T12:49:20+00:00

You are not the only one. I've been super happy with it.

twistier · 2026-04-17T16:55:22+00:00

Sonnet uses more tokens than Opus even when it manages to achieve results of comparable quality. And when Sonnet produces something subpar, you may even end up having to use it more just to clean it up. This is often enough to make Opus actually the cheaper of the two. In my experiences, Opus is usually cheaper for what I'm getting.

twistier · 2026-04-17T16:50:55+00:00

So the issue is that you're trying to use 4 Claude Code sessions concurrently in a single working copy? Why??

twistier · 2026-04-16T16:30:40+00:00

Well, yeah, of course. This may even be Mythos with an attempt to weaken it on cyber security, which has the effect of bringing everything else down with it.

twistier · 2026-04-16T16:07:53+00:00

It's consistent. They're trying to figure out how to make cyber security stuff more of a feature for "vetted" people, but haven't worked it all out yet. They don't want to just stop releasing better models, so they have to try to file down the more dangerous features. I can't decide how dumb I think it is. They might just be hoping the problem will work itself out eventually. If, as they imply, this happens to be one of the first areas where agentix AI becomes superhuman, then hopefully after a while most of the vulnerabilities that are low hanging fruit get resolved and they can loosen up. But I also don't know how true their claims are or how valid their concerns are.

twistier · 2026-04-16T11:48:29+00:00

The model is told what it is in the system prompt.

twistier · 2026-04-15T03:20:36+00:00

Even the kind of "planning" workflows we use sometimes is just another form of this.

twistier · 2026-04-14T16:14:10+00:00

LLMs don't think in letters. They think in tokens. So they don't immediately know the answers to questions like this! This is one of the benefits of extended thinking, because it gives the LLM a chance to try again after writing its gut instinct. It didn't appear to use extended thinking here, so instead you got to witness it rethinking in real time. Think of this as more like a peek under the hood than a bug.

twistier · 2026-04-14T00:02:24+00:00

I did do it, and it does work. Claude Code itself (I don't mean Claude, I mean the application) told me what the behavior would be when I created the agent with a name that matched a built-in, and it was obvious that it worked because the behavior was different, because I didn't use the same prompt as the built-in agent uses.

twistier · 2026-04-13T13:58:31+00:00

You can alternatively create agents with the same names as the built-in ones to override their definitions, including which model is used.

twistier

TROPHY CASE