you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 May 2026
16 points (94.4% liked)
TechTakes
2586 readers
86 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
So what's the over/under on the discrepancies between the numbers that the HN folks got and the official press release numbers being in part due to some kind of hallucinatron hijinks? Because I'm gonna go ahead and predict with confidence that either the HN post was written with a faulty slopbot and they didn't check it or else the presser itself went through the matrix-multiplication-meaning-mangler. Possibly both and all those numbers are similar levels of "more or less right, we swear"
It's almost certainly a slop article, but to its credit, it did accurately cite the numbers from the official Anthropic flowchart image. (Also, just to be clear, this is an Indian "#1 cybersecurity news" company doing an SEO piggyback off the orange site, not the orange site itself).
However, Anthropic's numbers in their official post do not match their own flowchart, despite being presented together. My assumption is they made the image, post, and yet another fucking dashboard earlier, then failed to keep them all in sync when someone revised the numbers up or down.
The dashboard timestamp claims it's showing the latest numbers as of 2026-05-22 10:27 PT (T17:27Z) with values that match the numbers in the image. The post created timestamp gives 2026-05-20 T14:07:48Z, and it was later updated at 2026-05-22 T20:37:40Z. I'm guessing that update was to swap the image, and the fact that some of the values are also quoted in the text was completely overlooked. Or vice versa.
It's the kind of attention to detail I've come to expect from Anthropic.