News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by magicalist on Thursday February 05, 2026 @02:41PM (#46904077)
> They've said this directly and analysts agree [1]

chasing down a few sources in that article leads to articles like this at the root of claims[1], which is entirely based on information "according to a person with knowledge of the company’s financials", which doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.

[1] https://www.theinformation.com/articles/openai-getting-effic...

Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by simonw on Thursday February 05, 2026 @06:01PM (#46906656)
"according to a person with knowledge of the company’s financials" is how professional journalists tell you that someone who they judge to be credible has leaked information to them.

I wrote a guide to deciphering that kind of language a couple of years ago: https://simonwillison.net/2023/Nov/22/deciphering-clues/

Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by topaz0 on Friday February 06, 2026 @08:30AM (#46912589)
Unfortunately tech journalists' judgement of source credibility don't have a very good track record
Re:Claude Opus 4.6 by mrgaro on Friday February 06, 2026 @03:22AM (#46910395)
But there are companies which are only serving open weight models via APIs (ie. they are not doing any training), so they must be profitable? here's one list of providers from OpenRouter serving LLama 3.3 70B: https://openrouter.ai/meta-llama/llama-3.3-70b-instruct/prov...