← Back to context

Comment by bcherny

19 hours ago

We are taking it seriously, and are continuing to investigate. We are not trusting the metrics.

The quantitative ux research team at Google was created for exactly this problem: a service which became popular before the right metrics existed, meaning metrics need to be derived first, then optimized. We would observe users (irl), read their logs, then generate experiments to improve the behavior as measured by logs, and return to see if the experiment improves irl experiences. There were not many of us and we are around :)

Cool, are you going to be transparent and explain the metrics and costs as a postmortem? And given the inability to actually audit what you produce, why should we trust Anthropic?

  • HN sometimes talks about pathological customers who will never be happy. Boris is probably the single best rep in the community, possibly ever.

    The way your tone and complaints come across reminds me of this. As a paying customer ($5k spend per month in my corporate job), I’d rather anthropic keep doing what they’re doing — innovating and shipping useful stuff at blinding speed — and not index on your feedback. I think the tradeoffs they would cost far outweigh the consequences.

    • > Boris is probably the single best rep in the community, possibly ever.

      That’s a tall claim. When you say “the community”, what exactly are you referring to?

  • It's incredible that Boris is here on HN being open and sharing an issue they don't fully understand yet, and offering a possible workaround. CTFO.

    Thank you Boris.

    • I am sorry you feel this way, but the reality of the situation is there is zero reason to trust anything Anthropic or Boris says. They have no legal liability or obligation to tell the truth, besides brand risk, which to people like you is mitigated for a single person to show up, post, and thats it.

      3 replies →