I asked Claude to fix the grammar of my comment, and it changed "I am using 3.7 for" to "I've been using Claude 3.7", so they sneaked their own name on it.
incredible. further evidence supporting my personal stance to never ever let an LLM write or edit my writing intended for another human being to read. this is all me, baby
Once you've written something, it's incredibly easy to overlook minute changes to the text.
See: why authors wait days, weeks, or even months before editing what they've written (or, if you're more interested: cognitive regression, inattentional blindness, and the effects of misdirected saccades).
Then I think you read it wrong, because you don't make that mistake unless you copy-paste your comment out of a Claude window and into the comment box.
Eh that one is on me, if I think too much about my HN comment I end up deleting before posting it. I rely on the 1 min `delay` set in the profile page to fix before it goes live, but for some reason this time it was set to 0.
I think the better comparison point is Opus 5. I'm also using both and I think overall I like Opus slightly better, but I'm still using Codex a lot for any project requiring image handling.
I moved a while back when Claude started refusing to do security audits and also failed to run properly in my sandbox without a lot of wrangling. Renamed Claude.md to agents.md and had no problems at all. There’s almost 0 switching cost.
No. Here's a data point: I tried it for a few days. While it worked fine I didn't see any benefit to switching since it costs the same ($100) and I've spent a year getting up to speed on Claude usage and quirks.
3 and 3.1 Pro are both marked as deprecated by Google. Even if they're the best Google offers, it would be foolish to choose a model that's explicitly deprecated.
It's not a technical problem, it's a commercial one. If Google can't ship a model to replace the one they deprecated, that tells you everything you need to know about choosing a Gemini model for whatever you're trying to do.
