HackerNews中文版

自从最近的更新以来，我感觉Claude Opus在处理复杂任务时变得愚蠢了。以前在单个提示中能够顺利完成的事情，现在完全失败。在编码工作流程中，它不断忽视强制性的CLAUDE.md项目规则，对无关文件进行不必要的编辑，并破坏了正常工作的代码。它开始根据过时的评论进行争论，在代码更改时未能更新文档，并且在没有实际验证代码库的情况下进行盲目猜测的编辑。我甚至发现自己在处理我过去一直用Opus完成的任务时，开始使用Fable，只是为了获得体面的结果。这感觉就像Anthropic将他们的技术问题转嫁给了付费用户。要么他们使用严格的安全过滤器，在没有告知我们的情况下默默回退到更便宜的模型，要么在高负载下降低计算能力以节省开支。结果就是同样的“缩水通货膨胀”：我们支付相同的订阅费用，但要么在无休止的重试中消耗更多的Opus代币，要么被迫花钱购买更昂贵的Fable代币，以获得我们曾经拥有的质量。这里有没有人成功地在复杂的工程工作流程中摆脱Claude？你们用什么替代，如何处理过渡？免责声明：作为一名以德语为母语的人，我使用Gemini对这篇帖子的英文文本进行了整理和润色。

查看原文

Since the recent updates, I have the feeling that Claude Opus is becoming dumber on complex tasks.Things that used to work cleanly in a single prompt now fail completely. In coding workflows, it constantly ignores mandatory CLAUDE.md project rules, makes unsolicited edits to unrelated files, and breaks working code. It starts arguing based on stale comments, fails to update documentation when code changes, and edits based on blind guesswork instead of actually verifying the codebase first.I even caught myself using Fable for tasks that I always used Opus for in the past, just to get decent results.It feels like Anthropic is shifting their technical problems onto paying users. Either they are using strict safety filters that silently fall back to cheaper models without telling us, or they are downgrading the compute under heavy load to save money.The result is the same kind of shrinkflation: we pay the same subscription price, but we either burn way more Opus tokens on endless retries, or we are forced to spend money on more expensive Fable tokens to get the quality we used to have.Has anyone here successfully moved away from Claude for complex engineering workflows? What are you replacing it with, and how are you handling the transition?Disclaimer: As a native German speaker, I used Gemini to clean up and polish the English text for this post.

是我一个人这样觉得，还是克劳德·奥普斯最近变得更糟了？