Skip to content
All topics
IntegrationsSee on /pulse →

Anthropic

Recent items mentioning Anthropic across the Databricks ecosystem — releases, news, videos, and community Q&A. Updated hourly.

60 recent items25 releases10 news20 videos5 community threads
What's happening in AnthropicAI synthesis · updated 6d ago

Databricks has released official guidance on using Claude alongside Genie and ChatGPT to study for its new Context Engineer Associate certification 7, while developers are deploying Claude Code to audit platform spend 1. Furthermore, Claude is being integrated into multi-agent frameworks like OmniGen for collaborative execution 4 and leveraged in knowledge distillation pipelines to train low-cost student models 6.

Generated daily from the 10 most recent items mentioning Anthropic. Click any [N] to jump to the source.

HackerNews

Databricks Cost Optimizer: Audit Spend with Codex or Claude Code

20kylehui8181w ago
HackerNews

Managing AI Coding Costs at Scale

--- top comments --- [extr] I would be really curious to hear from devs at Databricks what the experience of development is like internally. I work at a small startup with essentially unlimited AI spend budget - the entire point is that I should be turning to it at every opportunity since our human labor is so expensive relative to tokens. So generally it's like: - Spend most time prioritizing/discussing what to do. - Once that's agreed, use Fable 5 High + 5.6 Sol XHigh come up with a design + plan. Agree on the high level plan. (Usually this just comes down to choosing where the change belongs on the spectrum between minimal patch <-> full redesign) - Use Opus 5 or Sol Med to execute - Auto-fix bugs and CI until green + thermonuclear review skill x3. - Manual interrogation of change/nits - Come up with QA plan and have Codex Computer Use execute on it - Manually spot check the final result (usually a sizable diff, thousands of lines, complete feature E2E, etc) I probably spend like $80 a day at least but I produce the output of 3 or 4 2022 engineers and probably at better quality. So it's easily worth it. Would I save money by switching to GLM 5.2 and such...perhaps? IDK. At our scale it's not worth the time spent building the eval harness to actually understand the performance tradeoff. [lbriner] There are a surprising number of articles like this along the lines of, "we started using AI tools and ended up spending millions per year". On what planet do people start paying for things without keeping an eye on the costs and no-one notices until you have spent a crazy amount? I don't understand. You are either paying a fixed amount which you are happy about in-advance or you are PAYG in which case you would ballpark how much it costs. Otherwise it reads a bit like a fake problem, because it didn't really happen, you just foresaw it (as you should) and added a few guide rails. [sashank_1509] I suspect that when it comes to hard complex software products, you’re better off ignoring agents and doing “trad coding”. What you lose in short term speed you gain in manageable complex codebases. If you have a 500k line codebase and even > 50% is written by agents, you are in a world of pain that won’t justify the costs longer term. Now of course, there are products that just involve lots of code but are not actually complex. This is generally the project with like hundreds or thousands of features but most of the features are separate and don’t actually interact in complex ways. Think a task management app with hundreds of features like calendar, email integration etc. there I think agents gives you more bang for the buck. Just my thought, using agents at work. [platinumrad] Careful. If you admit to using models that weren't trained by OpenAI or Anthropic then you might hauled in front of Congress: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3362616/us... [dgellow] What I take from this is that models are already commoditized, and it’s pretty clear nobody has a moat: routing for the models, they can be swapped whenever new models are released, AI labs will have to continue to run on the treadmill non stop or be replaced. Long term I cannot imagine that business will be high margin. Routing for the harness, so anything that differentiate a provider vs another isn’t exposed to the user and isn’t too relevant. One more datapoint for the thesis that OpenAI and anthropic aren’t viable, sustainable businesses, and cannot justify their $1T valuation and the level of compute commitment (reminder that OpenAI committed to >$750B in infra spending for 2030)

316268moonikakiss1w ago
HackerNews

Pi, Minimal and Performant

--- top comments --- [zhinit] Im looking forward to trying out Pi this week. It seems like anthropic just keeps adding more features that I don't really want and now is ignoring my claude.md and hooks. It feels like i'm adding more and more guardrails just to get to the place i used to be at before all the new features. Hopfully Pi helps

31tosh1w ago
HackerNews

Benchmarking coding agents on Databricks' multi-million line codebase

--- top comments --- [redmalang] We have an internal proxy (that I've been meaning to open source for ages) that routes all llm usage at our company, which allows us to see data in realtime. Its been fascinating how rapidly Pi has been adopted. Moreover since its pretty hackable, we've been able to automatically aggregate context from pi sessions, which has resulted in Pi efficacy being higher as more people use it, putting in place a interesting virtuous loop. I didn't expect this outcome: for whatever reason I assumed proprietary harnesses fine tuned to work with a companies' models would work better? ps/random aside: there is something slightly off about Pi's edit command, we are planning to investigate this further and patch this as we have quite a few session traces now.. [yodon] I wish they'd do a follow-on post drilling into the impact of the programming language on cost-per-task, specifically looking at cost to complete tasks in mainstream strongly typed languages (eg. C#, TypeScript) vs dynamic languages (eg. Python, JavaScript). Does the additional verbosity of the language help or hurt cost per task? [cpard] This was mostly because Sonnet 5 worked longer and read more to get there, consuming 1.9x more tokens. I have experienced similar behavior between opus and haiku when benchmarking Dara engineering tasks. The “cheaper” model takes many more turns to figure out the task and this is without taking into account other important factors. Another interesting behavior that I observed is that Haiku tended to cheat more maybe because it was having a harder time to find the root cause of the problem. Benchmarking and evaluation of agentic systems is very interesting and if there’s one thing that someone should keep from the Databricks post is how important is for everyone to build and run their own. [anentropic] > the results showed clear clustering of the models and harnesses into 3 capability tiers pretty sure the only thing making that 'clear' is the coloured stripes, if you took that away it'd look like two tiers good result for GLM 5.2 though and Sonnet 5 seems like a waste of time [HarHarVeryFunny] Wow! It's great to see a large-scale real-world benchmark from a user of these tools, as opposed to the the benchmaxxed results from the vendors themselves. Also great to see different harnesses being tested, with considerably different results. Definitely a few surprises here: 1) GLM 5.2 using Pi performs identically in terms of pass rate (~87.5%) to Opus 4.8 high using Claude Code, but significantly cheaper ($1.25 per task vs $2) 2) Absolute best pass rate (90%) was from Opus 4.8 x-high using Pi, beating out Opus 4.8 using Claude Code 3) Pareto frontier performance from any of the models (Opus 4.8, GPT 5.5, GLM 2.5) was using Pi rather than native harnesses Apparently Pi used 3x less context than Claude Code, and one takeaway is to use Pi regardless of what model you are using. The other takeaway is that in real-world performance GLM 5.2 is the equal of Opus 4.8 unless you run Opus 4.8 on x-high in which case you can eke out a 2.5% increase in pass rate at the expense of doubling your cost over GLM 5.2

16169tanelpoder1mo ago
HackerNews

Show HN: Dex – Cost-aware analytics engineering skills for agents

Hi I’m Marco, co-founder of Exmergo. Me and my team created Dex to help Analytics Engineers do real work with Claude Code (and any other coding agent). We’ve found that Data and Analytics teams are stuck between a rock and a hard place cost-wise: - On one side, they are using some of the most expensive consumption-billed software on the planet (Snowflake, Databricks etc.). - On the other side, Anthropic and Open AI want you to tokenmax (and with data analytics it’s very easy to burn your context window). So we created Dex, our open source skills plugin (Apache-2.0), to solve both of these problems: - Dex forces the agent to use a cost guard when performing exploration queries and transformations. - Dex uses a set of tooling that makes it hard to get burned when transforming data. It achieves these things with tight control scripts that the SKILL.md files are pointed towards when using /dex:explore, /dex:transform and /dex:maintain. Bonus: Dex makes agents really good data exploration, building sql and dbt models and detecting drift. 76% performance on ade-bench with Claude Sonnet 5 (and, per our measures, 2.5x cheaper than Fable 5). Install on any agent with this command in your terminal: npx skills add exmergo/dex Install on Claude Code running these commands (separately): /plugin marketplace add exmergo/exmergo-agent-plugins /plugin install dex@exmergo If you want to see more visual examples you can go through the README or browse here: https://www.exmergo.com/dex Let me know if this helps your analytics workflow and makes your agents more cost-aware.

50marcociavarella1mo ago