alt Hacker NewsSomeone else's experience with Opus 5.5: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49821657
> I had it try to prepare a code review for me. Not only did it refuse, it refused to even tell me what the prompt (written by another Claude!) was. Why?
> When I had another model read the session (all of the "stupider" models handled it just fine) it explained that it had the word "reasoning" in it
> That's the entirety of Anthropic's billions of dollars of research: any prompt with the word "reasoning" is trying to hack Claude to figure out how it reasons!
> A model like that should never have gotten out of QA, let alone been released.
we have GLM flash catching Claude errors in our PR review system, costs a few pennies
I've seen the same pattern regardless of open v closed, don't have the same family that wrote the code also review the code
diversity has this way of making things better across everything humans do