\n<\/p>\n
The AI race is moving quickly.<\/p>\n
And as quickly as companies develop new models, raise new funding, and make new hires, so too does the tech industry\u2019s view of the field’s key players shift.<\/p>\n
So, after weeks as the industry\u2019s darling, Anthropic has seen this past week defined by its perceived shortcomings.<\/p>\n
On Thursday, Anthropic released its latest model, Claude Opus 4.7.<\/p>\n
Notably, this is not its most advanced model \u2014 that is Mythos Preview, which it has released to a select number of partners as part of Project Glasswing.<\/p>\n
The challenge, however, is that users have noticed.<\/p>\n
Tae Kim, author of the newsletter Key Context and a recent book on Nvidia, compiled a series of complaints from notable commentators on X, highlighting a variety of perceived deficiencies in Opus 4.7.<\/p>\n
Gergely Orosz, who writes the Pragmatic Engineer newsletter, also called Opus 4.7 \u201csurprisingly combative.\u201d<\/p>\n
Orosz has also been among those in the tech space, noting that Claude has notably struggled to keep up with tasks in recent weeks.<\/p>\n
Anthropic\u2019s compute disadvantage \u2014 that is, the amount of raw computing power available to the company \u2014 relative to OpenAI has become a major point of discussion as adoption of Claude, specifically Claude Code, has ramped in recent weeks.<\/p>\n
This also comes as the company\u2019s rollout of Mythos Preview continues to confound some commentators, with a description of its capabilities \u2014 but a less transparent view of its benchmarks \u2014 making the cybersecurity vulnerabilities reportedly surfaced by Mythos feel like a blend of PR spin and a true AGI moment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n