Hacker News Reader

Comment by trollbridge | Hacker News Reader

On the flip side, I really like being able to inspect its reasoning chain thoroughly, as opposed to the "black box" that Anthropic models are now.

View on HN

Genuine question, is the reasoning chain different from clicking the status bar under a reply and watching it "think"? Or selecting the "Thinking" transcript view in Claude Code? (both on the desktop app). Seems to me that is very out in the open

That's a summarized and filtered view of the actual reasoning.

OpenAI and Anthropic guard the real reasoning closely. Users have never been able to see it and the API returns an encrypted blob instead of legible reasoning.

Got it. Thanks

Older models did show the full unredacted thinking trace, but I don't think Opus has ever shown full CoT.

Here is an archived version of Anthropic's API docs saying that Sonnet 3.7 (only) has unredacted CoT on API: https://web.archive.org/web/20260324051339/https://platform....

That’s cool. I knew o1 hid it since launch, so I assumed Anthropic would also have never shown it.

Right I was going to say, no way of knowing whether these issues are unique to Chinese models.

Depends on whether the models report the correct amount of tokens.

5.5 Sol repors 10x fewer reasoning tokens than Kimi k3. If it is correct, than it unlikely has those doubt issues.

At the same time, I feel like their reporting is incorect and we are now paying per "intelligence", not actual tokens. We can't verify it anyway..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com