Birbla

Discussion summary

Discussions revolve around potential session or cache leakage issues, with some skepticism about the likelihood and causes. Experts suggest cache sharing, hash collisions, or bugs as possible explanations.

What the discussion says

  • Some believe it's a hallucination or unlikely to be a real leak.
  • Others point to cache sharing or hash collisions as causes.
  • There is skepticism about the severity and likelihood of the issue.
“Caches are shared, but its key is always a function of the input.”
— ec109685
“Hash functions necessarily have collisions.”
— estebarb

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • Reminds me of a session I had recently (on web!) where claude insisted that i prefixed all my messages with statements about code execution or something, which was not the case. I interrogated it about that and it confirmed that it came from somewhere else, but could not get rid of it and each response mentioned that its gonna ignore those instructions. Eerie.
    by _def
  • Anthropic injects text into the conversation triggered by certain conversation topics. This happened to me in relation to some red-teaming related discussion that was adjacent to something “sensitive”, I think sex, and Claude got confused about why I had said some kind of warning and mentioned it it’s response. After a back and forth it was clear that some extra warning to answer but avoid anything inappropriate had been inserted into the conversation.
    by andy99
  • The first reply clearly being a copy and paste from Claude made me want to vomit

    If people absolutely need to use AI to write replies, they NEED to start including a "everything after this was generated by AI" disclaimer

    by Trasmatta
  • Is there anything particular about LLMs that would make separating customer data harder than in all SaaS cases?
    by jstummbillig
  • It'd be terribly compute inefficient to not share prefix caches (KV cache) across customers.
    by woadwarrior01
  • If I had to hazard a guess, doing anything in a multi-tenant way on a GPU is going to be hard mode compared to most SaaS due to lack of memory safe tooling. I've built multi-tenant SaaS systems, and I've done a little GPU programming (a long time ago), but I've never tried to combine the two disciplines.
    by 27183
  • Vibe-coding the implementation.

    I haven't had much issue with Codex, but seems Claude Code has major issues being reported nearly on the daily.

    They also happen to be the most boastful about not reading or looking at the code.

    LLMs are very capable, but not nearly to the level they seem to be messaging.

    (We've actually moved on from vibe-coding to having the LLM vibe code itself in a loop)

    by adam_arthur
  • Yes:

    * There's an enormous amount of very expensive shared state (context cache) which you do not want to duplicate when you can avoid it.

    * Memory locality is crucially important for performance.

    * Hardware is extremely over-subscribed.

    * Hardware is extremely expensive.

    These factors all make hardware or even traditional memory-space (hypervisor/VM/hardware assisted virtualization) isolation a non-starter for most workloads and customers, which forces all isolation to the software layer. This already makes things way harder than they are in commodity SaaS.

    Moving beyond that, the tools, frameworks, and hardware which the system runs on (GPU) wasn't designed for task isolation and building this isolation is even moreso an emergent research field than it is in x86 CPU hardware-sharing (which has required a huge amount of effort over the past 30+ years to get where we are today).

    And, the ratio of usage/sensitivity to maturity is also just poor overall; these are young companies with rapid development and enormous delivery pressure under incredible customer workload requirements, too.

    I can't tell if the original post is a real issue or not, but I'm surprised there aren't more like this overall; the whole thing really is a house of cards in this sense.

    by bri3d
  • In order Fable 5 has rejected:

    "Recipe for red-braised pork, I have pork shoulder"

    "Write up a framework for MCP patterns I can give to claude code"

    "explain the biomechanics of motion in c. elegans" (I get this one, I mostly did it to test and it's related to my hobby project)

    Do we get an extra day of functional Fable 5 because it's down?

    by Avicebron
  • I asked it how people get blue eyes from their parents and it downgraded me to Opus because of safety.
    by stavros
  • The safety filter rejected or the model was down?
    by nijave
  • I'm impressed that folks are using this frontier model for cooking
    by slashdave
  • What does this have to do with anything? Who are you talking to? This is Hacker News, not Anthropic support.
    by HumanOstrich
  • Not sure the relevance of this comment, but normally if someone built a classifier that bad they’d be fired. Anthropic obviously thinks they have some monopoly power they can use to foist garbage on consumers, I think they don’t.
    by andy99
  • Oh yes, we do not need programmers any more…
    by acepl
  • "Coding is largely solved"
    by emehex
  • it’s the wet dream of execs and pm types. however, i have not seen anything close to it in my life. I remember the UML days, lol. the issue is not the code, it’s the translation layer between business and code. maybe someday ai bridges that gap. history has shown probably not
    by JohnMakin
  • 50% unemployment :D
    by kylehotchkiss
  • Interesting to see the claudeslop reply as the first comment to the gh post and the reaction to it.
    by andy99
  • So the options are this amazing tech is so stupid it just randomly brings up Minecraft or it’s got a major security issue?
    by bix6
  • What does a self-driving car do when it hallucinates?
    by b0ner_t0ner
  • Not that different than people, amiright?

    ---

    Note that the author did have a minecraft.py file. So not quite 100% random.

    by paulddraper
  • ¿Por qué no los dos?
    by 27183
  • It’s the weekend so we’re allowed to anthropomorphize.

    I’ve known some brilliant engineers who would also just randomly bring up Minecraft (more likely Factorio these days) so this makes sense.

    by bee_rider
  • The person had “minecraft.py” in their context and the session context was very long.

    Having an LLM session with very long context occasionally go off on a tangent is not uncommon. The people who expect absolute perfection out of every LLM interaction see this as some total indictment of the entire technology, but the people who use these tools daily have learned to treat the output as partially stochastic and to avoid extremely long context, even if the model offers it. It’s best to compact strategically or summarize next steps to hand off to a new session. Using sub-sessions can also reduce context pollution at the cost of additional token expenditure to summarize and transfer data to and from the sub-session.

    by Aurornis
  • Hi, it's Thariq from the Claude Code Team here.

    Thanks for the detailed report. We’re confident this is a hallucination but of course take these reports seriously and the team is looking into it. We’ll report back if anything turns up.

    by trq_
  • I know it's the weekend, so thanks for working hard. Just a suggestion from a user: I wish we could manage Claude Code's memory more easily. Right now, when I go into the .claude folder and change a project folder name or something, sometimes it can't pull up the memory properly. It'd be nice if there were an easier way to import or export it. Thanks!
    by jdw64
  • I’ve been seeing this in Gemini in the past few days. Often during a prompt with a reasonably large input set, I’ll get answers that appear to belong to someone else. It may be trigger hallucination, but it seems like it may be cache collisions or something else. I’ve not seen anything to suggest private information is leaking, but it’s disconcerting to be researching something and then get what appears to be a math tutoring response.
    by jonhohle
  • My whole company is doing mid year reviews and Gemini is the only allowed tool and its been flumoxing people with seemingly random unrelated responses. Often in different languages.

    That is when it bothers to respond instead of just sending back an 1099 error code

    by malfist
  • I’ve also had problems with Gemini when accessed through their UI in the past few weeks. That’s concerning that you are also seeing it several days later in a different context.

    I wonder if there could be a large security situation playing out behind the scenes right now.

    I’ve been working on using AI to assist me in writing meta parsing grammars. Fortunately I have not launched most of them yet. I know for a fact that the next generation of models represent a major step change in basic vulnerability identification and exploitation, especially if you know where to point them. They’ve found several bugs and at least one exploit in my parsing tools so far, I can’t imagine how many there still are waiting to be discovered across the entire modern tech ecosystem.

    by weitendorf