3 ms·

> Seriously though, why phrase API use of Claude as "special developer access"? Isn't that precisely what an API is? Normal users do not use the API. Other pro

> Seriously though, why phrase API use of Claude as "special developer access"? Isn't that precisely what an API is? Normal users do not use the API. Other programs written by developers use it to access Claude from their app. That's like asking why is an SDK phrased as a special kit for developers to build software that works with something they wish to integrate into their app

viraptor 1y ago
Because it's not "special developer access". It's just "normal developer access". The phrasing gives an impression they accessed something other users cannot.
- CPLX 1y ago
  It would be normal standard English to assume that special modifies the word access. That would make the sentence semantically be the same as “special access, specifically the type of access used by developers” Compare with a sentence like “the elevator has special firefighter buttons” which does not mean that only some special type of firefighter uses the button.
  - toomanyrichies 1y ago
    Counter-point: as a wordsmith, it's incumbent on the article's author to make their point in an unambiguous way. In your example, rather than write "the elevator has special firefighter buttons", the author could choose to write "the elevator has buttons which are only available to firefighters". Or alternatively, "the elevator has buttons which are only available to certain firefighters". The amount of care the author puts into their phrasing determines whether their point comes across as intended, or not. The average magazine reader can likely figure out that there's no such thing as "special" firefighters with "privileged" access to elevator buttons that other firefighters lack. They may not have the programming knowledge to do likewise with "developer access", even if they are reading a magazine like "Wired".
    - Bluestein 1y ago
      It's Newswriting 101-level stuff.-
  - Calavar 1y ago
    In your example, "firefighter buttons" is a noun phrase which refers to a particular type of button. "Special" applies to the whole of "firefighter buttons," not just to "firefighter" and not just to "buttons." The same would apply for "special developer access."
    - nilamo 1y ago
      So it isn't normal developer access, like an API, there's something special about it that most developers with access to the API could not access.
  - tick_tock_tick 1y ago
    > the elevator has special firefighter buttons If you said that to anyone they'd assume there are non standard buttons beyond the normal "call" / "fire" buttons. Special changes the meaning in both sentences.
    - Jare 1y ago
      Firefighter buttons are meant to only be used in very rare special occasions (emergencies) so "special" is just emphasis, whereas developer access is a completely normal way to use the product and thus "special" suggests additional significance. Sure not everyone uses the product as developers, but then not everyone uses the 18th floor button either.
      - CPLX 1y ago
        Developer access isn’t normal to a lay audience. That’s my point. To a lay audience developers are special computer expert people who do completely different things than they do. From the perspective of a non technical reader developer access isn’t normal, it’s special. The HN audience doesn’t see that. But the phrase isn’t confusing to normal people.
  - saghm 1y ago
    I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that if someone bothers to say "special developer access" rather than just " developer access", there must be some difference between the two. There's clearly not any reason that " developer access" wouldn't be sufficient to describe using APIs though, so it's hard not to read the word "special" as being at least redundant if not actively misleading.
    - Veen 1y ago
      In content intended for an audience of developers, it's reasonable to assume "special developer access" means access for special developers. If the audience is the general public, it would be sensible to interpret it as "special access for developers," in contrast to the normal sort of access most other people use.
      - luke-stanley 1y ago
        Yeah and Wired could just write it in a clear way so that no disambiguation or head scratching is needed.
  - luke-stanley 1y ago
    If Wired wants to portray normal access to Anthropic's API platform as a special fringe activity, rather than a normal way to programmatically use AI, it really says something about Wired. And this is Hacker News, right? Should we be on some watch list or something for thinking having control via API access is normal dev access!? MCP isn't even that old yet! ;D It's possible to write clearly and not that hard, I'm pretty sure they are hyping.
    - dragonwriter 1y ago
      > If Wired wants to portray normal access to Anthropic's API platform as a special fringe activity, rather than a normal way to programmatically use AI, I know people on HN might mot understand this, but programmatically using anything is a special fringe activity, even if the manner of programmatic use is normal for such use.
stavros 1y ago
If I'm an OpenAI employee, and I use Claude Code via the API, I'm not doing some hacker-fu, I'm just using a tool a company released for the purpose they released it. I understand that they were technically "using it to train models", which, given OpenAI's stance, I don't have much sympathy for, but it's not some "special developer hackery" that this is making it sound like.
dgfitz 1y ago
Normal users use the API constantly, they just don’t realize it. Isn’t half the schtick of LLMs making software development available for the layman?
slacktivism123 1y ago
>That's like asking why is an SDK phrased as a special kit It's Software Developer Kit, not Special Developer Kit ;-)
708145_ 1y ago
Most people reading Wired probably don't know what an API is.

viraptor 1y ago

Because it's not "special developer access". It's just "normal developer access". The phrasing gives an impression they accessed something other users cannot.

CPLX 1y ago
It would be normal standard English to assume that special modifies the word access. That would make the sentence semantically be the same as “special access, specifically the type of access used by developers” Compare with a sentence like “the elevator has special firefighter buttons” which does not mean that only some special type of firefighter uses the button.
- toomanyrichies 1y ago
  Counter-point: as a wordsmith, it's incumbent on the article's author to make their point in an unambiguous way. In your example, rather than write "the elevator has special firefighter buttons", the author could choose to write "the elevator has buttons which are only available to firefighters". Or alternatively, "the elevator has buttons which are only available to certain firefighters". The amount of care the author puts into their phrasing determines whether their point comes across as intended, or not. The average magazine reader can likely figure out that there's no such thing as "special" firefighters with "privileged" access to elevator buttons that other firefighters lack. They may not have the programming knowledge to do likewise with "developer access", even if they are reading a magazine like "Wired".
  - Bluestein 1y ago
    It's Newswriting 101-level stuff.-
- Calavar 1y ago
  In your example, "firefighter buttons" is a noun phrase which refers to a particular type of button. "Special" applies to the whole of "firefighter buttons," not just to "firefighter" and not just to "buttons." The same would apply for "special developer access."
  - nilamo 1y ago
    So it isn't normal developer access, like an API, there's something special about it that most developers with access to the API could not access.
- tick_tock_tick 1y ago
  > the elevator has special firefighter buttons If you said that to anyone they'd assume there are non standard buttons beyond the normal "call" / "fire" buttons. Special changes the meaning in both sentences.
  - Jare 1y ago
    Firefighter buttons are meant to only be used in very rare special occasions (emergencies) so "special" is just emphasis, whereas developer access is a completely normal way to use the product and thus "special" suggests additional significance. Sure not everyone uses the product as developers, but then not everyone uses the 18th floor button either.
    - CPLX 1y ago
      Developer access isn’t normal to a lay audience. That’s my point. To a lay audience developers are special computer expert people who do completely different things than they do. From the perspective of a non technical reader developer access isn’t normal, it’s special. The HN audience doesn’t see that. But the phrase isn’t confusing to normal people.
- saghm 1y ago
  I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that if someone bothers to say "special developer access" rather than just " developer access", there must be some difference between the two. There's clearly not any reason that " developer access" wouldn't be sufficient to describe using APIs though, so it's hard not to read the word "special" as being at least redundant if not actively misleading.
  - Veen 1y ago
    In content intended for an audience of developers, it's reasonable to assume "special developer access" means access for special developers. If the audience is the general public, it would be sensible to interpret it as "special access for developers," in contrast to the normal sort of access most other people use.
    - luke-stanley 1y ago
      Yeah and Wired could just write it in a clear way so that no disambiguation or head scratching is needed.
- luke-stanley 1y ago
  If Wired wants to portray normal access to Anthropic's API platform as a special fringe activity, rather than a normal way to programmatically use AI, it really says something about Wired. And this is Hacker News, right? Should we be on some watch list or something for thinking having control via API access is normal dev access!? MCP isn't even that old yet! ;D It's possible to write clearly and not that hard, I'm pretty sure they are hyping.
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    > If Wired wants to portray normal access to Anthropic's API platform as a special fringe activity, rather than a normal way to programmatically use AI, I know people on HN might mot understand this, but programmatically using anything is a special fringe activity, even if the manner of programmatic use is normal for such use.

stavros 1y ago

If I'm an OpenAI employee, and I use Claude Code via the API, I'm not doing some hacker-fu, I'm just using a tool a company released for the purpose they released it. I understand that they were technically "using it to train models", which, given OpenAI's stance, I don't have much sympathy for, but it's not some "special developer hackery" that this is making it sound like.

dgfitz 1y ago

Normal users use the API constantly, they just don’t realize it. Isn’t half the schtick of LLMs making software development available for the layman?

slacktivism123 1y ago

>That's like asking why is an SDK phrased as a special kit It's Software Developer Kit, not Special Developer Kit ;-)

708145_ 1y ago

Most people reading Wired probably don't know what an API is.