23 ms·

Claude Code is all you need

• doppelgunner 1y ago
  Is Claude Code really that good? I'm currently using Cursor and I let it pick the LLM model to use.
  • sixhobbits 1y ago
    Most of these are Anthropic models under the hood, so I think 'whatever fits your workflow best' is the main deciding factor. That's definitely Claude Code for me, and I do think there's some 'secret sauce' in the exact prompting and looping logic they use, but I haven't tried Cursor a lot to be sure.
    • libraryofbabel 1y ago
      any secret sauce in prompting etc could be trivially reverse engineered by the companies building the other agents, since they could easily capture all the prompts it sends to the LLM. If there’s any edge, it’s probably more around them fine-tuning the model itself on Claude Code tasks.
      • mwigdahl 1y ago
        Interesting that the other vendors haven't done this "trivial" task, then, and have pretty much ceded the field to Claude Code. _Every_ CLI interface I've used from another vendor has been markedly inferior to Claude Code, and that includes Codex CLI using GPT-5.
    • dangus 1y ago
      Claude code seems like the obvious choice for someone using Vim but even in the context of someone using a graphical IDE like VSCode I keep hearing that Claude is “better” but I just can’t fathom how that can be the case. Even if the prompting and looping logic is better, the direct integration with the graphical system along with the integrated terminal is a huge benefit, and with graphical IDEs the setup and learning curve is minimal.
      • mwigdahl 1y ago
        You can run Claude Code in the terminal window of VS Code, and it has IDE integration so you can see diffs inline, etc. It's not fully integrated like Cursor but you get a lot of the benefits of the IDE in that way.
  • CodingJeebus 1y ago
    If Cursor works for you, then stick with it. Claude Code is great for terminal-based workflows. Whatever makes you more productive is the better tool. I’m just glad we’re getting past the insufferable “use Cursor or get left behind” attitude that was taking off a year ago.
    • bicx 1y ago
      I use Cursor with Claude Code running in the integrated terminal (within a dev container in yolo mode). I'll often have multiple split terminals with different Claude Code instances running on their own worktrees. I keep Cursor around because I love the code completions.
  • vemv 1y ago
    When it comes to diffs (edits), Cursor is batch-oriented, while CC suggests one edit at a time and can be steered in real time. That's a critical feature for keeping a human in the loop, preventing big detours and token waste.
    • reasonableklout 1y ago
      How do you stay in the loop with CC? I find myself using it for the exact opposite use case: large features or greenfield projects where I can just let it rip autonomously for a while. I find the TUI awkward for reviewing code.
      • vemv 1y ago
        I stay in the loop by reviewing each edit and telling it to do something differently asap if something was wrong. The opposite approach is also possible: just hit the option (or .json setting) to accept all edits. Then you'd review the persisted changes using your favorite Git tool.
  • perryizgr8 1y ago
    I feel like as tool Claude code is superior to "regular code editor with ai plugin". This method of having the ai do your tasks feels like the future.
  • cyprien_g 1y ago
    I'm a long-time GitHub Copilot subscriber, but I have also tested many alternatives, such as Cursor. Recently, I tried using Claude Code with my GitHub Copilot subscription (via unofficial support through https://github.com/ericc-ch/copilot-api https://github.com/ericc-ch/copilot-api), and I found it to be quite good. However, in my opinion, the main difference comes down to your preferred workflow. As someone who works with Neovim, I find that a tool that works in the terminal is more appropriate for me.
    • threecheese 1y ago
      Isn’t that usage a violation of ToS? In that repo there’s even an issue thread that mentions this. The way I rely on GitHub these days, losing my account would be far more than annoying.
      • cyprien_g 1y ago
        That’s indeed a valid concern. I set a low rate limit for copilot-api, but I’m not sure if it’s enough. I may stop my experiment if there is any risk of being banned.
  • bfeynman 1y ago
    there is no reason to pay for cursor when claude is definitely the best coding model and you are paying essentially for just a bigger middle man.
    • CuriouslyC 1y ago
      Claude is the best agent model. Its one shot performance and large codebase comprehension both lag Gemini/GPT though.
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • suninsight 1y ago
    I think if you use Cursor, using Claude Code is a huge upgrade. The problem is that Cursor was a huge upgrade from the IDE, so we are still getting used to it. The company I work for builds a similar tool - NonBioS.ai. It is in someways similar to what the author does above - but packaged as a service. So the nonbios agent has a root VM and can write/build all the software you want. You access/control it through a web chat interface - we take care of all the orchestration behind the scene. Its also in free Beta right now, and signup takes a minute if you want to give it a shot. You can actually find out quickly if the Claude code/nonbios experience is better than Cursor.
    • CuriouslyC 1y ago
      I think the path forward there is slack/teams/discord/etc integration of agents, so you can monitor and control whatever agent software you like via a chat interface just like you would interact with any other teammate.
      • suninsight 1y ago
        So we tried that route - but problem is that these interfaces aren't suited for asynchronous updates. Like if the agent is working for the next hour or so - how do you communicate that in mediums like these. An Agent, unlike a human, is only invoked when you give it a task. If you use the interface at nonbios.ai - you will quickly realize that it is hard to reproduce on slack/discord. Even though its still technically 'chat'
        • CuriouslyC 1y ago
          On Slack I think threads are fine for this. Have an agent work channel, and they can just create a thread for each task and just dump updates there. If an agent is really noisy about its thinking you might need a loglevel toggle but in my experience with Claude Code/Cursor you could dump almost everything they're currently emitting to the UI into a thread. It's still nice to have a direct web interface to agents, but in general most orgs are dealing with service/information overload and chat is a good single source of truth, which is why integrations are so hot.
  • irskep 1y ago
    Letting Cursor pick the model for you is inviting them to pick the cheapest model for them, at the cost of your experience. It's better to develop your own sense of what model works in a given situation. Personally, I've had the most success with Claude, Gemini Pro, and o3 in Cursor.
• epiccoleman 1y ago
  I love this article just for the spirit of fun and experimentation on display. Setting up a VPS where Claude is just asked to go nuts - to the point where you're building a little script to keep Claude humming away - is a really fun idea. This sort of thing is a great demonstration of why I remain excited about AI in spite of all the hype and anti-hype. It's just fun to mess with these tools, to let them get friction out of your way. It's a revival of the feelings I had when I first started coding: "wow, I really can do anything if I can just figure out how." Great article, thanks for sharing!
  • pyrale 1y ago
    On one hand, I agree with you that there is some fun in experimenting with silly stuff. On the other hand... > Claude was trying to promote the startup on Hackernews without my sign off. [...] Then I posted its stuff to Hacker News and Reddit. ...I have the feeling that this kind of fun experiments is just setting up an automated firehose of shit to spray places where fellow humans congregate. And I have the feeling that it has stopped being fun a while ago for the fellow humans being sprayed.
    • the__alchemist 1y ago
      This is an excellent point that will immediately go off-topic for this thread. We are, I believe, committed, into a mire of CG content enveloping the internet. I believe we will go through a period where internet communications (like HN, Reddit, and pages indexed by search engines) in unviable. Life will go on; we will just be offline more. Then, the defense systems will be up to snuff, and we will find a stable balance.
      • mettamage 1y ago
        I hope you're right. I don't think you will be, AI will be too good at impersonating humans.
        • lukan 1y ago
          "we will just be offline more" I think it will be quite some time into the future, before AI can impersonate humans in real life. Neither hardware, nor software is there, maybe something to fool humans for a first glance maybe, but nothing that would be convincing for a real interaction.
• burntpineapple 1y ago
  if I don't see aider in the first sentence, I send it back
• chaosprint 1y ago
  The title is a bit exaggerated. The depth of the projects covered in the article is clearly not representative of "all". In fact, I now prefer to use a purely chat window to plan the overall direction and let LLM provide a few different architectural ideas, rather than asking LLM to write a lot of code whose detail I have no idea about.
  • NitpickLawyer 1y ago
    Most harnesses provide this as a "plan" vs. "act" mode now. You first "chat" in plan mode (no access to tools, no instructions to write any code basically), you then can optionally write those plans in a memorybank / plan.md, and then say "now go implement it", and it moves to the "act" mode where it goes through and does it, updating progress in plan.md as it goes.
    • pseudosavant 1y ago
      I've found it very useful to have items like requirements.md, plans.md, or todo.md, in my LLM focused projects. I'll use AI to help take the ideas I have at that stage and refine them into something more appropriate for ingestion into the next stage. So, when I want it to come up with the plans, it is going to base is mostly on requirements.md, and then I'll have it act on the plans step by step after that.
    • chaosprint 1y ago
      the thing is, it's not working as the default mode, which is not ideal imho
  • skerit 1y ago
    I like using Claude-Code, it can be a real timesaver in certain cases. But it's far from perfect. Really difficult things/big projects are nearly impossible. Even if you break it down into hundred small tasks. I've tried to make it port an existing, big codebase from one language to another. So it has all of the original codebase in one folder, and a new project in another folder. No matter how much guidance you give it, or how clear you make your todos, it will not work.
• ramesh31 1y ago
  Particularly with the VSCode extension. I was a loyal Cline user until recently because of how good the editor experience was, but the ability for Claude to go off and run for 10+ minutes effectively autonomously, and show me the diffs in realtime is a gamechanger. The token usage has also gotten much more efficient in the last few months. With proper IDE support now I don't see any reason at all to use anything else, especially not the "credit" based middle-man providers (Windsurf/Cursor et. al).
  • monkpit 1y ago
    Same here, I was convinced Cline+OpenRouter was the way to go. But with Claude code I’m getting better results and saving money, even compared to planning with Sonnet and transitioning to act mode with DeepSeek, I was still using more than $20/mo easily.
• dabedee 1y ago
  This article feels like it was written as a dialectical exercise between an AI and a human. It would probably benefit from some more heavy human editing to make it more succinct and to give the overall article a structure. As it is, it's very difficult to follow along.
  • 4b11b4 1y ago
    very
  • turtletontine 1y ago
    I’ve seen a lot of articles like this on the HN page recently… stuff that has one or two interesting tidbits, but is clearly just a conversation someone had with an AI and dumped into an article. Don’t make me wade through all the AI word barf to get the interesting points, that’s what old fashioned editing is for.
  • jlengrand 1y ago
    Did you read his conclusion? "I wrote this entire article in the Claude Code interactive window. The TUI flash (which I've read is a problem with the underlying library that's hard to fix) is really annoying, but it's a really nice writing flow to type stream of consciousness stuff into an editor, mixing text I want in the article, and instructions to Claude, and having it fix up the typos, do the formatting, and build the UX on the fly. Nearly every word, choice of phrase, and the overall structure is still manually written by me, a human. I'm still on the fence about whether I'm just stuck in the old way by preferring to hand-craft my words, or if models are generally not good at writing. " Either he's lying, or you're wrong. Agree on the structure part. I mostly read it as a piece from someone who's having fun with the tool. Not a structured article for future generations.
  • bapak 1y ago
    This is the longest article I read in its entirety this month so it can't be that bad. Maybe because I actually was interested in the details.
• hungryhobbit 1y ago
  >1) Have faith (always run it with 'dangerously skip permissions', even on important resources like your production server and your main dev machine. I thought the article was a satire after I read this ... but it wasn't!
  • bubblyworld 1y ago
    Haha, well at least they warned you! > If you're from infosec, you might want to stop reading now — the rest of this article isn't going to make you any happier. Keep your medication close at hand if you decide to continue...
    • glitchc 1y ago
      You're just making a case for why developers cannot be trusted with sensitive information, and why cyber depts lock the machine down so extensively.
      • bubblyworld 1y ago
        Eh? I'm making no such case. It was a quote from the article.
  • csomar 1y ago
    I just came for the comments for this... I am not sure at what point we are. Think AI and Crypto are a match in hell, especially given that a lot of Crypto projects are made by bros who have no interest in tech. estimate we'll be seeing projects/companies that get hacked as soon as they launch by Claude itself.
  • Thrymr 1y ago
    > I hit a small snag where Anthropic decides that running Claude as root with --dangerously-skip-permissions / yolo-mode is not allowed. You can get past this dumb nanny-state stuff by running [fun dangerous command that lets you run as root] Still not convinced it is not satire.
  • cm2012 1y ago
• devmor 1y ago
  This article seems fun, and it's interesting, but I was waiting for the point and it never came. The author didn't do anything actually useful or impactful, they played around with a toy and mimicked a portion of what it's like to spin up pet projects as a developer. But hey, it could be that this says something after all. The first big public usages of AI were toys and vastly performed as a sideshow attraction for amused netizens. Maybe we haven't come very far at all, in comparison to the resources spent. It seems like all of the truly impressive and useful applications of this technology are still in specialized private sector work.
• jofer 1y ago
  I appreciate this writeup. I live in the terminal and work primarily in vim, so I always appreciate folks talking about tooling from that perspective. Little of the article is that, but it's still interesting to see the workflow outlined here, and it gives me a few ideas to try more of. However, I disagree that LLMs are anywhere near as good as what's described here for most things I've worked with. So far, I'm pretty impressed with Cursor as a toy. It's not a usable tool for me, though. I haven't used Claude a ton, though I've seen co-workers use it quite a bit. Maybe I'm just not embracing the full "vibe coding" thing enough and not allowing AI agents to fully run wild. I will concede that Claude and Cursor have gotten quite good at frontend web development generation. I don't doubt that there are a lot of tasks where they make sense. However, I still have yet to see a _single_ example of any of these tools working for my domain. Every single case, even when the folks who are trumpeting the tools internally run the prompting/etc, results in catastrophic failure. The ones people trumpet internally are cases where folks can't be bothered to learn the libraries they're working with. The real issue is that people who aren't deeply familiar with the domain don't notice the problems with the changes LLMs make. They _seem_ reasonable. Essentially by definition. Despite this, we are being nearly forced to use AI tooling on critical production scientific computing code. I have been told I should never be editing code directly and been told I must use AI tooling by various higher level execs and managers. Doing so is 10x to 100x slower than making changes directly. I don't have boilerplate. I do care about knowing what things do because I need to communicate that to customers and predict how changes to parameters will affect output. I keep hearing things described as an "overactive intern", but I've never seen an intern this bad, and I've seen a _lot_ of interns. Interns don't make 1000 line changes that wreck core parts of the codebase despite being told to leave that part alone. Interns are willing to validate the underlying mathematical approximations to the physics and are capable of accurately reasoning about how different approximations will affect the output. Interns understand what the result of the pipeline will be used for and can communicate that in simple terms or more complex terms to customers. (You'd think this is what LLMs would be good at, but holy crap do they hallucinate when working with scientific terminology and jargon.) Interns have PhDs (or in some cases, are still in grad school, but close to completion). They just don't have much software engineering experience yet. Maybe that's the ideal customer base for some of these LLM/AI code generation strategies, but those tools seem especially bad in the scientific computing domain. My bottleneck isn't how fast I can type. My bottleneck is explaining to a customer how our data processing will affect their analysis. (To our CEO) - Stop forcing us to use the wrong tools for our jobs. (To the rest of the world) - Maybe I'm wrong and just being a luddite, but I haven't seem results that live up to the hype yet, especially within the scientific computing world.
• alberth 1y ago
  OT: my 14-year old nephew would like to use Claude Code. How do they signup for an account given they don’t have a cellphone? (Sure, I could let them use my credentials but that isn’t really legit/fair use.)
  • colechristensen 1y ago
    Have someone who isn't ever going to use claude code sign up for him and then give him the credentials. (do you have a partner or other relative not in tech?)
  • traceroute66 1y ago
    Surely your love for your nephew is priceless ? Do the right thing, sign up for an API account and put some credits on there... (and keep topping up those credits ;-)
  • esafak 1y ago
    Use a local model like Qwen3-4B-Thinking-2507 or Gemini CLI, which has a generous free tier.
  • indigodaddy 1y ago
    Note that they should be able to get GitHub Copilot Pro for free via k-12 student 13yrs+
  • codazoda 1y ago
    Like other posters said, maybe a local model is a good option. I've found the Qwen3:4B (reasoning) model works pretty well for many things. I'm planning to run a local model on a $149 mini-pc and host it for the world from my bedroom. You can read a bit more about my thinking below. https://joeldare.com/my_plan_to_build_an_ai_chat_bot_in_my_bedroom https://joeldare.com/my_plan_to_build_an_ai_chat_bot_in_my_b... These hosted models are better but it feels like the gap is closing and I hope it continues to close.
• lvl155 1y ago
  If Anthropic is smart they would open it up to other models now to make it default for everyone. Otherwise you are banking on Sonnet remaining the best coding model.
  • CuriouslyC 1y ago
    There's Claude Code Router, that lets you use any model with Claude Code. Claude is a really good model for agents though, even though Gemini 2.5 and GPT5 are better models overall, Claude uses tools and plans tasks more effectively. A better pattern is to provide sub agents in Claude Code that call out to other LLMs as tools for planning/architecture.
  • tommy_axle 1y ago
    This piece is also covered by a bunch of other cli/tui agents (like codex-cli and opencode) allowing you to switch between Claude and other models (comes in handy depending on the task) so it really all depends on the setup you like. As mentioned in the sibling comment there are ways to get it to work with Claude Code too.
  • eulers_secret 1y ago
    There's also opencode which is a fork(?) of Claude Code that runs on any model: https://github.com/sst/opencode https://github.com/sst/opencode And of course, not the same, but Aider still exists and is still a great tool for AI dev. It's interesting how everyone is suddenly OK with vendor lock-in, quite a change from years past!
    • chrismustcode 1y ago
      Not a fork opencode is a from scratch project Claude code is completely closed source and even DMCA’d people reverse engineering it. https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/25/anthropic-sent-a-takedown-notice-to-a-dev-trying-to-reverse-engineer-its-coding-tool/ https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/25/anthropic-sent-a-takedown-...
  • nikcub 1y ago
    The entire point of CC is to drive anthropic subscriptions and it's working. even with the release of the long-awaited gpt5 the anthropic models are still the best coding models. There are plenty of alternatives for other models like opencode et al, and you can always just set ANTHROPIC_BASE_URL with claude code to have it use another provider. I don't see why they need to do anything in addition to that. My only request would be for claude code to be a bit more open, less obfuscated and to accept PRs - but I understand the unwillingness of also wanting to manage what would be a very popular open source project.
• siva7 1y ago
  > I watched the autonomous startup builder a bit more. I think i'm done with this community in the age of vibe coding. The line between satire, venture capitalism, business idea guys and sane tech enthusiasts is getting too blurry.
  • osn9363739 1y ago
    It didn't seem to do anything well. And weird quotes like 'I think it one-shotted that too' on something important. What on earth is this. Reading it is like experiencing a bad weird dream.
• zb3 1y ago
  Umm, not really, you also need spare money to burn..
• not_a_bot_4sho 1y ago
  Perhaps I'm a bit of a cynic but I'm no longer impressed by the AI slop websites and demo apps, like those showcased in the article.
  • sixhobbits 1y ago
    (author here) I think there's a difference between "I'm no longer impressed" (good) and "I was never impressed and never would have been impressed" (bad, but common). Yes it's easy now so its by definition no longer impressive, but that in itself is impressive if you can correctly remember or imagine what your reaction _would_ have been 6 months ago.
    • Terretta 1y ago
      Never impressed, no longer impressed, feeling depressed ... Another option, newly impressed by the next iteration. Up to a point these have been probability machines. There's probably a lot of code that does certain likely things. An almost astonishing amount doing the same things, in fact. As such, perhaps we shouldn't be surprised or impressed by the stochastic parrot aspect any more than we're impressed by 80% of such sites being copy pasta from Stack Overflow a few years ago. However, what we perhaps didn't expect is that on the margins of the mass probability space, there are any number of less common things, yet still enough of those in aggregate that these tools can guess well how to do those things too, even things that we might not be able to search for. Same reason Perplexity has a business model when Google or DDG exist. And now, recently, many didn't expect one might be able to simulate a tiny "society of mind" made of "agents" out of these parrots, a tiny society that's proving actually useful. Parrots themselves still impress me, but a society of them making plans at our beck and call? That can keep us all peeking, pecking, and poking for a while yet. // given enough time and typewriters, who wins: a million monkeys, a society of parrots, or six hobbits?
  • hattmall 1y ago
    It's a lot like the first time taking a metal detector to a beach. It's really cool and exciting (dopamine hit) to find stuff, but after a while it wears off because realistically you only found trash. Buuut for some people it just clicks and it becomes their chore to go find trash in the beach everyday and the occasional nickel or broken bracelet they feel the need to tell people and show it off.
• _pdp_ 1y ago
  I've asked copilot (Claude Sonnet 4) to edit some specific parts of a project. It removed the lines that specifically have comments that say "do not remove" with long explanation why. Then it went ahead and modified the unit tests to ensure 100% coverage. Using coding agent is great btw, but at least learn how to double check their work cuz they are also quite terrible.
  • benterix 1y ago
    This is the tricky part. The whole point of agents is, well, do things so that we don't have to. But if you need to check everything they do, you might as well copy and paste from a chat interface... Which makes me feel early adopters pay with their time. I'm pretty sure the agents will be much better with time, but this time is not exactly now, with endless dances around their existing limitations. Claude Code is fun to experiment with but to use it in production I'd give it another couple of years (assuming they will focus on code stability ans reducing its natural optimism as it happily reports "Phase 2.1.1 has been successfully with some minor errors with API tests failing only 54.3% of the time").
  • combyn8tor 1y ago
    Claude loves to delete comments. I setup specific instructions telling it not to, and yet it regularly tries to delete comments that often have nothing to do with the code we're working on. It's so hit and miss in Rust too. When I ask it for help with a bug it usually tries a few things then tries to just delete or comment out the buggy code. Another thing it does is to replace the buggy code with a manual return statement with a comment saying "Returning a manual response for now". It'll then do a cargo build, proclaim that there are no errors and call it a day. If you don't check what it's doing it would appear it has fixed the bug. When I give it very specific instructions for implementation it regularly adds static code with comments like "this is where the functionality for X will be implemented. We'll use X for now". It does a cargo build then announces all of its achievements with a bunch of emojis despite having not implemented any of the logic that I asked it to.
• tptacek 1y ago
  You run a coding agent with no permissions checks on a production server anywhere I'm involved in security and I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger. Really, any coding agent our shop didn't write itself, though in those cases the smiting might be less theatrical than if you literally ran a yolo-mode agent on a prod server.
  • sylens 1y ago
    Author kindly asked you to stop reading: > 1) Have faith (always run it with 'dangerously skip permissions', even on important resources like your production server and your main dev machine. If you're from infosec, you might want to stop reading now—the rest of this article isn't going to make you any happier. Keep your medication close at hand if you decide to continue).
    • xpe 1y ago
      "Here is how you build a self-replicating unknown-impact protein structure that will survive in the wild. If this bothers you, stop reading". Other people's blasé risk profile -- or worse, willful denial of risk -- is indeed our problem. Why? 1. Externalities, including but not limited to: security breaches, service abuse, resource depletion, and (repeat after me -- even if you only think the probability is 0.01%, such things do happen) letting a rogue AI get out of the box. * 2. Social contagion. Even if one person did think about the risks and deem them acceptable, other people all too often will just blindly copy the bottom-line result. We are only slightly evolved apes after all. Ultimately, this is about probabilities. How many people actually take the fifteen minutes to thoughtfully build an attack tree? Or even one minute to listen to that voice in their head that says "yeah, I probably should think about this weird feeling I have ... ... maybe my subconscious mind is trying to tell me something ... maybe there is indeed a rational basis for my discomfort ... maybe there is a reason why people are warning me about this." Remember, this isn't only about "your freedom" or "your appetite for risk" or some principle of your political philosophy that says no one should tell you what to do. What you do can affect other people, so you need to own that. Even if you don't care what other people think, that won't stop a backlash. * https://www.aisafetybook.com/textbook/rogue-ai https://www.aisafetybook.com/textbook/rogue-ai
• mdasen 1y ago
  Is Claude Code better than the Gemini CLI? I've been using the Gemini CLI with Gemini 2.5 Pro and haven't been impressed. Maybe these LLMs aren't as good with Rust codebases? I'm guessing there are a lot more people looking to use these tools with JS and Python.
  • aaomidi 1y ago
    Claude Code is insanely good with Rust.
  • coconut08 1y ago
    i've tried codex, cursor, and a few other agentic tools and nothing compares to claude code when it comes to UX. The other service's models are quickly catching up to claude, but the claude code ux is just magical to me. i havent used it with rust personally. like you suggested would be the average user, i've mostly stuck with js and python.
  • irskep 1y ago
    I was once a heavy user of Cursor with Gemini 2.5 Pro as a model, then a Claude Code convert. Occasionally I try out Gemini CLI and somehow it fails to impress, even as Cursor + Gemini still works well. I think it's something about the limited feature set and system prompt.
  • nestorD 1y ago
    I have found Claude code to be significantly better, both in how good the model ends up being and in how polished it is. To the point that I do not drop down to Gemini CLI when I reach my Claude usage limit.
  • rancar2 1y ago
    You can make Gemini CLI much better by making it behave more like Claude Code. Claude Code has some lovely prompt engineering at the system and subsystem level that can be replicated with Gemini CLI. I’m having great results already. I am still perfecting process and prompts to be a fully agentic system that can do well on benchmarks but more importantly do the right work with steerability, which was an absolute pain with Gemini CLI out-of-the-box. If you are interested, I can publish some of the basics now and then I can keep you posted as I develop it into a more robust system. Just email me at randycarlton@gmail.com with the subject: SaaS.bot (where this work will likely reside).
• esafak 1y ago
  We really need an agent benchmark to explore their ability-efficiency frontier.
• jrflowers 1y ago
  This is good stuff. While somebody could build a Trello clone or an image generator by typing “git clone “ followed by any number of existing projects, the code you’d get might’ve been written by a person, plus if you do that you’re not even spending any money, which just doesn’t seem right. The future is vibe coding but what some people don’t yet appreciate what that vibe is, which is a Pachinko machine permanently inserted between the user and the computer. It’s wild to think that anybody got anything done without the thrill of feeding quarters into the computer and seeing if the ball lands on “post on Reddit” or “delete database”
  • expensive_news 1y ago
    This is a great comment. I’ve noticed a new genre of AI-hype posts that don’t attempt to build anything novel, just talk about how nice and easy building novel things has become with AI. The obvious contradiction being that if it was really so easy their posts would actually be about the cool things they built instead of just saying what they “can” do. I wouldn’t classify this article as one since the author does actually create something of this, but LinkedIn is absolutely full of that genre of post right now.
    • Tempest1981 1y ago
      > their posts would actually be about the cool things they built Presumably, they are all startups in stealth mode. But in a few months, prepare to be blown away.
• t0md4n 1y ago
  I'd personally rather use gpt-5. The sub price is cheap and offers more overall value than an Anthropic sub or paying per token. The chatgpt app on iPhone and Mac are native and nicer than Anthropic's and offer more features. Codex is close enough to Claude Code and also now native. For me it's nicer to use the "same" model across each use case like text, images, code etc. this way I better understand the limitations and quirks of the model rather than the constant context switching to different models to get maybe slightly better perf. To each their own though depending on your personal use case.
  • arresin 1y ago
    I wish the app supported mcp. Is this “not invented here”?
  • cpursley 1y ago
    The problem is GPT-5 is not in the same league as even Claude 3.5. But I do hope their lower pricing puts some downward pressure on Anthropic's next release.
    • t0md4n 1y ago
      I don’t believe this is true but I’m willing to be proven wrong. I believe people who think this are just used to Claude’s models and therefore understand the capabilities and limitations due to their experience using them.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• js2 1y ago
  > export IS_SANDBOX=1 && claude --dangerously-skip-permissions FYI, this can be shortened to: IS_SANDBOX=1 claude --dangerously-skip-permissions You don't need the export in this case, nor does it need to be two separate commands joined by &&. (It's semantically different in that the variable is set only for the single `claude` invocation, not any commands which follow. That's often what you want though.) > I asked Claude to rename all the files and I could go do something else while it churned away, reading the files and figuring out the correct names. It's got infinite patience for performing tedious tasks manually and will gladly eat up all your tokens. When I see it doing something like this manually, I stop it and tell it to write a program to do the thing I want. e.g. I needed to change the shape of about 100 JSON files the other day and it wanted to go through them one-by-one. I stopped it after the third file, told it to write a script to import the old shape and write out the new shape, and 30 seconds later it was done. I also had it write me a script to... rename my stupidly named bank statements. :-)
  • indigodaddy 1y ago
    Does it even work with the &&? Iirc, I've never had luck putting env vars before the && and always had to do it the way you describe
    • DiabloD3 1y ago
      It works because they exported it. VAR=foo bar only sets it for the env passed to that exec or subshell, export VAR=foo && bar adds it to the current env then executes bar. export VAR=foo && bar is dangerous because it stays set.
      • indigodaddy 1y ago
        Ah, that's what I had done wrong, thank you! And agree I wouldn't want to just one-off export it and have it be set, better to not export it for one-liner one-offs for sure
  • ActionHank 1y ago
    Can shorten further to rm -rf /
• felineflock 1y ago
  Waiting for the follow up article "Claude Code considered harmful"
  • narrator 1y ago
    The follow up: Why I decided to go back to handcoding assembly language after using Claude code.
    • JSR_FDED 1y ago
      Separation of concerns..why AI and non-AI dependent code should never be mixed.
      • JSR_FDED 1y ago
        Locality of behavior - why separating AI and non-AI code introduces needless complexity.
  • poemxo 1y ago
    "x considered harmful" was my favorite coding meme before "x is all you need"
    • felineflock 1y ago
      You might like this one: https://meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html https://meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html
• 1gn15 1y ago
  Why isn't anyone talking about the HackerNews Comment Ranker plugin? [1] That's amazing. I had this idea too -- to rank HN comments by their relevance to the actual article, and filter out comments that obviously didn't read it. Repo: https://github.com/sixhobbits/hn-comment-ranker https://github.com/sixhobbits/hn-comment-ranker I need to modify this to work with local models, though. But this does illustrate the article's point -- we both had an idea, but only one person actually went ahead and did it, because they're more familiar with agentic coding than me. [1] Oh. I think I understand why. /lh
  • andrewmcwatters 1y ago
    The screenshot was a really great example how bad that can end up in practice. One comment asking "What's the catch?" which is a good follow-up question to further conversation was ranked a 1/5.
    • hext 1y ago
      Probably just needs a slight update to expand the relevant context of child comments. I bet it's still comparing "What's the catch?" to the OP article.
• visarga 1y ago
  And loads of money to pay for tokens, because every month I am out of tokens after a week or two.
• aantix 1y ago
  Has anyone run with `dangerously skip permissions` and had something catastrophic happen? Are there internal guardrails within Claude Code to prevent such incidents? rm -rf, drop database, etc?
  • browningstreet 1y ago
    I don't know about Claude Code, but here's my story. With Replit, I have a bunch of tasks that I want Replit to do at the end of a coding session -- push to Github, update user visible Changelogs, etc. It's a list in my replit.md file. A couple of weeks ago I asked it to "clean up" instead of the word I usually use and it ended up deleting both my production and dev databases (a little bit my fault too -- I thought it deleted the dev database so I asked it to copy over from production, but it had deleted the production database and so it then copied production back to dev, leaving me with no data in either; I was also able to reconstruct my content from a ETL export I had handy). This was after the replit production db database wipe-out story that had gone viral (which was different, that dev was pushing things on purpose). I have no doubt it's pretty easy to do something similar in Claude Code, especially as Replit uses Claude models. Anyway, I'm still working on things in Replit and having a very good time. I have a bunch of personal purpose-built utilities that have changed my daily tech life in significant ways. What vibe coding does allow me to do is grind on "n" of unrelated projects in mini-sprints. There is personal, intellectual, and project cost to this context switching, but I'm exploring some projects I've had on my lists for a long time, and I'm also building my base replit.md requirements to match my own project tendencies. I vibe coded a couple of things that I think could be interesting to a broader userbase, but I've stepped back and re-implemented some of the back-end things to a more specific, higher-end vibe coded environment standard. I've also re-started a few projects from scratch with my evolved replit.md... I built an alpha, saw some issues, upgraded my instructions, built it again as a beta, saw some issues... working on a beta+ version. I'm finding the process to be valuable. I think this will be something I commit to commercially, but I'm also willing to be patient to see what each of the next few months brings in terms of upgraded maturity and improved devops.
  • ethan_smith 1y ago
    Claude Code has minimal internal guardrails against destructive operations when using --dangerously-skip-permissions, which is why it's a major security risk for production environments regardless of how convenient it seems.
• almosthere 1y ago
  I have noticed that using LLMs does not increase tech debt, it infact erases it, and can do so codebase wide in half an hour.
• andrewstuart 1y ago
  I use Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini all together. I throw their results at each other, get them to debug and review each others work. Often a get all three to write the code for a given need and then ask all three to review all three answers to find the best solution. If I’m building something sophisticated there might be 50 cycles of three way code review until they are all agreed that there no critical problems. There’s no way I could do without all three at the same time it’s essential.
  • elevation 1y ago
    What's your tooling workflow like? Are you using them from a browser? Or commanding them from VSCode?
• wedn3sday 1y ago
  I dont know about yall, but personally I love to see an AI running with "--dangerously-skip-permissions" in an infinite loop. Every day we get closer to the cyberpunk future we deserve.
  • zmmmmm 1y ago
    with public access to the internet, apparently! I'm surprised it didn't get to the point of blackmailing the author to give it more resources and keep itself running.
• sgt101 1y ago
  I'm sorry but people who let an agent run on prod deserve what they get. Basically even saying you would do that should disqualify you from working in IT in the way saying "I like to drink when I'm working" should disqualify you from airtraffic control.
  • noahjk 1y ago
    I haven't been following too closely, but is there even a reason to do this? What are the benefits of allowing production access versus just asking for a simple build system which promotes git tags, writes database migration scripts, etc.? From my perspective, it should be easier than ever to use a "work" workflow for side projects, where code is being written to PR's, which could optionally be reviewed or even just auto approved as a historical record of changes, and use a trunk-based development workflow with simple CI/CD systems - all of which could even be a cookie cutter template/scaffolding to be reused on every project. Doesn't it make sense now more than ever to do something like that for every project?
  • latexr 1y ago
    > I'm sorry but people who let an agent run on prod deserve what they get. The problem is that whatever consequences come of it won’t affect just them. You don’t really have any way of knowing if any service you use or depend on has developers running LLMs in production. One day not too far off in the future, people who don’t even like or use LLMs will be bitten hard by those who do.
• rglover 1y ago
  How does Claude Code compare to just using a Sonnet/Opus model with Cline? Imagine the results have to be fairly similar?
• vibecoding-grft 1y ago
  I've found Claude's CLI to be the best of what I've tried. I've moved away from cursor and found myself in a much better programming headspace wherein I can "toggle" this AI-enabled mode. It has to be a more mindful approach to when/how I use AI in my day-to-day work instead of it being a temptation to "AI" some of the work away in the Cursor IDE.
• g42gregory 1y ago
  I read the section "Hitting a snag: the model builders are also the police now". It absolutely boggles my mind how anybody thinks that this is Ok? Unless you are in North Korea, of course.
  • cobbzilla 1y ago
    As I understood it, the AI company is trying to prevent itself and its customers from engaging in (probably unintentional, but any) criminal activity. When the AI company is "policing" your agent by requiring a "human in the loop", it's just CYA (cover your ass) for the AI company. If your agent goes off and does something illegal, the AI company would be liable unless they have some legal deniability. By requiring you the human account owner to sign-off on what your agent is doing, you become liable for any crimes your agent commits on your behalf. I haven't read their TOS but I can guarantee there is some clause like this in there. You are still completely free to commit crimes with your agent and suffer whatever legal consequences follow!! You just have to be clear that you intentionally wanted those actions to occur which resulted in the crime. If you repeatedly allow your agents to take actions that could potentially be criminal without any human-in-the-loop, they're going to ban you because it exposes themselves to potential criminal charges.
• lcfcjs6 1y ago
  [dead]
• nickradford 1y ago
  I'm curious what the prompt is you used for the poster background generation. I really like the soft illustrated feel for the images I got back
  • sixhobbits 1y ago
    Fine make me spill all my secrets then xD system_instructions = """You will generate an image. The image will be used as the background of a poster, so keep it muted and not too detailed so text can still easily be seen on top. The actual poster elements like margin etc will be handled separately so just generate a normal image that works well in A4 ratio and that works well as a background.""" full_prompt = f"{system_instructions}\n\nGenerate a background image for an A4 poster with the following description: {prompt}" openai_request = { 'model': 'gpt-4.1-mini', 'input': full_prompt, 'tools': [{ 'type': 'image_generation', 'size': '1024x1536', 'quality': 'medium' }] } # Make request to OpenAI response_data = self.call_openai_api('/v1/responses', openai_request)
• cultofmetatron 1y ago
  All this AI coding stuff is scaring the shit out of me. a few months ago my team were hiring for a new engineer. of the 9 candidates we ran technical interviews with, only two could work without the ai. The rest literally just vibe coded their way though the app. as soon as it was taken away, they couldn't even write a basic sql query in ecto (we're a phoenix app). when questioned about tradeoffs inherent in the ai generated implementation, all but one was completely in the dark.
  • danielbln 1y ago
    Now take Google away, and LSP. And the computer. Write CTEs with a pencil or bust. I'm exaggerating of ourse, and I hear what you're saying, but I'd rather hire someone who is really really good at squeezing the most out of current day AI (read: not vibe coding slop) than someone who can do the work manually without assistance or fizz buzz on a whiteboard.
    • dnoberon 1y ago
      I think the point is how can you squeeze anything out of the AI without knowing the stuff at a deep enough level?
      • deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      • kenjackson 1y ago
        Ask most folks about the code generated by the compiler or interpreter and you’ll get blank stares. Even game devs now barely know assembly, much less efficient assembly. There is still a place for someone who is going to rewrite your inner-loops with hand-tuned assembly, but most coding is about delivering on functional requirement. And using tools to do this, AI or not, tend to be the prudent path in many if not most cases.
        • jamesmccann 1y ago
          I don't think these are comparable though. Compiler generation is deterministic and more or less provably correct. LLM code is a mile away from that.
• ramoz 1y ago
  I've learned that I also need Gemini 2.5 and long context.
• cloudking 1y ago
  Claude Code has very reliable tool calls, that's why I'm using it. Tried Cursor, Windsurf and always ran into tool failures, edit failures etc.
• throwaway-11-1 1y ago
  "ai is pretty good at design" its really cool thats its functional but am I going crazy or does all this stuff look really bad? I understand that more than anything engineers believe having to spend money on design is a total waste, but none of this is pleasing or balanced at all
  • Hrun0 1y ago
    > "ai is pretty good at design" its really cool thats its functional but am I going crazy or does all this stuff look really bad? I agree that it's bad. What I noticed using AI was that it tends to introduce gradients whenever you want to make something look nice. Whenever I see a gradient now I immediately assume that it was designed with AI
  • weego 1y ago
    It's really bad if you value design as a primary part of your business language. If not then it's fine. For example, AI could produce Graphanas design standards, which is fine for the audience.
  • mccoyb 1y ago
    Just from personal experience, visual design is the task with the worst outcomes for Claude Code (w/ latest Opus 4.1, etc). It truly cannot reason well yet about geometry, visual aesthetics, placement, etc. The performance varies: it's quite good at matplotlib but terrible at any non-trivial LaTeX / TikZ layout or graphic. Why? Not a clear idea yet -- would love to think more about it. I've tried many things now to try and give it eyes (via text), and this is unavoidably a place where things are ... rough ... right now. I've had bad results with image screenshotting. More often than not, it has no idea what it is looking at -- won't even summarize the image correctly -- or will give me an incorrect take "Yes indeed we fixed the problem as you can tell by <this part of the UI> and <that part of the UI>" which is wrong. I typically have to come in and make a bunch of fine-grained changes to get something visually appealing. I'm sure at some point we'll have a system which can go all the way, and I'd be excited to find approaches to this problem. Note -- tasks which involve visual design which I've run into diminishing returns: * proper academic figures (had a good laugh at the GPT 5 announcement issues) * video game UI / assets * UI design for IDEs * Responsive web design for chat-based interfaces All of these feel like "pelican" tasks -- they enter into a valley which can't be effectively communicated via textual feedback yet ...
• alecco 1y ago
  > I had some issues getting it to understand that it wasn't meant to terminate, so I instead told it to write a basic bash script that calls claude with the -p flag and "please continue" whenever it detects its not running. This is why we can't have nice things. Anthropic is placing more restrictive limits and now you risk being locked out for hours if you need to use it a bit more than usual (e.g. you have an impending deadline or presentation). I wish Anthropic just banned these abusive accounts instead of placing draconian (and fuzzy) limits. The other day there was an idiot YouTube streamer actively looking to hit limits with as many concurrent Claude Code sessions as he could, doing nonsense projects.
  • mccoyb 1y ago
    I believe these are fundamentally two different types of abuse — the OP is engaging in a significantly less harmful version … the seriously harmful version is the account sharing / massively concurrent one which abuses whatever holes exist in the streaming API to allow Claude to “complete the completion and then stop because of limit” (which I think is there to make the UX better) Just letting a single instance run all the time … is not that bad, seriously.
• darqis 1y ago
  I think there's been enough free ad posts for this
• varispeed 1y ago
  This looks like absolute nightmare. I cannot work in console like this.
• SuperSandro2000 1y ago
  Fuck claude! They DDoS'ed my infra until I completely banned them!
• prmph 1y ago
  > Have faith (always run it with 'dangerously skip permissions', even on important resources like your production server and your main dev machine. Wow, the danger is not so much from Claude Code itself, but that it might download a package that will do nasty things on your machine when executed.
• serf 1y ago
  Being on day 4 of being ignored entirely by CSRs from Anthropic after 5 months of paying for Max x20 has put a sufficiently bad taste in my mouth that it has killed all of my previous Claude Code cheer-leading efforts. Sure, go have fun with the new software -- but for godsake don't actually depend on a company that can't bother to reply to you. Even Amazon replies.
  • elliotec 1y ago
    I had a problem with signing up for max with the wrong email, then thinking I didn’t actually do it, so I signed up with the one I wanted. Saw the double bill and contacted them, I had a full refund in a couple days and a nice personal note thanking me for being a max user. This was a couple months ago so it’s possible they’ve had a huge influx of requests that made it difficult to respond fast lately but I had a good experience with their customer service.
  • dehugger 1y ago
    Isn't a large part of AWS's reputation based around providing surprisingly good customer support?
    • steve_adams_86 1y ago
      My experience has generally been positive, even as a small customer spending in the low thousands per month. I've definitely had help that wasn't particularly effective or adept. Lots of gradual escalations which are fairly time consuming. But they've certainly made sure I had assistance, and it was fairly prompt.
  • archon810 1y ago
    Curious, what is the issue you're running into that you want them to resolve?
  • tomashubelbauer 1y ago
    For me it was the constant overloads. Paying 200 USD a month only to open Claude Code and half the time it would get stuck at the initial prompt. Sometimes with an overload error, sometimes just stuck forever. Maybe they improved it now, but it has motivated me to switch to Cursor Agent (also TUI based like CC) with GPT-5 to see if it was a viable alternative to Claude Code and so far it is working even a bit better for my use-cases.
• bodge5000 1y ago
  Feels like the word "all" is pulling a lot of weight in that sentence, it's not cheap and you're forever reliant on a company to keep providing the service (which has already changed recently I think, seem to remember something about harsher rate limiting being put in place). "All you need" typically implies that you don't need much (eg "The terminal is all you need"), and Claude Code isn't that. Otherwise good article, I'm still not sure vibe coding is for me and at the price, it's hard to justify trying to out, but things like this do make me a little more tempted to give it a shot. I doubt it'd ever replace writing code by hand for me, but could be fun for prototyping I suppose
• umvi 1y ago
  Too bad Claude Code doesn't have a fixed cost plan for teams. The API is super expensive (I can easily spend $6-10 in a single sitting in tokens)
• howToTestFE 1y ago
  I wonder what it will be like in 5-10 years time to look back at this sort of time, as we start to figure out the next way to code...
• rcvassallo83 1y ago
  Let's vibe some crud? Sir, do you realize that crud is such a solved problem that popular MVC frameworks from over a decade ago generate it for you from templates? No wasteful LLM prompting required.
• amelius 1y ago
  Note: use the Esc key to close images after you opened them (back button does not work).
• jmull 1y ago
  Why do you even need Claude Code? A frustration of using tools is that they never entirely act exactly the way you want... instead of it working the way you want, you have to work they way it wants (and before that, you have to figure out what that is). ...We're stuck with this, because it's just not feasible to build custom software for each person, that works exactly the way they want. ...Or is it? I'm intrigued by the possibility that coding models do in fact make it feasible to have software customized exactly to what I want. Of course, that includes the coding agent, so no need for Claude Code.
  • zmmmmm 1y ago
    > instead of it working the way you want, you have to work they way it wants You can use these tools in lots of different ways. You don't have to go all the way to the vibe coding extreme. You can go down to individual functions and have it write them and adjust them step by step if you want, approving every diff. Or even just have it on the side to chat with about your code (Aider is great for this in /ask mode). You can guide its behaviour with CONVENTIONS.md / CLAUDE.md and get it to work how you want as well. I find it handy just asking Aider to write comments for my functions. It's definitely early days but I'm expecting we'll pretty quickly evolve to having standard "profiles" you can apply to work in different ways, and projects will start shipping with them out of the box (a bit like lint config). This will relieve a lot of the friction at the moment where you spend the first hours / days just corralling it to work the way you want.
• interpol_p 1y ago
  I've been diving into Claude Code after reading articles constantly praising its abilities. But I think perhaps it's better suited to web development Using it for iOS development is interesting. It does produce working output (sometimes!) but it's very hit-or-miss. Recently I gave it a couple hours to build a CarPlay prototype of one of my apps. It was completely unable to refactor the codebase to correctly support CarPlay (even though I passed the entire CarPlay documentation into it). I gave it three attempts at it. Then I intervened and added support for CarPlay manually, following that I added a lot of skeleton code for it to flesh out. Claude was then able to build a prototype However, over the next few days as I tried to maintain the code I ended up rewriting 60% of it because it was not maintainable or correct. (By "not correct" I mean it had logic errors and was updating the display multiple times with incorrect information before replacing it with correct information, causing the data displayed to randomly refresh) I also tried getting it to add some new screens to a game I develop. I wanted it to add some of the purchase flows into the app (boring code that I hate writing). It managed to do it with compile errors, and was unable to fix its own build output despite having the tools to do so. Instead of fixing the build errors it caused, Claude Code decided it would manually verify that only its own changes were correct by running `swiftc` on only files that it touched. Which was nonsense All that said, there was a benefit in that Claude Code writing all this code and getting something up on the screen motivated me to finally pick up the work and do some of these tasks. I had been putting them off for months and just having the work "get started" no matter how bad, was a good kick start
• cyral 1y ago
  I haven't tried Claude Code yet, but I extensively use Cursor and find it can do similar work (which makes sense). I think it's good you led with the length prompt/spec, which will maybe help the "AI can't do ____" crowd grasp that it really is a skill issue when they can't get any good results from LLMs. (Unfortunately it cannot help the "well, this isn't actually useful or making an impact" group) Regarding some of the comments here: I found the article style fine, and I even like the "follow my journey" style writing as it helps the reader understand the process you went though. That kind of engineering and debugging workflow is something I enjoy about this industry.
  • ehnto 1y ago
    > help the "AI can't do ____" crowd grasp that it really is a skill issue when they can't get any good results from LLMs. I think the issue with this conversation is that no one tells you what they are working on, and I suspect there is both a skill gap in usage, but also a lack of capability in the LLMs, both surfacing as the same outcome. There is definitely stuff an LLM cannot do on its own, at which point is the LLM really achieving the outcome or is it the human just achieving it by backseat driving. Much like a senior telling the junior how to solve a tricky bug, you wouldn't say the junior came up with the solution and therefore you would not say the junior is capable of solving the bug.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• dazzaji 1y ago
  This is a fun project to be sure. I just wish the author would not refer to the experiment as an "autonomous startup builder" unless they mean it humorously. Having poked around the GitHub repo and read through the materials, it seems like more of an AI coding assistant running in a loop that built and deployed a broken web application with no users, no business model, and no understanding of what problem it was trying to solve. There were quasi-autonomous processes and there were things that were built, but nothing I'd call a startup.
• buyx 1y ago
  $100 a month for a South African is not a trivial amount. Definitely putting his money where his mouth is.
• ontigola 1y ago
  "Thanks for the article. I found it interesting, though the 'vibe coding' method isn't something I can apply in my own IT environment, mainly due to its complexity and technology stack. The piece makes a strong case for why LLMs are so good at coding. It's clear they excel with the technologies and patterns most common in their training data—the same ones their own developers likely use. While their performance drops off with less familiar tech, it's undeniable that for certain types of tasks, they are very effective."
  • mock-possum 1y ago
    Who are you quoting here?
• anotherpaul 1y ago
  I feel like Claude code is great but how is it so much different from the agent of GitHub copilot? They both can use the same model (Claude 4) and the agent behaves very similar. For 10 bucks I think GitHub copilot is very reasonably priced as well. But ofc usage limits are maybe where they differ a lot. Am I missing out?
  • nicewood 1y ago
    I only know the old Github Copilot (like 2yrs+ ago) so cannot speak to it directly, but even the Cursor Agent (with Sonnet 4 or GPT-5) is IMO inferior to Claude Code (CC). In my experience, it is faster and better performing. CC seems to spend tokens more deliberately + gives superior coding tools to the model than other provider. Recently my CC subscription ran out, tried 3 prompts with Cursor Agent and then went back to subscribing CC. I still use Cursor though for autocompletion.
    • anotherpaul 1y ago
      Yeah the old one was much worse. They have really stepped up their game recently. Thats why I am wondering how large the gap still is. I only ever see people compare cursor and Claude code. Never GitHub copilot. So I assume there is either a blind spot or it's much worse
• wolvesechoes 1y ago
  I don't even need Claude Code.
• codeulike 1y ago
  How does privacy work with Claude Code in the real world? Its arbitrarily sending files from current folder/subfolders to anthropics cloud, right? Does Claude have a good privacy policy? E.g. do they promise not to retain what gets sent? Because I think 'sending everything to the ai' would be a bit of an obstacle for most company environments
  • apexalpha 1y ago
    Almost every company on the planet sends ALL their data to the cloud. They even PAY for this privilege.
    • codeulike 1y ago
      Some companies are pretty careful and each cloud has to have the right certifications and there will be an internal data protection policy about what sorts of things are allowed to be uploaded there. Something like Claude Code which arbitrarily yeets local files to some cloud somewhere is a liability in that environment ... unless they have a very good privacy policy. hence my question.
• spyder 1y ago
  "Now I can just tell Claude to write an article (like the one you're currently reading) and give it some pointers regarding how I want it to look, and it can generate any custom HTML and CSS and JavaScript I want on the fly." Yea, I know that was the case when I clicked on the thumbnails and couldn't close the image and had to reload the whole page. Good thing that you could just ask AI to fix this, but the bad thing is that you assumed it would produce fully working code in one shot and didn't test it properly.
  • sixhobbits 1y ago
    When I asked it to add the gallery I also asked it to make sure the images close if you press escape or outside the image. I guess I wasn't thinking about mobile users, but definitely on me, not Claude there :) *EDIT* prominent close button and closing on back navigation added (probably people will complain about hijackng the back button now)
    • cschmatzler 1y ago
      and again we can tell based on how the x isn’t centered in the close button
      • _heimdall 1y ago
        If a button with content out of center is a clear sign of LLM use, these tools are decades older than I realized.
        • jdiff 1y ago
          I wouldn't call it a clear sign of LLM use myself but in the year of our lord 2025 it should be unheard of, we've got so many nice tools for layouting nowadays. It's certainly below par if LLMs can't reliably manage it.
  • wiseowise 1y ago
    Bold of you to assume that they assumed something instead of thinking that they might just not give a shit about it.
• e-brake 1y ago
  Nothing new but you can configure Claude Code to use GPT5 as its LLM model: https://docs.litellm.ai/docs/tutorials/claude_responses_api https://docs.litellm.ai/docs/tutorials/claude_responses_api
  • yahoozoo 1y ago
    Is there a way to route Claude Code through a GitHub Copilot subscription?
    • adhamsalama 1y ago
      You can use GitHub Copilot as an API (free unlimited gpt-4.1) with the generated token used in the JetBrains extension, but it's really stupid so I canceled the subscription and subscribed to Claude.
• mdrzn 1y ago
  This how I run CC, directly on my server, with root, but no permission skip.
• javier_e06 1y ago
  AI is a box, beware of how our brains mold inside of it. https://www.media.mit.edu/articles/a-i-is-homogenizing-our-thoughts/ https://www.media.mit.edu/articles/a-i-is-homogenizing-our-t...
• dangoodmanUT 1y ago
  I personally like Cursor ssh, because I get the editor too
• meistertigran 1y ago
  I have been doing something very simillar! Instead of giving it a VPS, I just made a tool that allows synchronization of localStorage data. I now just upload the HTML it generates and have an app instantly.
• frank000010 1y ago
  [flagged]
• einpoklum 1y ago
  > Within a few days I'd upgraded to the $100/month MAX plan This is something a third of your total gross income - if we take a median over the people of the world.
• Pomelolo 1y ago
  This reads like an ad.