4 ms·

They're losing money on this $200 plan and they're essentially paying you to make you dependent on Claude Code so they can exploit this (somehow) in the future.

• esafak 8mo ago
  It's a bizarre plan because nobody is 'dependent' on Claude Code; we're begging to use alternatives. It's the model we want!
  • alexandre_m 8mo ago
    You’re not really paying for the model, you’re paying for the tool, the ecosystem, and the application layer around it. Sonnet 4.6 in CC doesn’t behave the same way as Sonnet 4.6 in Antigravity.
    • code51 8mo ago
      Skills is a generic construct. System prompt is generic as well. Subagents, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md etc. these are generic, "please care for my instruction" kind of constructs without any real guarantee to close gaps. Tool is generic (CC vs OpenCode) Ecosystem is already same everywhere. I don't understand what's the point.
      • alexandre_m 8mo ago
        The point is that wrappers matter. Orchestration, tool calls, reasoning loops, system prompts, agentic capabilities. Output is different, quality is different. This is the moat for AI frontier companies.
  • duskdozer 8mo ago
    And it's their 'ecosystem' they want to sell you.
• psoundy 8mo ago
  When using Claude Code, it's possible to opt out of having one's sessions be used for training. But is that opt out for everything? Or only message content, such that there could remain sufficient metadata to derive useful insight from?