Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code on the web

anthropic.com

61–70 of 405 posts

Re: Claude Code on the web

#62
post #57

Nit about doing your AI interfaces on the Web: I really want claude.ai and chatgpt.com to offer a standard username+password login without 2FA. The kind my privacy-friendly browser of short-lived sessions can complete in a couple clicks, like for most other SaaSes, and then I'm in and using the tool. I don't want to leak data either way by using some "let's throw SSO from a sketchy adtech company into the trust loop"…

In the modern age of mass credential stuffing attacks exploiting password reuse, MFA is one of the most effective tools for reducing unauthorized logins. Companies that don't adopt it are risking unacceptably high levels of credit card chargebacks.

I wish the standard were for companies to check new passwords against leaked password lists, e.g. what https://haveibeenpwned.com uses.

I use a similar workflow and have found that websites that allow passkey-based login can avoid the friction of waiting for TOTP codes or magic links.

Re: Claude Code on the web

#63
post #37

I had a preview of this over the weekend, notes here plus some example PRs: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Oct/20/claude-code-for-web/ It's really solid. It's effectively a web (and native mobile) UI over Claude Code CLI, more specifically "claude --dangerously-skip-permissions". Anthropic have recognized that Claude Code where you don't have to approve every step is massively more productive and interesting than the…

It’s interesting because I’ve slowly arrived at the opposite conclusion: for much of my practical day to day work, using CC with “allow edits” turned OFF results in a much better end product. I can correct it inline, I pseudo-review the code as it’s produced, etc etc. Codex is better for “fire and forget” features for sure. But Claude remains excellent at grokking intent for problems where you aren’t quite sure what you want to build yet or are highly opinionated. Mostly due to the fact it’s faster and the iteration loop is faster.

Re: Claude Code on the web

#64

We were heavy users of Claude Code ($70K+ spend per year) and have almost completely switched to codex CLI. I'm doing massive lifts with it on software that would never before have been feasible for me personally, or any team I've ever run. I'll use Claude Code maybe once every two weeks as a second set of eyes to inspect code and document a bug, with mixed success. But my experience has been that initially Claude Co…

What model are you using respectively? Not sure I share your observations

Re: Claude Code on the web

#65
post #46

We were heavy users of Claude Code ($70K+ spend per year) and have almost completely switched to codex CLI. I'm doing massive lifts with it on software that would never before have been feasible for me personally, or any team I've ever run. I'll use Claude Code maybe once every two weeks as a second set of eyes to inspect code and document a bug, with mixed success. But my experience has been that initially Claude Co…

Do you find this to still be true with the Sonnet 4.5 model?

IMO Sonnet 4.5 is great but it just isn’t as comprehensive of a thinker. I love Anthropic and primarily use CC day to day but for any tricky problems or “high stakes, this must not have bugs” issues, I turn to Codex. I do find if you let Codex run on it its own too long it will produce comparably sloppy or lacking-in-vision type issues that people criticize Sonnet for, however.

Re: Claude Code on the web

#66

We were heavy users of Claude Code ($70K+ spend per year) and have almost completely switched to codex CLI. I'm doing massive lifts with it on software that would never before have been feasible for me personally, or any team I've ever run. I'll use Claude Code maybe once every two weeks as a second set of eyes to inspect code and document a bug, with mixed success. But my experience has been that initially Claude Co…

Yeah, after correcting it several times I've gotten Claude Code to tell me it didn't have the expertise to work in one of my problem domains. It was kinda surprising but also kinda refreshing that it knew when to give up. For better or worse I haven't noticed similar things with Codex.

Re: Claude Code on the web

#67
post #46

We were heavy users of Claude Code ($70K+ spend per year) and have almost completely switched to codex CLI. I'm doing massive lifts with it on software that would never before have been feasible for me personally, or any team I've ever run. I'll use Claude Code maybe once every two weeks as a second set of eyes to inspect code and document a bug, with mixed success. But my experience has been that initially Claude Co…

Do you find this to still be true with the Sonnet 4.5 model?

I'm like 80% sure Sonnet 4.5 is just rebranded Opus.

Sonnet 4 was a coding companion, I could see what it was doing and it did what I asked.

Sonnet 4.5 is like Opus, it generates massive amounts of "helper scripts" and "bootstrap scripts" and all kinds of useless markdown documentation files even for the tinies PoC scripts.

Re: Claude Code on the web

#68

This is quite nice! I'm using Claude Code locally a lot, occasionally with a couple parallel session. I was very happy when they made the GitHub Action - I used it quite a bit, but in practice I got frustrated that I effectively only get a single back-and-forth out of it, I can't really "continue the conversation without losing context" - Sure, I can respond to it in the PR it makes, but that will be a fresh session…

https://docs.github.com/en/actions/tutorials/use-containeriz...

I'm not sure how this applies? We're talking about the "Claude Code on the Web" custom sandbox, not running Claude Code in GitHub Actions.

Re: Claude Code on the web

#69

We were heavy users of Claude Code ($70K+ spend per year) and have almost completely switched to codex CLI. I'm doing massive lifts with it on software that would never before have been feasible for me personally, or any team I've ever run. I'll use Claude Code maybe once every two weeks as a second set of eyes to inspect code and document a bug, with mixed success. But my experience has been that initially Claude Co…

Can you share an example of the tasks you found Codex being much better? From my experience Claude Code is much better.

Re: Claude Code on the web

#70

We were heavy users of Claude Code ($70K+ spend per year) and have almost completely switched to codex CLI. I'm doing massive lifts with it on software that would never before have been feasible for me personally, or any team I've ever run. I'll use Claude Code maybe once every two weeks as a second set of eyes to inspect code and document a bug, with mixed success. But my experience has been that initially Claude Co…

Yeah, after correcting it several times I've gotten Claude Code to tell me it didn't have the expertise to work in one of my problem domains. It was kinda surprising but also kinda refreshing that it knew when to give up. For better or worse I haven't noticed similar things with Codex.

I've chosen problems with non-negotiable outcomes. In other words, problem domains where you either are able to clearly accomplish the very hard thing, or not, and there's no grey area. I've purposely chosen these kinds of problems to prove what AI agents are capable of, so that there is no debate in my mind. And with Codex I've accomplished the previously impossible. Unambiguously. Codex did this. Claude gave up.

It's as if there are two vendors saying they can give up incredibly superpowers for an affordable price, and only one of them actually delivers the full package. The other vendor's powers only work on Tuesdays, and when you're lucky. With that situation, in an environment as competitive as things currently stand, and given the trajectory we're on, Claude is an absolute non-starter for me. Without question.

Post reply on HN