Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Claude Code chooses

amplifying.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 266 posts

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#71

Post by alexsmirnov »

wrs wrote: post #15

This is where LLM advertising will inevitably end up: completely invisible. It's the ultimate "influencer". Or not even advertising, just conflict of interest. A canary for this would be whether Gemini skews toward building stuff on GCP.

Considering how little data needed to poison llm https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison , this is a way to replace SEO by llm product placement:

1. create several hundreds github repos with projects that use your product ( may be clones or AI generated )

2. create website with similar instructions, connect to hundred domains

3. generate reddit, facebook, X posts, wikipedia pages with the same information

Wait half a year ? until scrappers collect it and use to train new models

Profit...

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#72

Post by xg15 »

dvt wrote: post #50
dataviz1000 wrote: post #39

I'm running a server on AWS with TimescaleDB on the disk because I don't need much. I figure I'll move it when the time comes. (edit: Claude Code is managing the AWS EC2 instance using AWS CLI.) Claude Code this morning was about to create an account with NeonDB and Fly.io (edit: it suggested as the plan to host on these where I would make the new accounts) although it has been very successful managing the AWS EC2 se…

> Claude Code likely is correct that I should start to use NeonDB and Fly.io which I have never used before and do not know much about I wouldn't be so sure about that. In my experience, agents consistently make awful architectural decisions. Both in code and beyond (even in contexts like: what should I cook for a dinner party?). They leak the most obvious "midwit senior engineer" decisions which I would strike down…

> they are overly-focused on versioning and legacy support (from APIs to DB schemas--even if you're working on a brand new project)

I mean, DB schema versioning is one of the things that you can dismiss as "I won't need it" for a long time - until you do need it, at which point it will be a major pain to add.

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#73

Post by matheus-rr »

esafak wrote: post #55
mjheadd wrote: post #32

Worth reading alongside recent research on AGENTS.md file effectiveness. The clearest use case for these files isn't describing your codebase, it's overriding default behavior. If your project has specific requirements around tooling (common in government and regulated industries), that's exactly what belongs in the AGENTS.md files.

It still ignores it. I always have to say 'Isn't this mentioned in AGENTS??' and it will concede that it is.

In my experience the problem is how people write them. Descriptive statements get ignored because the model treats them as context it can reason past.

"We use PostgreSQL" reads as a soft preference. The model weighs it against whatever it thinks is optimal and decides you'd be better off with Supabase.

"NEVER create accounts for external databases. All persistence uses the existing PostgreSQL instance. If you're about to recommend a new service, stop." actually sticks.

The pattern that works: imperative prohibitions with specific reasoning. "Do not use Redis because we run a single node and pg_notify covers our pubsub needs" gives enough context that it won't reinvent the decision every session.

Your AGENTS.md should read less like a README and more like a linter config. Bullet points with DO/DON'T rules, not prose descriptions of your stack.

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#74

Post by awad »

actionfromafar wrote: post #44
MeetingsBrowser wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't necessarily have to be advertisers paying AI providers. It could be advertisers working to ensure they get recommended by the latest models. The next form of SEO.

That's called LLM SEO now I believe.

There are competing terms currently being decided on by the market at large: AEO (Answer Engine Optimization) and GEO (Generative Engine Optimization)

Candidly I am working on a startup in this space myself, though we are taking a different angle than most incumbents.

While it's still early days for the space, I sense a lot of the original entrants who focus on, essentially, 'generate more content ideally with our paid tools' will run in to challenges as the general population has a pretty negative perception of 'AI Slop.' Doubly so when making purchasing decisions, hence the rise of influencers and popularity of reviews (though those are also in danger of sloppification).

There's an inevitable GIGO scenario if left unchecked IMO.

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#75

Post by rapind »

wrs wrote: post #15

This is where LLM advertising will inevitably end up: completely invisible. It's the ultimate "influencer". Or not even advertising, just conflict of interest. A canary for this would be whether Gemini skews toward building stuff on GCP.

Probably closer to the Walmart / Amazon model where it's the arbiter of shelf space, and proceed to create their own alternatives (Great Value, Amazon Brand) once they see what features people want from their various SaaS.

An obvious one will be tax software.

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#76

Post by cryptonector »

torginus wrote: post #53

What coding with LLMs have taught me, particularly in a domain that's not super comfortable for me (web tech), is that how many npm packages (like jwt auth, or build plugins) can be replaced by a dozen lines of code. And you can actually make sense of that code and be sure it does what you want it to.

We used to reuse code a lot. But then we got problems like diamond dependency hell. Why did we reuse code a lot? To save on labor. Now we don't have to.

So we might roll-your-own more things. But then we'll have a tremendous amount of code duplication, effectively, and bigger tech debt issues, minus the diamond dependency hell issue. It might be better this way; time will tell.

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#77

Post by cryptonector »

The bias to build might mean faster token burn through (higher revenue for the AI co). But I think it's natural. I often have that same impulse myself. I prefer all the codebases I work on that have minimal external dependencies to the ones that are riddled with them. In Java land it's extremely common to have tons of external dependencies, and then upgrade headaches, especially when sharing in a monorepo type environment.

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#78

Post by rhubarbtree »

cryptonector wrote: post #76
torginus wrote: post #53

What coding with LLMs have taught me, particularly in a domain that's not super comfortable for me (web tech), is that how many npm packages (like jwt auth, or build plugins) can be replaced by a dozen lines of code. And you can actually make sense of that code and be sure it does what you want it to.

We used to reuse code a lot. But then we got problems like diamond dependency hell. Why did we reuse code a lot? To save on labor. Now we don't have to. So we might roll-your-own more things. But then we'll have a tremendous amount of code duplication, effectively, and bigger tech debt issues, minus the diamond dependency hell issue. It might be better this way; time will tell.

Not just to save on labour. To have confidence in a battle tested solution. To use something familiar to others. For compatibility. To exploit further development, debugging, and integration.

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#79

Post by [deleted] »

alexsmirnov wrote: post #71
wrs wrote: post #15

This is where LLM advertising will inevitably end up: completely invisible. It's the ultimate "influencer". Or not even advertising, just conflict of interest. A canary for this would be whether Gemini skews toward building stuff on GCP.

Considering how little data needed to poison llm https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison , this is a way to replace SEO by llm product placement: 1. create several hundreds github repos with projects that use your product ( may be clones or AI generated ) 2. create website with similar instructions, connect to hundred domains 3. generate reddit, facebook, X posts, wikipedia pages with the same informa…

[deleted]

Re: What Claude Code chooses

#80

Post by nikcub »

alexsmirnov wrote: post #71
wrs wrote: post #15

This is where LLM advertising will inevitably end up: completely invisible. It's the ultimate "influencer". Or not even advertising, just conflict of interest. A canary for this would be whether Gemini skews toward building stuff on GCP.

Considering how little data needed to poison llm https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison , this is a way to replace SEO by llm product placement: 1. create several hundreds github repos with projects that use your product ( may be clones or AI generated ) 2. create website with similar instructions, connect to hundred domains 3. generate reddit, facebook, X posts, wikipedia pages with the same informa…

from my understanding Anthropic are now hiring a lot of experts in different who are writing content used to post-train models to make these decisions and they're constantly adjusted by the anthropic team themselves

this is why the stacks in the report and what cc suggests closely match latest developer "consensus"

your suggestion would degrade user experience and be noticed very quickly

Post reply on HN