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

Schedule tasks on the web

code.claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 261 posts

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#181

Post by hirako2000 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #164
hirako2000 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing to solve. It's already there, a VPS, a container platform, just push your script and schedule it. Of course a provider can offer convenient shortcuts, but at the cost of getting tied into their ecosystem. Anthropic is clearly battling an existential threat: what happens when our paying users figure out they can get a better and cheaper model elsewhere.

> what happens when our paying users figure out they can get a better and cheaper model elsewhere. They solved that with subscriptions. For end-users (and developers using AI for coding), it makes no sense to go for pay-as-you-go API use, as anything interesting will burn more than the monthly subscription worth of $$$ in API costs in few hours to days.

Yes but that's anthropic API pricing, some of the highest per token.

Sure subscription is a sort of tie in, but only if users are fooled into investing in workflows bound to anthropic. That's what the company is hooking them to do with this scheduler, banning open agentic framework and the rest.

The moat, if any, will be the tooling. Token is becoming a commodity, they know it.

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#182

Post by sharemywin »

jFriedensreich wrote: post #167

We need to fight model providers trying to own memory, workflows and tooling. Don't give them an inch more of your software than needed even if there is a slight inconvenience setting up.

I wish there was a company that was easy to use but wouldn't sell out in this arena.

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#183

Post by onionisafruit »

jwpapi wrote: post #120
nickandbro wrote: post #4

I feel like we are just inching closer and closer to a world where rapid iteration of software will be by default. Like for example a trusted user makes feedback -> feedback gets curated into a ticket by an AI agent, then turned into a PR by an Agent, then reviewed by an Agent, before being deployed by an Agent. We are maybe one or two steps from the flywheel being completed. Or maybe we are already there.

I just don’t see it coming. I was full on that camp 3 months ago, but I just realize every step makes more mistakes. It leads into a deadlock and when no human has the mental model anymore. Don’t you guys have hard business problems where AI just cant solve it or just very slowly and it’s presenting you 17 ideas till it found the right one. I’m using the most expensive models. I think the nature of AI might block tha…

I know it’s not your main point, but I’m curious where $300/line comes from. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a dollar amount attached to a line of production code before.

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#184

Post by aspenmartin »

skydhash wrote: post #179
aspenmartin wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think this is a problem? Reasoning is constantly improving, it has ample access to humans to gather more business context, it has access to the same industry data and other signals that humans do, and it can get any data necessary. It has Zoom meeting notes, I mean why do people think there's somehow a fundamental limit beyond coding? The other thing you're missing here is generalizability. Better coding p…

> Why do you think this is a problem? Because it cannot do it? Every investment has a date where there should be a return on that investment. If there’s no date, it’s a donation of resources (or a waste depending on perspective). You may be OK with continuing to try to make things work. But others aren’t and have decided to invest their finite resources somewhere else.

> Because it cannot do it?

Ah ok so you didn't really read my comment, what is your counter argument? Models are just fundamentally incapable of understanding business context? They are demonstrably already capable of this to a large extent.

> Every investment has a date where there should be a return on that investment. If there’s no date, it’s a donation of resources (or a waste depending on perspective).

what are you implying here? This convo now turns into the "AI is not profitable and this is a house of cards" theme? That's ok, we can ignore every other business model like say Uber running at a loss to capture what is ultimately an absolutely insane TAM. Little ol' Uber accumuluated ~33B in losses over 14 years, and you're right they tanked and collapsed like a dying star...oh wait...hmm interesting I just looked at their market cap and it's 141 Billion.

> You may be OK with continuing to try to make things work. But others aren’t and have decided to invest their finite resources somewhere else.

I truly love that. If you want to code as a hobby that is fantastic, and we can go ahead and see in 2 years how your comment ages.

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#185

Post by wastepaste »

azan_ wrote: post #173
michaelmior wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worry about the costs from an energy and environmental impact perspective. I love that AI tools make me more productive, but I don't like the side effects.

Environmental impact of ai is greatly overstated. Average person will make bigger positive impact on environment by reducing his meat intake by 25% compared with combined giving up flying and AI use.

[dead]

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#186

Post by sobellian »

aspenmartin wrote: post #174
sobellian wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The space of programs is incomprehensibly massive. Searching for a program that does what you need is a particularly difficult search problem. In the general case you can't solve search, there's no free lunch. Even scaling laws must bow to NFL. But depending on the type of search problem some heuristics can do well. We know human brains have a heuristic that can program (maybe not particularly well, but passably). To…

So what do you think the difference is between humans and an agent in this respect? What makes you think this has any relevance to the problem? everything is combinatorially explosive: the combination of words that we can string into sentences and essays is also combinatorially explosive and yet LLMs and humans have no problem with it. It's just the wrong frame of thinking for what's going on. These systems are obtai…

Hey man, it sounds like you're getting frustrated. I'm not ignoring anything; let's have a reasonable discussion without calling each other ignorant. I don't dispute the value of these tools nor that they're improving. But the no free lunch theorem is inexorable so the question is where this improvement breaks down - before or beyond human performance on programming problems specifically.

What difference do I think there is between humans and an agent? They use different heuristics, clearly. Different heuristics are valuable on different search problems. It's really that simple.

To be clear, I'm not calling either superior. I use agents every day. But I have noticed that claude, a SOTA model, makes basic logic errors. Isn't that interesting? It has access to the complete compendium of human knowledge and can code all sorts of things in seconds that require my trawling through endless documentation. But sometimes it forgets that to do dirty tracking on a pure function's output, it needs to dirty-track the function's inputs.

It's interesting that you mention AlphaGo. I was also very fascinated with it. There was recent research that the same algorithm cannot learn Nim: https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/03/figuring-out-why-ais-get-.... Isn't that food for thought?

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#187

Post by MattGaiser »

jondwillis wrote: post #29
MattGaiser wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am already there with a project/startup with a friend. He writes up an issue in GitHub and there is a job that automatically triggers Claude to take a crack at it and throw up a PR. He can see the change in an ephemeral environment. He hasn't merged one yet, but it will get there one day for smaller items. I am already at the point where because it is just the two of us, the limiting factor is his own needs, not my…

Why doesn’t he merge them?

He is not technical but a product guy, so he still wants me to check it over.

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#188

Post by duped »

rkomorn wrote: post #125
dominotw wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont mean this as a shade but ppl who are not coders now seem to think "coding is now solved" and seem to be pushing absurd ideas like shipping software with slack messages. These ppl are often high up in the chain and have never done serious coding. Stripe is apparently pushing gazzaliion prs now from slack but their feature velocity has not changed. so what gives? how is that number of pr is now the primary metri…

I ask myself the same question. I'm not seeing the apps, SaaS, and other tools I use getting better, with either more features or fewer bugs. Whatever is being shipped, as an end user, I'm just not seeing it.

I think a lot of SWE roles are really bullshit jobs (1) and these have been particularly susceptible to getting sniped with AI tools.

(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs

Re: Schedule tasks on the web

#190

Post by troupo »

aspenmartin wrote: post #177
troupo wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because it has business context It doesn't because it doesn't learn. Every time you run it, it's a new dawn with no knowledge of your business or your business context > better reasoning It doesn't have better reasoning beyond very localized decisions. > and can ask humans for clarification and take direction. And yet it doesn't, no matter how many .md file you throw at it, at crucial places in code. > We have clea…

> It doesn't because it doesn't learn. Every time you run it, it's a new dawn with no knowledge of your business or your business context It does learn in context. And lack of continuous learning is temporary, that is a quirk of the current stack, expect this to change rather quickly. Also still not relevant, consider that agentic systems can be hierarchical and that they have no trouble being able to grok codebases…

> It does learn in context

It quite literally doesn't.

It also doesn't help that every new context is a new dawn with no knowledge if things past.

> Also still not relevant, consider that agentic systems can be hierarchical and that they have no trouble being able

A bunch of Memento guys directing a bunch of other Memento guys don't make a robust system, or a system that learns, or a system that maintains and retains things like business context.

> and this will only improve.

We've heard this mantra for quite some time now.

> Do you have any basis for this claim?

Oh. Just the fact that in every single coding session even on a small 20kloc codebase I need to spend time cleaning up large amounts of duplicated code, undo quite a few wrong assumptions, and correct the agent when it goes on wild tangents and goose hunts.

> Maybe to yourself? Chinchilla scaling laws a

yap yap yap. The result is anything but your rosy description of these amazing reasoning learning systems that handle business context.

Post reply on HN