Earlier quoted context omitted.
Comments are great for developers. I like having as much design in the repo directly. If not in the code, then in a markdown in the repo.
Meanwhile, some colleagues: "Code should have as little comments as possible, the code should explain itself." (conceptually not wholly wrong, but it can only explain HOW not WHY and even then often insufficiently) all while having barebones/empty README.md files more often than not. Fun times.
The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
401–410 of 636 posts
Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#4021. They are loved, and for good reasons, Sonnet 4 was groundbreaking but Opus 4.6 was for many a turning point in realizing Agentic SDLC real potential. People moved from Cursor to Claude Code in droves, they loved the CLI approach (me too), and the LOVED the subsidized $200 max pro plan (what's not to love, pay $200 instead of $5000 to Cursor...) They are the underdog, the true alternative to "evil" OpenAI or "don't be evil" Google, really standing up against mass surveillance or use of AI for autonomous killing machines. They are standing for the little guy, they are the "what OpenAI should have been" (plus they have better models...) They are the Apple of the AI era.
2. They are too loved, so loved that it protects them from legitimate criticism. They make GitHub's status page look good, and they make comcast customer service look like Amazon's. (At least Comcast has customer service), They are "If Dario shoots a customer in the middle of 5th avenue it won't hurt their sales one bit" level of liked. The fact they have the best models (for now) might be their achilles heel, because it hides other issues that might be in the blindspot. And as soon as a better model comes out from a competitor (and it could happen... if you recall OpenAI were the undisputed kinds with GPT 4o for a bit) these will become much more obvious.
3. This can hurt them in the long run. Eventually you can't sustain a business where you have not even 2 9s of SLA, can't handle customer support or sales (either with humans or worse for them - if they can't handle this with AI how do they expect to sell their own dream where AI does everything?). I'm sure they'll figure it out, they have huge growth and these are growth pains, but at some point, if they don't catch up with demand, the demand won't stay there forever the moment OpenAI/Google/someone else release a better model.
4. They inadvertently made all of the cybersecurity sector a potential enemy. Yes, all of them use Anthropic models, and probably many of them use Claude Code, but they know they might be paying the bills of their biggest competitor. Their shares drop whenever Anthropic even hints of a new model. Investors cut their valuations because they worry Anthropic will eat them for breakfast. I don't know about you, but if you ask me, having the people who live and breath security indirectly threatened by you, is not the best thing in the world, especially when your source code is out in the open for them to poke holes in...
5. the SaaS pocalypse - many of Claude Code's customers are... SaaS companies, that the same AI is "going to kill", again, if there was another provider that showed a bit more care about the entire businesses it's going to devour, if they also had even marginally better models... would the brand loyalty stay?
Side note: I'm an Claude Enterprise customer, I can't get a human to respond to anything, even using the special "enterprise support" methods, and I'm not the only one, I know people who can't get a sales person, not to mention support, to buy 150 + seats (Anthropic's answer was - release self serve enterprise onboarding, which by the way is "pay us $20 which does not include usage, usage is at market prices, same as getting an API key", you pay for convenience and governance, p.s. you can't cancel enterprise, it's 20 seats min, for 1 year, in advance, so make sure you really need it, the team plan is great for most cases but it lacks the $200 plan, only the $100 5x plan).
Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a whole of people thought that running code through a linter or formatter was objectionable, I'd probably just dismiss their beliefs as invalid rather than adding the linter or formatter as a co-author to every commit.
Like frying a veggie burger in bacon grease. Just because somebody's beliefs are dumb doesn't mean we should be deliberately tricking them. If they want to opt out of your code, let them.
Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#404Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#405Meanwhile Claude Code is still awesome. I don’t see my self switching to OpenAI (seriously bad mgmt and possibly the first domino to fall if there is a correction) or Gemini (Google ethics cough cough).
I switched to Codex out of frustration with Claude Code and it has been surprisingly similar for my web and mobile coding needs
Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#406Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#407I used to swear at Claude. To be honest, I thought it helped get results (maybe this is "oldschool" LLM thinking), but I realized it was just making me annoyed.
Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#408Earlier quoted context omitted.
If those tools are writing the code then in general I do expect that to be included in the PR! Through my whole career I've seen PRs where people noted that code that was generated (people have been generating code since long before LLMs). It's useful context unless you've gone over the generated code and understand it and it is the same quality as if you wrote it yourself (which in my experience is the case where it…
> If those tools are writing the code then in general I do expect that to be included in the PR! How about compiler?
Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#409Earlier quoted context omitted.
If those tools are writing the code then in general I do expect that to be included in the PR! Through my whole career I've seen PRs where people noted that code that was generated (people have been generating code since long before LLMs). It's useful context unless you've gone over the generated code and understand it and it is the same quality as if you wrote it yourself (which in my experience is the case where it…
> If those tools are writing the code then in general I do expect that to be included in the PR! How about compiler?
Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm also wondering if it's even legally valid? They constantly love to talk about Claude Code being "100%" being vibe coded...and the US legal system is leaning towards that not being copyrightable. It could still be a trade secret, but that doesn't fall under a DMCA take down.
You're confused, AI can't itself hold copyright, but the human who triggered the AI to write the code holds the copyright instead.