Depends on who you ask. For me it sounds good. For Anthropic it might increase load and make them less money but give them better KPIs.
Make them less money? By automating use of their product, that costs money to use?
Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
11–20 of 133 posts
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#12Right now the interests align, but as soon as more tokens -> more profit (instead of more revenue and more losses) the perverse incentives will be too big to avoid.
It seems inevitable that open source harnesses will win. These companies would do better to just open source their harnesses.
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#13I really hate this direction both Anthropic and Open AI are following. They are in this silly competition whose model/harness can go unattended the longest, no matter what. And it is never explicit, you learn about it after you get bitten by it. Claude Code has auto mode which is supposed to take over permission prompts but no, they had to couple that with “I will assume this is what the user wants” and made it unusa…
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#14As soon as tokens stop being subsidized I would not trust any harness made by a company that also charges for the compute. Right now the interests align, but as soon as more tokens -> more profit (instead of more revenue and more losses) the perverse incentives will be too big to avoid. It seems inevitable that open source harnesses will win. These companies would do better to just open source their harnesses.
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#15The headache I recently had was it somehow started interpreting mouse clicks in the terminal to mean I clicked an option when I was really just trying to get/confirm window focus.
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#16The headache I recently had was it somehow started interpreting mouse clicks in the terminal to mean I clicked an option when I was really just trying to get/confirm window focus.
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#17Also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48766895 I would love Claude Code to be a little less vibe-coded. The underlying model is excellent, but we're being pretty much forced into using CC to use the subscription model.
The most recent one that's had me annoyed is the "Fullscreen" TUI feature, which is super unintuitive, implementing its own text highlighting and copy-on-select mechanics, overriding your terminal's native right click. Easy to disable but terrible defaults, IMO. It's not even really clear to me what problem it was actually supposed to solve.
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Make them less money? By automating use of their product, that costs money to use?
Anthropic makes more money when people use 5% of what their subscription offers them. This allows them to sell more subscriptions without paying for more capacity.
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Make them less money? By automating use of their product, that costs money to use?
Anthropic makes more money when people use 5% of what their subscription offers them. This allows them to sell more subscriptions without paying for more capacity.
Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Make them less money? By automating use of their product, that costs money to use?
Anthropic makes more money when people use 5% of what their subscription offers them. This allows them to sell more subscriptions without paying for more capacity.