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

Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

olafalders.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 133 posts

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#111

Post by chickensong »

randysalami wrote: post #98
brabel wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it shows weakness in a vulnerable way. It is human. It is not strategic. Are you complaining that the answer is too human and that a multi billion company should not allow a human who made a mistake to own the mistake in public, being honest about what happened in this case?? Would you prefer complete silence from them like you most certainly would from Google or Apple. That sounds incredibly sad to me, we don’t ev…

Hey, mistakes happen. As we saw with the recent AWS billing issue. But Anthropic is a leading company that makes cutting-edge AI which will kill people. It’s literally a matter of life and death and at this point, it is the place to be if you want to be the best. So as an institution, I don’t want human answers, I want the right, most professional answers. We used to have it. Human responses with every word chosen to…

> But Anthropic is a leading company that makes cutting-edge AI which will kill people. It’s literally a matter of life and death and at this point

But Stihl makes cutting-edge chainsaws which will kill people. It’s literally a matter of life and death and at this point

> So as an institution, I don’t want human answers, I want the right, most professional answers.

We deeply regret our auto-saw feature activated while you were sawing unattended. Your safety is our top priority.

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#112

Post by oalders »

blixt wrote: post #66
oalders wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Meanwhile, this article was written by Claude The prose was written by me, with the research being done by Claude and also clearly attributed. I left Claude's research as a series of bullet points so that it would be clear that I'm not passing off an LLM's work as my own, but if anyone wants to dig deeper, they have some starting points to consider. I don't publish prose written by an LLM for the same reason I would…

Then I apologize, it seemed to me you wrote that part, but I guess I was reading Claude output.

No worries. :) I did struggle a little with how to make it obvious that the machine output was not my own. I set it off inside horizontal rules and I did add some prose before and after to say when Claude's output began and ended. If anyone just jumps around using the table of contents, they'll miss that, though. (Not saying that was the case for you).

I had considered putting the research into a gist, but I don't want to have to rely on a 3rd party to keep something that's integral to my post online. Seemed more cohesive to keep it all in one place.

What I was trying to get across was that I had some basis for the points I was trying to make and wasn't just handwaving about it, but I also didn't want to spend endless hours whittling it down. We're all busy people and I see now that it's entirely possible to skim the post and assume it's some low effort word salad. It may be a word salad, but it wasn't low effort. ;)

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#113

Post by finnthehuman »

brabel wrote: post #69
randysalami wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the article but I find this response kind of strange. Am I alone in this? Wanton accountability for a multi-billion dollar cutting edge company… leaves more to be desired from the best? Take Apple or Google or any top tech company of the past at its prime and compare. This kind of behavior then would probably reflect poorly on the institutions behind the tech and not maintain their image of technical brillianc…

> it shows weakness in a vulnerable way. It is human. It is not strategic. Are you complaining that the answer is too human and that a multi billion company should not allow a human who made a mistake to own the mistake in public, being honest about what happened in this case?? Would you prefer complete silence from them like you most certainly would from Google or Apple. That sounds incredibly sad to me, we don’t ev…

> we don’t even expect humanity from big tech since that’s what we’ve become accustomed to seeing.

There is a difference between humanity in communication and saying the problem was a human choice.

You can have humane communication about a system failure and actors in that system. Or you can have cold matter of fact press release voice about an individual persons failure.

I don’t think anthropic statement was any less distant than other times big tech brushes off a whiopsie. They just used personal language to ingratiate the reader.

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#114

Post by mdavid626 »

Shadowmist wrote: post #45
mdavid626 wrote: post #28

It happened to me today. I was reading agent's answer and it asked me something. I didn't even get to the question - it accepted something! Jesus Christ. Where are the software engineers?!

I’ve seen that a few times. Had to disable the TUI mode because clicks to focus the terminal window were being interpreted as an approval even though the click was nowhere near the question being asked. I’ve also never chosen to enable auto mode but somehow it is on and approving shell commands I didn’t want approved. Scary since I’ve caught it adding things like auto approve flags to terraform apply commands.

I’d really suggest to run Claude Code in a sandbox! Anthropic can’t be trusted.

I run it on Mac with sandbox-exec. No access to AWS, database, pretty much just files in the current folder. Even if it goes rogue, it can’t do much harm.

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#115

Post by allenu »

bostik wrote: post #109
allenu wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hate that change. It's counterintuitive that a shell recognizes mouse clicks to mean "select this option". Also, the auto-copy selected text feature is awful. That's another thing that is so counterintuitive. I have never seen a UI where just selecting text means auto-copy to the paste buffer. Who is coming up with these awful UX ideas? On top of that, the scroll "feel" of the new client (at least on macOS)…

> I have never seen a UI where just selecting text means auto-copy to the paste buffer. Isn't this the default behaviour of every X application since the 1990's?

I stand corrected. I haven't used X in a long time, but I think you're right.

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#116

Post by cute_boi »

inigyou wrote: post #99
cute_boi wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All these words don't mean anything when you got no intention to open source claude code. Even grok cli is open-sourced.

Can't you just ask Claude to decompile it?

It isn’t very smart to recover the code, and Anthropic will ban you because, apparently, decompiling code or training a model constitutes cybercrime, according to Dario and his lackeys.

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#117

Post by sheepscreek »

trq_ wrote: post #47

Hi everyone, It's Thariq from the Claude Code team here. This was my change! I made the AskUserQuestion tool so am generally in charge of maintaining it. First, overall wanted to apologize and agree that this did not meet our bar and does not represent how we plan to ship on Claude Code. To give you a motivating sense, as the models get more powerful, usage patterns start to change. I'd gotten a lot of feedback that…

Hey Thariq. Don't dwell too much on the negativity here. It's a hard act to balance and I'm sure the frightening pace has only made your job harder.

I think there might be a case for multiple CC release streams, same as Chrome - a stable that is infrequently updated, a beta (which would have been the right place for this feature to land) and maybe even a canary.

This way folks can choose the right one based on their risk tolerance.

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#118

Post by nojvek »

Codex server is open source. You can connect many clients to it. There is open code, pi.dev and many other harnesses.

Claude Code is the major closed source coding harness, uses private apis. Anthropic punishes you if you use another api.

IMO Anthropic is not a company that wants a flourishing AI ecosystem.

Re: Claude Code: Anatomy of a Misfeature

#119

Post by alansaber »

DanielHB wrote: post #12

As 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.

Not that I disagree but I can imagine it's easy enough to ship implicit token increase (ratchet up the COT settings) on then backend
Post reply on HN