[flagged]
What Claude Code chooses
101–110 of 266 posts
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Advertisers will only pay if AI providers will provide them data on the equivalent of “ad impressions”. And unlabeled/non-evident advertisements are illegal in many (most?) countries.
Maybe. Historically lots of ads had little to no stats and those ads were wildly more effective than anything we have today.
The AI provider still has to prove that they actually deployed the ad.
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#103I just got an incredible idea about how foundation model providers can reach profitability
I'm already seeing a degradation in experience in Gemini's response since they've started stuffing YouTube recommendations at the end of the response. Anthropic is right in not adding these subtle(or not) monetization incentives.
I mean, that’s almost just fair. They ripped the answer from a YouTube video, but at least link you back to the source now.
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#104OK two things First, how did shadcn/ui become the go-to library for UI components? Claude isn't the only one that defaults to it, so I'm guessing it's the way it's pushed in the wild somehow. Second, building on this ^, and maybe this isn't quantifiable, but if we tell Claude to use anything except shadcn (or one of the other crazy-high defaults), will Claude's output drop in quality? Or speed, reliability, other met…
I expect its synergy with Tailwind. Shadcn/ui uses Tailwind for styling components, and AIs love Tailwind, so it makes sense they'd adopt a component library that uses it.
And it's definitely a real effect. The npm weekly download stats for shadcn/ui have exploded since December: https://www.npmjs.com/package/shadcn
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#105I just got an incredible idea about how foundation model providers can reach profitability
Buy more GPUs.
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
That sounds too expensive to be viable when the giveaway phase ends.
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#107[dead]
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#108Ist why I never give it such vague prompts. But it's sad it does not ask the user more. Also interesting and important to know how one would tease out good and correct information from llms in 2026. It's like relearning now to Google like it was 2006 all over again, except now it's much less deterministic.
I wonder how the tail of the distribution of types of requests fares e.g. engineer asking for hypothesis generation for,say, non trivial bugs with complete visibility into the system. A way to poke holes in hypothesis of one LLM is to use a "reverse prompt". You ask it to build you a prompt to feed to another LLM. Didn't used to work quite as well till mid 2025 as it does now.
I always take a research and plan prompt output from opus 4.6 especially if it looks iffy I feed it to codex/chatgpt and ask it to poke holes. It almost always does. The I ask Claude Code: Hey what do you think about the holes? I don't add an thing else in the prompt.
In my experience Claude Opus is less opinionated than ChatGPT or codex. The latter 2 always stick to their guns and in this binary battle they are generally more often correct about hypothesis.
The other day I was running Docker app container from inside a docker devbox container with host's socket for both. Bind mounts pointing to devbox would not write to it because the name space was resolving for underlying host.
Claude was sure it was a bug based to do with Zfs overlays, chatgpt was saying not so, that its just a misconfigurarion, I should use named volumes with full host paths. It was right. This is also how I discovered that using SQLite with litestream will get one really far rather than a full postgres AWS stack in many cases.
This is how you get the correct information out of LLMS in 2026.
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#109They forgot the single most important (bad) choice. Claude Code chooses npm. All the time. For everything. I noted the Claude Code lead dev has a full line in AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md - "Use bun." Yes. Please. Please, use bun. I beg you.
[deleted]
Re: What Claude Code chooses
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
I find they are very concerned about ever pulling the trigger on a change or deleting something. They add features and codepaths that weren't asked for, and then resist removing them because that would break backwards compatibility. In lieu of understanding the whole architecture, they assume that there was intent behind the current choices... which is a good assumption on their training data where a human wrote it,…
Yet at the same time they manage to reformat my code for no reason and change my (intentionally chosen) variable names.