Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code Routines

code.claude.com

101–110 of 451 posts

Re: Claude Code Routines

#101

OpenClawd had about a two week moat... Feature delivery rate by Anthropic is basically a fast takeoff in miniature. Pushing out multiple features each week that used to take enterprises quarters to deliver.

The velocity of shipping is wild. Though I cannot recall a novel feature they shipped first. Can you?

Re: Claude Code Routines

#103

meta: Sorry, but I just have to ask. Why is u/minimaxir's comment dead? Is this somehow an error, an attack, or what? This is a respected user, with a sane question, no? I vouched, but not enough. edit: His comment has arisen now. Leaving this up for reference.

We live in strange times!

Re: Claude Code Routines

#104

Given the alleged recent extreme reduction in Claude Code usage limits ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47739260 ), how do these more autonomous tools work within that constraint? Are they effectively only usable with a 20x Max plan? EDIT: This comment is apparently [dead] and idk why.

AI race to the bottom is a debt game now. Once the party is over somebody will have to pay the bill.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#105

LLMs and LLM providers are massive black boxes. I get a lot of value from them and so I can put up with that to a certain extent, but these new "products"/features that Anthropic are shipping are very unappealing to me. Not because I can't see a use-case for them, but because I have 0 trust in them: - No trust that they won't nerf the tool/model behind the feature - No trust they won't sunset the feature (the graveya…

> I want to pick up and move to another harness and/or model with minimal fuss. Buying in to things like this would make that much harder.

Yes, I expect that is very much the point here. A bunch of product guys got on a whiteboard and said, okay the thing is in wide use but the main moat is that our competitors are even more distrusted in the market than we are; other than that it's completely undifferentiated and can be swapped out in a heartbeat for multiple other offerings. How do we do we persuade our investors we have a locked in customer base that won't just up-stakes in favour of other options or just running open source models themselves?

Re: Claude Code Routines

#107
Unrelated, but Claude was performing so tragically last few days, maybe week(s), but days mostly, that I had to reluctantly switch. Reluctantly because I enjoy it. Even the most basic stuff, like most python scripts it has to rerun because of some syntax error.

The new reality of coding took away one of the best things for me - that the computer always just does what it is told to do. If the results are wrong it means I'm wrong, I made a bug and I can debug it. Here.. I'm not a hater, it's a powerful tool, but.. it's different.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#109

LLMs and LLM providers are massive black boxes. I get a lot of value from them and so I can put up with that to a certain extent, but these new "products"/features that Anthropic are shipping are very unappealing to me. Not because I can't see a use-case for them, but because I have 0 trust in them: - No trust that they won't nerf the tool/model behind the feature - No trust they won't sunset the feature (the graveya…

I fully endorse building a custom stack (1) because you will learn a lot (2) for full control and not having Big Ai define our UX/DX for this technology. Let's learn from history this time around?

Here's the problem I keep running into with AI and 'history'. We all know where this is going. We'll pick our winners and losers in the interim, but so far, this is a technology that mostly impacts tech practitioners. Most people don't care, in the sense that you're a taxi driver. Perhaps you have a manual transmission and the odd person comments on your prowess with it. No one cares. I see a bunch of boys making fools out of themselves otherwise.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#110
post #25

I'm a little confused on the ToS here. From what I gathered, running `claude -p ` on cron is fine, but putting it in my Telegram bot is a ToS violation (unless I use per-token billing) because it's a 3rd party harness, right? (`claude -p` being a trivial workaround for the "no 3rd party stuff on the subscription" rule) This Routines feature notably works with the subscription, and it also has API callbacks. So if my…

The ambiguity is intentional. Like Microsoft not banning volume licenses. They want to scare you, so you don't max out your subscription – which they sell at a loss.

Another comparison would be "unlimited storage", where "unlimited" means some people will abuse it and the company will soon limit the "unlimited."

Post reply on HN