Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code Routines

code.claude.com

171–180 of 451 posts

Re: Claude Code Routines

#172
post #163

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…

In this regard, the release of open-weight Gemma models that can run on reasonable local hardware, and are not drastically worse than Anthropic flagships, is quite a punch. An M2 Mac Mini with 32GB is about 10 months worth of Claude Max subscription.

In coding they are worse.

Chinese models (GLM, MiniMax) are better.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess there's a pretty clear incentive to nerf the current model right before the next model is about to come out.

Wouldn't that amount to fraud?

Did Apple slow down iPhones before the new release? I’m really asking. People used to say that and I can’t remember if it was proven or not?

Re: Claude Code Routines

#174
post #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 mean…

I'm the first to be tired of everyone, for every model, that says "uuuh became dumber" because I didn't believe them ... until this week! Opus is struggling worse than Sonnet those last two weeks.

In my experience Opus and Claude have declined significantly over the past few weeks. It actually feels like dealing with an employee that has become bored and intentionally cuts corners.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#175

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.

It’s going to be crazy with the explanation they come up with why the us public has to pay to bail out AI for national security.

In a way, it’s true if china has superior AI then it’s dominance over US will materialize. But it’s not hard to see how this scenario is being used to essential lie and scam into trillions of debt.

Its interesting how the cutthroat space of big tech has manifested into an incidious hyper capitalist system where disrupting a system is it’s primary function. The system in this case is world order and western governments

Re: Claude Code Routines

#176
If anyone from anthropic reads it. I love this feature very much, when it works. And it mostly doesn't.

The main bugs / missing features are

1. It loses connection to it's connectors, mostly to the slack connector. It does all the work, then says it can't connect to slack. Then when you show it a screenshot of itself with the slack connector, it will say, oh, yeah, the tools are now loaded and does the rest of the routine.

2. ability to connect it to github packages / artifactory (private packages) - or the dangerous route of allowing access to some sort of vault (with non critical dev only secrets... although it's always a risk. But cursor has it...)

3. the GitHub MCP not being able to do simple things such as update release markdown (super simple use case of creating automated release notes for example)

You are so close, yet so far...

Re: Claude Code Routines

#177
post #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 mean…

I'm the first to be tired of everyone, for every model, that says "uuuh became dumber" because I didn't believe them ... until this week! Opus is struggling worse than Sonnet those last two weeks.

Is it? Or is it the task you're trying to do? Opus 4.6 has been staggeringly good for me this last week, both inside Claude Code and through Antigravity until I used up my quota.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#178

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…

Without getting too pedantic for no reason… I think it’s important to not call this an LLM.

This isn’t an LLM. It’s a product powered by an LLM. You don’t get access to the model you get access to the product.

An LLM can’t do a web search, an LLM can’t convert Excel files into something and then into PDF. Products do that.

I think it’s a mistake to say I don’t trust this engine to get me here, rather than it is to say I don’t trust this car. Because for the most part, the engine, despite giving you a different performance all the time is roughly doing the same thing over and over.

The product is the curious entity you have no control over.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#179
post #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 mean…

I'm the first to be tired of everyone, for every model, that says "uuuh became dumber" because I didn't believe them ... until this week! Opus is struggling worse than Sonnet those last two weeks.

Forget the agent itself being dumber: right now I'm getting an "API error: usage limit exceeded" message whenever I try anything despite my usage showing as 26% for the session limit and 8% for the week (with 0/5 routines, which I guess is what this thread is about). This is with the default model and effort, and Claude Code is saying I need to turn on extra usage for it to work. Forget that, I just canceled my subscription instead.

There's utility in LLMs for coding, but having literally the entire platform vibe-coded is too much for me. At this point, I might genuinely believe they're not intentionally watering anything down, because it's incredibly believable that they just have no clue how any of it works anymore.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#180

If you’re trying this for automating things on GitHub, also take a look at Agentic Workflows: https://github.github.com/gh-aw/ They support much of the same triggers and come with many additional security controls out of the box

Why have I not heard of this? Was looking for a way to integrate LLM CLI's to do automated feature development + PR submission triggered by Github issues, seems like this would solve it.

Built in Co-Pilot I believe can do this better than gh-aw (or a click away).

Cursor has that too by the way (issue -> remote coding session -> PR -> update slack)

Post reply on HN