Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

theverge.com

181–190 of 489 posts

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#181
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was trying to get a better sense of the time cost quality matrix of these, so I threw together a quick eval of Sonnet 4.6, Mistral's dev model, and Opus 4.7 (figuring it's what you'd use if you were on Max). The results for a function implementation and test of levenshtein distance in js are pretty similar but Mistral is 30x cheaper than Opus 4.7 and 4x faster than Sonnet 4.6. https://5m6qnuhyde.evvl.io/

But that's not very informative. Levenshtein distance is not only a well-understood problem, it's small, self-contained, and extremely well-represented in the training data. The kind of problem where even small/bad models can excel. The golden standard for those tasks is just "use a library" so no wonder the beefy models are expensive: you're chartering a commercial airplane to go grocery shopping. My personal benchm…

>> many small decisions

It’s making guesses not decisions, framing as decisions will lead you astray to wasted time and tokens.

It’s vaguely productive to tell them a ton of relevant info upfront attempting to minimise their need for load bearing guesses. I say vaguely because obedience is generally only around the level where it's good enough to lull you into a false sense of security, not to actually be obedient.

It’s a bit more productive to use the various loop mechanisms (hooks, /goal etc) to evaluate each end of turn against guard rails and reject with clear instruction on whats unacceptable. Obviously if you only do this without the front load of info then you’re likely to spend more tokens to reach a satisfactory end of iteration.

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#182
post #5

There's definitely a way to use Claude code that is token conscious. I've tried throwing unsupervised agentic software factory workflows against the wall, and they burned through my tokens like nobody's business but didn't produce much. Supervised, human-in-the-loop process on the other hand is much more productive but doesn't consume nearly as much. Maybe that's why everyone's pushing agentic approaches so much.

Yeah. Claude does good work but reviewing it all properly takes quite a bit of time. It got to the point I started having trouble maxing out my weekly allocation.

Dealt with that by going all out and making an agentic parallel code review skill. Basically an infinite TODO list generator. Now I'm definitely getting 100% of the usage I paid for. It really burns tokens like nobody's business, and catches a lot of issues while at it. I've been looping this review/fix process every week. It's dramatically reduced the amount of stuff I need to pay attention to during my human review sessions.

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#183
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's not very informative. Levenshtein distance is not only a well-understood problem, it's small, self-contained, and extremely well-represented in the training data. The kind of problem where even small/bad models can excel. The golden standard for those tasks is just "use a library" so no wonder the beefy models are expensive: you're chartering a commercial airplane to go grocery shopping. My personal benchm…

>> many small decisions It’s making guesses not decisions, framing as decisions will lead you astray to wasted time and tokens. It’s vaguely productive to tell them a ton of relevant info upfront attempting to minimise their need for load bearing guesses. I say vaguely because obedience is generally only around the level where it's good enough to lull you into a false sense of security, not to actually be obedient. I…

If I perfectly know all the guardrails I need, I don't need an LLM, only Prolog.

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I could understand the appeal of using Claude Code inside VScode rather than Copilot. I feel like I'm missing something obvious.

I'm a little the opposite, what's the point of using an IDE with AI? I genuinely don't get it? These days I just use Claude Code Desktop or Claude Code in powershell. Standalone, not inside and IDE. Honestly, I'm using Desktop more and more as it gets more features. The IDE is for me. No AI in it at all. If I want to get Claude to do something specific to a file I just @ the file.

the obvious answer is because it's easier , faster, and more efficient to flip a true to false right in front of you than it is to prompt an llm.

if your response is "my prompts don't produce code that needs values flipped, ever." then I would wager you're only touching very simple things with an LLM.

for me I don't care about the token cost and prompt writing so much as the fact that it's just faster to change 0 to 1 and leaves me twiddling my thumbs for an llm output less.

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Games like Diablo are basically a whole bunch of slot machines, and there are strategies you can follow to optimize your run.

Yes, because in video games there is always a chance to win so you can optimize your strategy around that chance. If you have a 1% chance to drop a legendary weapon, the question becomes how do I manufacture 100 chances for a weapon drop in the shortest possible time. With agentic coding there is no such guaranteed chance - in a way it's worse than a slot machine that is guaranteed to pay out eventually. You could sp…

> If you have a 1% chance to drop a legendary weapon, the question becomes how do I manufacture 100 chances for a weapon drop in the shortest possible time.

Sidenote but I hope everyone realizes that 100 is kind of arbitrary here and does not mean the total chance to to get something is 100%.

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose if it all works out it'll end up way more expensive than the employees the models displaced ever were. These kinds of technologies usually end up as an oligopoly at best, and those players will have a wide moat by then, and the things these models build will be tweaked such that no other model or human being can realistically work on them anymore, and then they can price gouge everyone to the brink of unpro…

At least the models don’t need health insurance, office space, a cafeteria, or have a threat of unionizing.

Because they are not people or alive, you can literally torture them if it gives you a mild increase in performance. For all practical purposes you can't do that to living humans. What is the price to put on being able to do that? It might weight the scales a bit for some employers.

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe OP is talking about new sessions or after compaction. He’s getting at the fact that LLMs are stateless and have to rediscover your codebase on every new session.

To be fair, on the Monday morning after a holiday, that’s exactly what I’m like too.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#189
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I prefer the API pricing because I feel like I'm not going to get rug pulled on my work. When it comes to personal stuff, I use the shit out of my sub, but it's not making me money.

I’ve made the same argument On Here. Paying the full price (should!) make you consider you usage, pick the right model, delegate to cheaper/local providers, …. It makes you use the models the way they’re going to be used after the subsidy ends.

Depends on what you're optimizing for. I'd hope that "after the subsidy ends", the "cheaper/local providers" will be at the level of at least current SOTA models. If not, then there's hardly a point using them anyway; if yes, then by sticking to subscription workflow you'll be learning the very workflow you'll be using "after subsidy ends".

Either way, I don't see much point of intentional austerity in times of extreme growth. There will be time for austerity once the growth ends.

Re: Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

#190

From reading the article. They offered their developers both Claude code and Copilot. What they wanted was for them to use both and feedback which was better. The developers voted with their feet and didn’t use Copilot. What Microsoft were hoping was that the opposite would happen...

For months, Employees had the option to choose claude code or copilot. Now they dont.

Underlying model choice still has no restrictions. Opus 4.6 is by far the most popular. there's still big $$$ bills going anthropic's way.

Post reply on HN