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

Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

raheeljunaid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 206 posts

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#181

Post by mnicky »

keeda wrote: post #179
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It just seems like Anthropic has made a deliberate choice to make themselves a TypeScript dev shop. From Claude Code being written in React (!!) to acquiring the Bun people so they they could have their very own bespoke JS/TS runtime (and then... rewriting the whole thing), to having the CC "native" app being Electron, etc. It just seems like it comes down to a choice at the highest level to hire people from a "full…

Interestingly I just skimmed through a video linked in TFA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlGRN8jh2RI and Boris Cherny explains that they chose TypeScript and React for Claude Code primarily because it was "on distribution" and the models back then just weren't good enough at other languages. So it's interesting that Codex is written in Rust. Amongst other things it could mean OpenAI had more powerful models that c…

Well, Codex came long after Claude Code, no? So at that time the situation with models and Rust support was probably already different...

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#182

Post by keeda »

tikhonj wrote: post #91
internet2000 wrote: post #42

They're subsidizing their tokens as long as you use their software. That's a fair exchange, I never understood why people took issue with it. If you don't want to get locked in to Claude Code, you can pay more. Just like you can pay more for an unlocked non-carrier subsidized phone. (Which I personally do.)

I mean, it has definite Borg Bill Gates vibes, doesn't it? It's totally reasonable for tech folks to be leery of a company using a strong market position from one system (Windows/Claude) to push mediocre complementary software (IE/CC).

That analogy only works partially, because when IE6 was released, it was the best browser by far. IE only became terrible once MSFT actively stopped developing it, and other browsers kept getting better.

On the other hand, Claude Code was the best coding agent when it was released, but there's no way Anthropic is going to let its cash cow stagnate. Like, I think pretty much all of Anthropic's revenue spike in the last few months was driven by the tokenmaxxing mania.

My take is most of Claude Code's problems originate from insufficient compute capacity and all kinds of workarounds they're doing to mitigate that fundamental limitation.

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#183

Post by Zababa »

rho4 wrote: post #109
Zababa wrote: post #20

>Dario and Boris have us convinced that “coding is solved” with their loops. But microwaves didn’t solve cooking. If you want a look at the timeline where the microwave solved cooking, this was an interesting article: https://malmesbury.substack.com/p/my-journey-to-the-microwav... . You can apparently sear meat with a microwave (provided you have the necessary pan).

Haha thanks for that article (I microwave most of my meals). I wonder if this statement from the article will apply to AI: > Second, microwave cooking fell victim to the same curse that threatens every new easy-to-use technology: it became low-status tech.

Oh that's an interesting parallel

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#184

Post by keeda »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #180
keeda wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly I just skimmed through a video linked in TFA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlGRN8jh2RI and Boris Cherny explains that they chose TypeScript and React for Claude Code primarily because it was "on distribution" and the models back then just weren't good enough at other languages. So it's interesting that Codex is written in Rust. Amongst other things it could mean OpenAI had more powerful models that c…

Codex also I think put its first version out a bit later? IMHO building the agent harness at least partially by hand is kind of key? I think going hogwild with "vibe coding" the actual harness is partially why CC is a bit of a rats nest. I think it's genuinely gotten out of control in terms of their ability to reason about it. Just my opinion, I'm sure Boris disagrees. Also Codex itself distributed via NPM same as Cl…

I used to think Claude Code was released much earlier too, and my initial theory was that OpenAI as a follower had the benefit of more powerful models... but when I looked it up, Codex was first released in April 2025 [1], whereas CC Beta was released in Feb 2025 [2] -- only a couple of months apart!

I'm sure each lab is keenly aware of what the other is doing (how else could they time so many of their releases so close to each other?) so it's highly probable they started developing each app about the same time, and likely even knew the technical details involved. Which is why it's additionally interesting that OpenAI started off with Rust while CC used Electron.

1. https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/16/openai-debuts-codex-cli-an...

2. https://github.com/jqueryscript/anthropic-claude-timeline

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#185

Post by harry19023 »

wqaatwt wrote: post #158
harry19023 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. The level of entitlement around how we all deserve to use a product in a category that didn't even exist 12 months ago with increasing performance at the same price forever is insane.

Consumers want to pay as little as possible and companies want to charge them as much as they possibly can. That’s how markets work I don’t understand what does “entitlement” have to do with anything. If loud consumers somehow manage to coerce companies into lowering prices/offering better products that’s a massive win for almost everyone (of course usually its just noise that doesn’t change anything, however it did…

The the article was talking about how Anthropic costs too much and how there are cheaper options available then yes I would agree with you. But this article has a conspiratorial and moral crusade tone which is what I'm responding to. The article says "In my opinion (which may be in the minority), it’s unethical to:

lock in your customers to a closed system for maximum market gain put down the competition when they pose a risk to your product make hypocritical claims on how your product increases quality when your own software sucks artificially restrict one’s own product as a fear-mongering marketing stunt test dynamic pricing on your users to see how much more they’ll pay for less change the terms of your product after the sale without notifying your user base"

anthropic is not just a business operating in a market, they are "unethical" and "fear-mongering" and "hypocritical".

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#186

Post by harry19023 »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #153
harry19023 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. The level of entitlement around how we all deserve to use a product in a category that didn't even exist 12 months ago with increasing performance at the same price forever is insane.

C'mon, get real. The monthly subscription costs on these services are several multiples what software engineers have formerly paid for development tools. I have worked in shops that made it difficult for me just to get a paid for RustRover or CLion license, and had to out of pocket it. The monthly sub for Claude or Codex is equivalent to the total license cost for that. It's not entitled to expect your $200/month too…

If you need stability for your business you can pay API prices, just like business plans for internet are also more expensive.

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#187

Post by Degorath »

croes wrote: post #178
internet2000 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you do it outside of Claude Code, you're not using their software, which is the intended outcome of the subsidy.

Why? What additional benefit do they get if I use their tools? Every request goes to their LLM either way

Well, they are wishing to lock you into their ecosystem, so that switching would be a high-friction decision. And then they can simply raise prices without you leaving.

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#188

Post by cyberax »

jefftk wrote: post #175
butlike wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1.) All you can eat buffets ARE the product, not a loss leader, so there's no bundle there. 2.) Early bird specials, again, aren't loss leaders. They're a way to get sales on the left side of the bell curve. The restaurant food is still the product, not a subsidy. 3.) Free soda with large fry doesn't actually exist (though it sounds like it should, right?) 4.) Happy hour wings (again, see #2) None of these are bundli…

> Free soda with large fry doesn't actually exist I just searched and found free medium fries with a large soda at McD if you order through the app. Seems like bundling to me, and you have to use their particular app.

Sure, and perhaps it should be prohibited. But it's also a matter of impact.

But it's just hard to care too much about a commoditized product and an app with tons of competition. And McDonald's is not keeping any competitors away by locking their fries offer behind their app.

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#189

Post by rvz »

harry19023 wrote: post #122
rvz wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're subsidizing their tokens as long as you use their software. That's a fair exchange, I never understood why people took issue with it. Except they themselves cannot afford it and as the article also mentioned, their level of service and uptime is atrocious for the price they are offering. Their unpredictable pricing model is designed to make it easy for you to lose more money without you knowing. Unannounced…

Yes, the subsidized loss leader product is evolving fast. If you want stable costs, the API plan is right there. You simultaneously say they cannot afford the API pricing but also claim they are overcharging, it sounds like you just want to get mad ad Anthropic.

> If you want stable costs, the API plan is right there.

Why don't you ask Microsoft [0], Tesla [1] and Alibaba [2] on why they believe it is not only expensive, but it also a security risk for them?

Like I said, You don't get anything for defending Anthropic and they are not going to hire you into their sales team.

> You simultaneously say they cannot afford the API pricing but also claim they are overcharging, it sounds like you just want to get mad ad Anthropic.

Read it again. "Except they themselves cannot afford it"

They is "Anthropic" given that I said "themselves". Who are the ones that cannot afford to subsidize tokens forever due to the even cheaper Chinese alternatives. They all know that the answer is open weight models and why Anthropic cannot raise prices and why the above companies are ditching them for open weight models.

[0] https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/microsoft-cancels-c...

[1] https://letsdatascience.com/news/tesla-limits-employee-ai-sp...

[2] https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...

Re: Anthropic's Method to Losing Goodwill in a Few Easy Steps

#190

Post by gck1 »

croes wrote: post #136
internet2000 wrote: post #42

They're subsidizing their tokens as long as you use their software. That's a fair exchange, I never understood why people took issue with it. If you don't want to get locked in to Claude Code, you can pay more. Just like you can pay more for an unlocked non-carrier subsidized phone. (Which I personally do.)

Because the subscription aren’t flat rates, they have a limit. What does it matter which tool I use when I hit the limit? And even if you pay-as-you-go Anthropic seems to prefer their own tools https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48788599

> What does it matter which tool I use when I hit the limit?

A third party harness may have a misconfiguration of prompt caching, leading to more load on Anthropic's servers, they could also have wildly different usage patterns (Hermes, openclaw etc), also making it hard to predict the load. If you constrain everyone to use your own harness, at least you're in control of that.

The first point is sort of funny though, because their own harness had a misconfigured prompt caching for several months during the times where they were crying about third party harnesses (/resume was busting cache all the time).

Post reply on HN