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

A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

support.anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 293 posts

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#191

Post by sumedh »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #188
Dlemo wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's an enabler for everyone. So many people benefit from basic things like sorting tables, searching and filtering data etc. Things were I might just use excel or a small script, they can now use an LLM for it. And for now, we are still in dire need for more developers and not less. But yes I can imagine that after a golden phase of 5-15 years it will start to go down to the bottom when automaisation and ai…

When a company lays off a chunk of the workforce because the increased productivity due to LLMs means they don't need as many people, how is it an enabler for the laid off people. What happens when most companies do this? During the 10s, every dev out there was screaming "everyone should learn to code and get a job coding". During the 20s, many devs are being laid off. For a field full of self-professed smart and log…

> What happens when most companies do this?

It also means it becomes easier to start new company and solve a problem for people.

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#192

Post by TingPing »

guappa wrote: post #171
jagged-chisel wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They rely on ChatGPT to answer their questions instead of taking time to read the documentation or a simple web search. Documentation is not written with answers in mind. Every little project wants me to be an expert in their solution. They want to share with me the theory behind their decisions. I need an answer now. Web search no longer provides useful information within the first few results. Instead, I get cont…

Ah yes, LLM is very good at giving me information from documentation that was out of date 15 years ago instead of using the documentation from 2025.

Mostly made up information in my experience.

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#193

Post by bko »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #142

Does anyone feel like the biggest selling point of LLMs so far is basically for programmers? Feels like most of the products that look like could generate revenue are for programmers. While you can see them as a productivity enhancing tool, in times of tight budgets, they can be useful to lay off more programmers because a single one is now way more productive than pre-LLM. I feel that LLMs will increase the barrier…

I don't get why making engineers more productive would decrease their salaries. It should be the reverse.

You could argue that it makes the bar lower to be productive so the candidate pool is much greater, but you're arguing the opposite, increasing the barrier to entry.

I'm open to arguments either way and I'm undecided, but you have to have a coherent economic model.

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#194

Post by fn-mote »

ori_b wrote: post #185
jagged-chisel wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They rely on ChatGPT to answer their questions instead of taking time to read the documentation or a simple web search. Documentation is not written with answers in mind. Every little project wants me to be an expert in their solution. They want to share with me the theory behind their decisions. I need an answer now. Web search no longer provides useful information within the first few results. Instead, I get cont…

> Documentation is not written with answers in mind. Every little project wants me to be an expert in their solution. They want to share with me the theory behind their decisions. I need an answer now. I have an answer now, because I read the documentation last week.

This is kind of dismissive.

As a real example, I needed to change my editor config last month. I do this about once every 5 years. I really didn’t want to become an expert in the config system again, so I tried LLM.

Sad to report, it told me where to look but all of the exact details were wrong. Maybe someday soon, though.

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#195

Post by UncleEntity »

vidarh wrote: post #155
tkzed49 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hey, I'm open to that possibility. Maybe I'll grab $5 in API credit and give it a shot (for 5 minutes or a week depending on who you ask)

A couple of tips if you're just starting with it: The two worst ways of burning API credits I've found with Claude Code are: 1. Getting argumentative/frustrated with the model if it goes off the rails and continuing to try to make something work when the model isn't getting anywhere. If it really isn't getting something in the first few prompts, stop and rethink. Can you go back and set a smaller task? Like writing t…

> If it really isn't getting something in the first few prompts, stop and rethink. Can you go back and set a smaller task? Like writing test cases that it's broken approach would fail?

This.

I was fighting with Claude for a good chunk of yesterday (usage limits seemed broken so it didn't really time me out) and most of that was getting it to fix one small issue with three test cases. It would fix one test and break the others, round and round we go. After it broke unrelated tests I had to back out all the changes and, by then, I understood the problem well enough so could direct it how to fix it with a little help from Deepseek.

As there are a bunch of other sections of code which suffer from the same problem I can now tell it to "look at the fixed code and do it like that" so, hopefully, it doesn't flail around in the dark as much.

Admittedly, this is fairly complicated code, being an AST to bytecode compiler with a bunch of optimizations thrown in, and part of the problem was a later optimization pass undoing the 'fixes' Claude was applying which took quite a while to figure out.

Now I just assume Claude is being intentionally daft and treat it as such with questions like "why would I possibly want a fix specifically designed to pass one test instead of a general fix for all the cases?" Oh, yeah, that's its new trick, rewriting the code to only pass the failing test and throwing everything else out because, why not?

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#196

Post by I_am_tiberius »

flynumber wrote: post #127
I_am_tiberius wrote: post #21

Do you still need a phone number to register with claude?

Judging by your username you're in Israel? If so just get yourself an Israeli mobile virtual number (which can receive SMS) https://www.flynumber.com/cities/israel/mobile/

Haha. No I'm not from Israel. Just a Star Trek fan:). But thanks for the info. My issue with that is that I don't want to give a way my phone number, and I certainly don't want to pay for a service that gives me a phone number.

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#197

Post by rat9988 »

bko wrote: post #193
netdevphoenix wrote: post #142

Does anyone feel like the biggest selling point of LLMs so far is basically for programmers? Feels like most of the products that look like could generate revenue are for programmers. While you can see them as a productivity enhancing tool, in times of tight budgets, they can be useful to lay off more programmers because a single one is now way more productive than pre-LLM. I feel that LLMs will increase the barrier…

I don't get why making engineers more productive would decrease their salaries. It should be the reverse. You could argue that it makes the bar lower to be productive so the candidate pool is much greater, but you're arguing the opposite, increasing the barrier to entry. I'm open to arguments either way and I'm undecided, but you have to have a coherent economic model.

> I don't get why making engineers more productive would decrease their salaries. It should be the reverse.

You need less engineers to do the same, demand gets lower, offer remains as high.

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#198

Post by lgiordano_notte »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #142

Does anyone feel like the biggest selling point of LLMs so far is basically for programmers? Feels like most of the products that look like could generate revenue are for programmers. While you can see them as a productivity enhancing tool, in times of tight budgets, they can be useful to lay off more programmers because a single one is now way more productive than pre-LLM. I feel that LLMs will increase the barrier…

Shift feels real. LLMs don't replace devs, but they do compress the value curve. The top 10% get even more leverage, and the bottom 50% become harder to justify.

What worries me isn't layoffs but that entry-level roles become rare, and juniors stop building real intuition because the LLM handles all the hard thinking.

You get surface-level productivity but long-term skill rot.

Re: A flat pricing subscription for Claude Code

#200

Post by bko »

rat9988 wrote: post #197
bko wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get why making engineers more productive would decrease their salaries. It should be the reverse. You could argue that it makes the bar lower to be productive so the candidate pool is much greater, but you're arguing the opposite, increasing the barrier to entry. I'm open to arguments either way and I'm undecided, but you have to have a coherent economic model.

> I don't get why making engineers more productive would decrease their salaries. It should be the reverse. You need less engineers to do the same, demand gets lower, offer remains as high.

But they're more productive. Your assumption is there is a fixed amount of engineering work to do so you need to hire fewer programmers, which is untrue. Every organization I worked at could have invested a lot more in engineering, be-it infrastructure, analytics, automation, etc.

Even if there were a fixed amount of work to do and we're already near that max amount, salaries still wouldn't necessarily go down. Again, they're more productive. Farming used to be 90% of the workforce in the US in the early 1900s. Now farmers are more productive and they're only 2% of the workforce. Do these farmers today earn a lower salary adjusted for inflation than 100 years ago? Of course not, because they're much more productive now with tools.

Generally wages track productivity. The more productive, the higher the wage.

Another example is bank tellers. With the advent of the ATM, somehow bank teller salaries didn't drop in real terms.

Show me an example of where this played out. Someone was made much more productive through technology and their salary dropped considerably

Post reply on HN