Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume it's to make it harder for competitors to train on Claude's Chain-of-Thought.
Not true because it is still exposed in API
And saved in files
Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
221–230 of 257 posts
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#222> Cherny responded to the feedback by making changes. "We have repurposed the existing verbose mode setting for this," he said, so that it "shows file paths for read/searches. Does not show full thinking, hook output, or subagent output (coming in tomorrow's release)." How to comply with a demand to show more information by showing less information.
Yeah but did he actually try to use the repurposed "verbose" mode? I did, and it's way more verbose than I need, but the regular mode now is basically like mute mode. In addition, recently it started running a lot of stuff in the background and that causes some crazy flicker and Claude has become stubbornly autonomous. It just runs stuff in a flyby mode, asks me a question and then waits a couple seconds and proceeds…
Did you enable verbose output in the settings? That gives you a different view then pressing ctrl-o. And this naming is endlessly confusing!
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this not just “build a better prompt” in more words? At what point do we realize that the best way to prompt is with formal language? I.e. a programming language?
No, the suite of linters, test suite and documentation in your codebase cannot be equated to “a better prompt” except in the sense that all feedback of any kind is part of what the model uses to make decisions about how to act.
What if LLMs, at the end of the day are machines, so for now generally dumber than humans and the best they can provide are at most statistically median implementantions (and if 80% of code out there is crap, the median will be low)?
Now that's a scary thought that basically goes against "1 trillion dollars can't be wrong".
Now, LLMs are probably great range extenders, but they're not wonder weapons.
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of those wild experiments are running on a "real", existing codebase that is more than 6 months old. The thing they don't talk about is that nobody outside these AI companies wants to vibe code with a 10 year old codebase with 2000 enterprise customers. As you as you start to work with a codebase that you care about and need to seriously maintain, you'll see what a mess these agents make.
My Claude Code has been running weeks on end churning through a huge task list almost unattended on a complex 15 yr old code base, auto-committing thousands of features. It is high quality code that will go live very soon.
Awesome! Which application or service?
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
The views I see often shared here are typical of those in the trenches of the tech industry: conservative. I get it; I do. It's rapidly challenging the paradigm that we've setup over the years in a way that it's incredibly jarring, but this is going to be our new reality or you're going to be left behind in MOST industries; highly regulated industries are a different beast. So; instead of just out-of-hand dismissing…
> I get it; I do. It's rapidly challenging the paradigm that we've setup over the years in a way that it's incredibly jarring, But it's not the argument. The argument is that these tools provide lower-quality output and checking this output often takes more time than doing this work oneself. It's not that "we're conservative and afraid of changes", heck, you're talking to a crowd that used to celebrate a new JS frame…
"Find any inconsistencies that should be addressed in this codebase according to DRY and related best practices"
This doesn't hurt to try and will give valuable and detailed feedback much more quickly than even an experienced developer seeing the project for the first time.
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
The views I see often shared here are typical of those in the trenches of the tech industry: conservative. I get it; I do. It's rapidly challenging the paradigm that we've setup over the years in a way that it's incredibly jarring, but this is going to be our new reality or you're going to be left behind in MOST industries; highly regulated industries are a different beast. So; instead of just out-of-hand dismissing…
> It will accelerate the work and change your role from what it is today to something different; We yet to see if different is good. My short experience with LLM reviewing my code is that LLM's output is overly explanatory and it slows me down . > something that takes time and experience to work with. So you invite us to participate in sunken cost fallacy.
Tell it to summarize?
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of those wild experiments are running on a "real", existing codebase that is more than 6 months old. The thing they don't talk about is that nobody outside these AI companies wants to vibe code with a 10 year old codebase with 2000 enterprise customers. As you as you start to work with a codebase that you care about and need to seriously maintain, you'll see what a mess these agents make.
Also anything that doesn't look like a SaaS app does very badly. We had an internal trial at embedded firmware and concluded the results were unsalvageably bad. It doesn't help that the embedded environment is very unfriendly to standard testing techniques, as well.
You will need to build an accessible knowledge base for the topics for which the models have not had extensive training.
Proprietary embedded system documentation is not exactly ubiquitous. You must provide reference material and guardrails where the training is weakest.
This applies to everything in ML: it will be weakest at the edges.
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#228[flagged]
You look at what Claude’s doing to make sure it doesn’t go off the rails? Personally, I either move on to another ask in parallel or just read my phone. Trying to catch things by manually looking at its output doesn’t seem like a recipe for success.
It all depends on how much you're willing to spend.
If you have an unlimited budget, obviously you will tend to let it run and correct it in the next iteration.
If you often run tight up against your 5-hour window, you're going to be more likely to babysit it.
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are you using experience and authoritative framing about a technology we’ve been using for less than 6 months?
6 months? I've been using LLMs to augment development since early December 2023. I've expanded the scope and complexity of the changes made since then as the models grew. Before beads existed, I used a folder of markdown files for externalized memory. Just because you were late to the party doesn't mean all of us were.
> Just because you were late to the party doesn't mean all of us were.
It wasn't a party I liked back in 2023. I'm just repeating the same stuff I see said over and over again here, but there has been a step change with Opus 4.5.
You can still it in action now because the other models are still where Opus was at a while ago. I recently needed to make small change to script I was using. It is a tiny (50 line) script written with the help of AI's ages ago, but was subtly wrong in so many ways. It's now become clear neither the AI's (I used several and cross checked) nor myself had a clue about what we were dealing with. The current "seems to work" version was created after much blood caused by misunderstandings was spilt, exposing bugs that had to be fixed.
I asked Claude 4.6 to fix yet another misunderstanding, and the result was a patch changing the minimum number of lines to get the job done. Just reviewing such a surgical modification was far easier than doing it myself.
I gave exactly the same prompt to Gemini. The result was a wholesale rearrangement of the code. Maybe it was good, but the effort to verify that was far lager than just doing it myself. It was a very 2023 experience.
The usual 2023 experience for me was ask an AI write some greenfield code, and get a result that looked like someone had changed variable names in something they found on the web after a brief search for code that looked like it might do a similar job. If you got lucky, it might have found something that was indeed very similar, but in my case that was rare. Asking it to modify code unlike something it had seen before was like asking someone to poke your eyes with a stick.
As I said, some of the organisers of this style of party seem have gotten their act together, so now it is well worth joining their parties. But this is a newish development.
Re: Anthropic tries to hide Claude's AI actions. Devs hate it
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
Claude Code's handling of multiple choice questions is awfully nice (it uses an interactive interface to let you use arrows to select answers, and supports multiple answers). I haven't seen opencode do that yet, although I don't know if that's just a model integration issue -- I've only tried with GLM 4.7, GPT 5.1 Codex Mini, and GPT 5.2 Codex.
Opencode also has that feature, I've seen it multiple times in the last days (mostly using Opus 4.5/4.6/Gemini 3)
Interesting. I wonder if it's just a matter of prompting properly or if GPT/GLM just doesn't have that training.