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

Claude Code Routines

code.claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 451 posts

Re: Claude Code Routines

#291

Post by pxc »

data-ottawa wrote: post #267
girvo wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favourite was, Opus 4.6 last night (to be fair peak IST time, late afternoon my time), the first prompt with a small context: jams a copy-pasted function in between a bunch of import statements, doesn't even wire up it's own function and calls it done. Wild, I've not seen failure states like that since old Sonnet 4

Yesterday I had my biggest Opus WTF. I asked Opus 4.6 to help me get GPU stats in btop on nixos. Opus's first approach was to use patchelf to monkey patch the btop binary. I had to redirect it to just look the nix wiki and add `nixpkgs.config.rocmSupport = true;`. But the approach of modifying a compiled binary for a configuration issue is bizarre.

It does stuff like this all the time. It loves doing this with scripts with sed, so I'm not surprised to hear about it trying to do this with binaries. It's definitely wilder, though

Re: Claude Code Routines

#292

Post by dbmikus »

teucris wrote: post #88

My only real disappointment with Claude is its flakiness with scheduling tasks. I have several Slack related tasks that I’ve pretty much given up trying to automate - I’ve tried Cowork and Claude Code remote agents, only to find various bugs with working with plugins and connectors. I guess I’ll give this a try, but I don’t have high hopes.

If you don't get it working with Claude Code Routines, would love to connect and see if we can help! We're building an open core product that can spin up sandboxed coding and control them from Slack (and also web UI, TUI, and HTTP APIs + CLIs)

We work with any coding model / harness.

website: https://www.amika.dev/

OSS repo: https://github.com/gofixpoint/amika

And my email is dylan@amika.dev (I'm one of the founders)

Re: Claude Code Routines

#293

Post by bicepjai »

comboy wrote: 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…

Yes totally agree it’s regurgitating crazy expansive text like book author who needs to publish 10 books a day

Re: Claude Code Routines

#294

Post by oefrha »

SoMomentary wrote: post #281
qingcharles wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think some of this comes down to undeclared A/B testing. I've had the worst week of interactions I have ever had using Claude Code. The whole week whenever I have a session that isn't failing miserably I seem to get tapped for a session survey but on any that are out and out shitting the bed it never asks. It has felt a little surreal. I'd love to see a product wide stats graph for swearing, I would 100% believe th…

Oh I’ve been getting a lot more of those too lately even though I dismiss it every time. Wonder if I should report not satisfied every time so that I get routed to something better…

Re: Claude Code Routines

#296

Post by bg24 »

ElFitz wrote: post #220
joshstrange wrote: post #66

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…

> Not because I can't see a use-case for them, but because I have 0 trust in them > […] > Put another way, LLM companies are trying to climb the ladder to be a platform, I have zero interest in that, I was a "dumb pipe", I want a commodity, I want a provider, not a platform. That is my sentiment precisely, and a big reason why I’ve started moving away from Claude Code in the past few weeks when I realised how much of…

Think another way, these product features are easy to build in other harnesses too. And as the open source models and the other models which are much lower cost are getting better, there will be a time when it will be justified to have a harness that can work with many models and optimize your cost and efficiency.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#297

Post by lherron »

It’s interesting to watch Ant try to ship every value-add product feature they can while they still have the SOTA model for agentic. When an open weights equivalent to Opus 4.5’s agentic capabilities comes out, I expect massive shifts of workloads away from Claude.

Don’t get me wrong, I think their business model is still solid and they will be able to sell every token they can generate for the next couple years. They just won’t be critical path for AI diffusion anymore, which will be good for all sides.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#298

Post by FrenchTouch42 »

eranation wrote: post #54

I've been using it for a while (it was just called "Scheduled", so I assume this is an attempt to rebrand it?) It was a bit buggy, but it seems to work better now. Some use cases that worked for me: 1. Go over a slack channel used for feedback for an internal tool, triage, open issues, fix obvious ones, reply with the PR link. Some devs liked it, some freaked out. I kept it. 2. Surprisingly non code related - give me…

I'd be curious to take a look if you can share

Re: Claude Code Routines

#300

Post by slopinthebag »

alex_sf wrote: post #289
crystal_revenge wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like someone complaining about how Windows is a black box while ignoring the existence of Linux/BSD. I'm currently hosting, on very reasonable consumer grade hardware, an LLM that is on par performance wise what every anyone was paying for about a year ago. Including all the layers in between the model and the user. Llama.cpp serves up Gemma-4-26B-A4B, Open WebUI handles the client details: system prompt,…

Everytime I've tried a local model, and I have tried lots for a couple years now, they just seem like they were overtrained on benchmarks. They consistently perform dramatically worse than even older models from Anthropic/OAI/Google.

You're just using them wrong.
Post reply on HN