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

311–320 of 451 posts

Re: Claude Code Routines

#311

Post by charcircuit »

JohnMakin wrote: post #134
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…

This is a similar sentiment I heard early on in the cloud adoption fever, many companies hedged by being “multi cloud” which ended up mostly being abandoned due to hostile patterns by cloud providers, and a lot of cost. Ultimately it didn’t really end up mattering and the most dire predictions of vendor lock in abuse didn’t really happen as feared (I know people will disagree with this, but specifically speaking abou…

>the predictions vs what actually happened is a massive gap

AWS is still charging a highway robbery price for internet bandwidth.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#312

Post by kennywinker »

Am I crazy in thinking an LLM doing any kind of serious workload is risky as hell?

Like, say it works today, but tomorrow they update the model and instead of emailing you an update it emails your api keys to all your contacts? Or if it works 999 times out of 1000 but then commits code to master that makes all your products free?

Idk man… call me Adama, but i do not trust long-running networked ai one bit

Re: Claude Code Routines

#313

Post by pants2 »

Eldodi wrote: post #49

Anthropic is really good at releasing features that are almost the same but not exactly the same as other features they released the week before

Clearly they have a weekly automation to take the backlog of feature requests and build a new feature!

Re: Claude Code Routines

#314

Post by idrdex »

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…

The framing is off. AI is a tool that can operate as a human. GOV is how the humans are organized. AI can basically scale GOV. That’s the paradigm shift. Provenance is durable. AI is just the first opportunity we have had to make it scaleable.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#316

Post by tvink »

mooreds wrote: post #255
ElFitz wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I use opencode with claude models through a GitHub subscription. I've also used claude through Amazon Bedrock. Both give you optionality because they support N models.

That is what too expensive to be an option for most.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#317

Post by [deleted] »

jordanarseno wrote: post #244
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…

In my view, lock-in anxiety is a holdover from a previous era of tech platforms, and it doesn't really apply in an era where frontier agents can migrate you between vendors in hours. So I personally don't see any good worrying about this. On top of that, every major LLM provider is rapidly converging on the same feature set. They watch each other and clone what works. So the "platform" you're building on isn't really…

[deleted]

Re: Claude Code Routines

#318

Post by hdjrudni »

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…

I also don't see the value add here... "schedule" is just a cron. "GitHub Event" is probably a 20-minute integration, which Claude itself can write for you.

Maybe there's something I'm not seeing here, but I never want to outsource something so simple to a live service.

Re: Claude Code Routines

#319

Post by straygarr »

wookmaster wrote: post #152
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…

They're trying to find ways to lock you in

Can't tell if you're joking, but if not: was -> want

Re: Claude Code Routines

#320

Post by goosejuice »

stavros wrote: post #207
dpark wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are more worried about building a moat than anything else. They want people building integrations that are difficult to undo so that they lock into the platform.

So basically what happened: 1. Anthropic realized their models weren't enough of a moat. 2. They built tools so they could expand their moat. 3. People don't want to use their tools, they want their models, and use other, better tools. 4. Anthropic bans the use of better tools, taking advantage of their model superiority to try to lock people into subpar tools. "I don't have enough of a moat so I'll use my little moa…

Kind of. Yes, they want you to use their tools.

I doubt Anthropic ever thought they would have a big moat just based on the models. The platform is just as important.

Claude code and Cowork would still be extremely valuable to Anthropic even if they didn't release them to the public.

Owning the harness gives them a ton of data they can use to tune the models.

This is a perfectly sane strategy even if it's a bit unsavoury to some technical folk.

Post reply on HN