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

The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 423 posts

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#321

Post by CharlieDigital »

carlgreene wrote: post #319
CharlieDigital wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> shouldn't we be seeing a ton of 1 person startups? Here's the dirty secret: 1 person AI coding enabled startups don't want their customers to know that they are 1 engineer AI coding startups so they do not expose it or share that info. There is still a lot of negative sentiment associated with this. I know 3 such founders; none would advertise to their customers the extent of their AI usage. There is also a conside…

I am one of those founders who does not want their customers to know. I have one specific very large customer that is quite an old school company. My software has become pretty pivotal for some of their workflows and if they knew it was one guy on his laptop keeping things afloat with the help of a mysterious AI I am pretty sure they'd reconsider our contract.

Most startup -> enterprise deals are like this in nature. Enterprise buyers are already wary of small startups (for various reasons). A 1 person startup? Wouldn't even get a meeting with the buyers in many cases even if your software was 10x cheaper and exactly solved the business problem.

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#322

Post by godzillabrennus »

crystal_revenge wrote: post #169
tmerr wrote: post #65

This is interesting to hear, but I don't understand how this workflow actually works. I don't need 10 parallel agents making 50-100 PRs a week, I need 1 agent that successfully solves the most important problem. I don't understand how you can generate requirements quicky enough to have 10 parallel agents chewing away at meaningful work. I don't understand how you can have any meaningful supervising role over 10 thing…

My initial response to reading this post was "wow, I think I'd rather just write the code". I also remain a bit skeptical because, if all of this really worked (and I mean over a long time and scaling to meet a range of business requirements), even if it's not how I personally want to write code, shouldn't we be seeing a ton of 1 person startups? I see Bay area startups pushing 996 and requiring living in the Bay are…

They are absolutely crushing it. I know of a one-man shop that just got notice they were selected for an eight-figure revenue contract. They would NEVER go public with their head count or their product being built by AI.

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#323

Post by MajidAliSyncOps »

CharlieDigital wrote: post #310
lunar_mycroft wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As of the middle of the year, there was no increase in publicly available indicators of new startups at all [0]. No change in the trend in steam releases, domain name registrations, app store releases, etc. People might be able to keep the fact that they're a one person team that built the app with AI secret, but they wouldn't be able to keep the fact that they made an app secret. Unless someone has evidence that's c…

Can't speak for anyone else, but I personally know 3. 2 of the 3 existed as entities for more than a year already, but pivoted at least once (both were VC-funded but now doing something very different than what they started with when I first met founders) and ultimately let go of their offshore and contract engineers once AI became good enough some time early last year. Founders basically realized that the quality of…

This matches what I’ve been seeing as well. Small teams can move surprisingly fast now, but the bottleneck usually shifts from engineering to distribution and positioning.

We’ve found that building the product got easier, but turning it into a sustainable business still required just as much manual effort around sales, onboarding, and retention.

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#324

Post by adam_patarino »

crystal_revenge wrote: post #169
tmerr wrote: post #65

This is interesting to hear, but I don't understand how this workflow actually works. I don't need 10 parallel agents making 50-100 PRs a week, I need 1 agent that successfully solves the most important problem. I don't understand how you can generate requirements quicky enough to have 10 parallel agents chewing away at meaningful work. I don't understand how you can have any meaningful supervising role over 10 thing…

My initial response to reading this post was "wow, I think I'd rather just write the code". I also remain a bit skeptical because, if all of this really worked (and I mean over a long time and scaling to meet a range of business requirements), even if it's not how I personally want to write code, shouldn't we be seeing a ton of 1 person startups? I see Bay area startups pushing 996 and requiring living in the Bay are…

I agree with you. I don’t think number of startups or less reliance on funding is the measure though.

Businesses are not code. They solve problems, find their customers, convince them to buy their solution, and maintain that relationship.

Code has always been a factor but not the critical one.

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#325

Post by godzillabrennus »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #294
CharlieDigital wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> shouldn't we be seeing a ton of 1 person startups? Here's the dirty secret: 1 person AI coding enabled startups don't want their customers to know that they are 1 engineer AI coding startups so they do not expose it or share that info. There is still a lot of negative sentiment associated with this. I know 3 such founders; none would advertise to their customers the extent of their AI usage. There is also a conside…

I don't think cheaper/easier software development can be the limiting success factor for many startups. Success is more about the skills and business aptitude of the founder(s), which is why VCs invest more in people than ideas, and don't seem to flinch when founders pivot to something completely different. I could see AI coding leading to more attempted startups, and more people shipping initial products and attempt…

I expect you see the world this way because you are a software developer. People who know how to sell and understand the problems to solve do not routinely understand how to build software to solve those problems so they can sell them to customers. Now that the bar for building software is lowering, the world of building a startup is changing. A relatively newcomer to software is able to ship a medium complexity vibe-coded app to a few test customers and kick off revenues.

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#326

Post by adam_patarino »

yoz-y wrote: post #156
exitb wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multiple instances of agents are an equivalent to tabs in other applications - primarily holders of state, rather than means for extreme parallelism.

I have not used Claude. But my experience with Gemini and aider is that multiple instances of agents will absolutely stomp over each other. Even in a single sessions overwriting my changes after telling the agent that I did modifications will often result in clobbering.

Proper sandboxing can fix this. But I didn’t see op mention it which I thought was weird

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#327

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

hnroo99 wrote: post #80
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #17

He did a follow up with someone on Reddit and the answers were posted here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1q2c0ne/comment/n... It offers a lot more context and I found it more helpful than the original twitter thread

50-100 PRs a week to me is insane. I'm a little skeptical and wonder how large/impactful they are. I use AI a lot and have seen significant productivity gains but not at that level lol.

50-100 is a lot, but 15 a week should be normal with continuous integration, you should be merging multiple times a day

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#328

Post by gedy »

JamesSwift wrote: post #312
gedy wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My brother is selling a CRM he developed for his business to others for a couple thousand a month. There is no way he would have built the CRM as quickly pre-AI The thing is, if AI is what enabled this, there's no long term market for selling something vibe coded for thousands a month. Maybe right at this moment and good for him, but I have my doubts these random saas things have a future.

Do you think you could build craigslist? Why are they worth so much?

I think that's comparing something different. I've seen the one-day vibe code UI tool things which are neat, but it feels like people miss the part that: if it's that easy now, it's not as valuable as it was in the past.

If you can sell it in the meantime, go for it and good for you, but it doesn't feel like that business model will stay around if anyone can prompt it themselves.

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#329

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #159
hnroo99 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

50-100 PRs a week to me is insane. I'm a little skeptical and wonder how large/impactful they are. I use AI a lot and have seen significant productivity gains but not at that level lol.

I work for a FAANG and I'm the top reviewer in my team (in terms of number of PRs reviewed). I work on an internal greenfield project, so something really fast moving. For ALL of 2025 I reviewed around 400 PRs. And that already took me an extreme amount of time. Nobody is reviewing this many PRs. I've also raised around 350 PRs in the same year, which is also #1 for my team. AI or not, nobody is raising upwards of 3,…

Reviewing PRs should be for junior engineers, architectural changes, brand new code, or broken tests. You should not review every PR; if you do, you're only doing it out of habit, not because it's necessary.

PRs come originally from the idea that there's an outsider trying to merge code into somebody's open source project, and the Benevolent Dictator wants to make sure it's done right. If you work on a corporate SWEng team, this is a completely different paradigm. You should trust your team members to write good-enough code, as long as conventions are followed, linters used, acceptance tests pass, etc.

Re: The creator of Claude Code's Claude setup

#330

Post by MajidAliSyncOps »

godzillabrennus wrote: post #325
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think cheaper/easier software development can be the limiting success factor for many startups. Success is more about the skills and business aptitude of the founder(s), which is why VCs invest more in people than ideas, and don't seem to flinch when founders pivot to something completely different. I could see AI coding leading to more attempted startups, and more people shipping initial products and attempt…

I expect you see the world this way because you are a software developer. People who know how to sell and understand the problems to solve do not routinely understand how to build software to solve those problems so they can sell them to customers. Now that the bar for building software is lowering, the world of building a startup is changing. A relatively newcomer to software is able to ship a medium complexity vibe…

I agree that the bar for building software has dropped significantly, but I think the harder part still shows up right after the first few customers.

Shipping something workable is easier now, but understanding which problems are actually worth solving — and getting consistent feedback early — still seems to be the main separator between hobby projects and real businesses.

Post reply on HN