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

How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 248 posts

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#51

Post by Graziano_M »

throwmeaway222 wrote: post #8
minimaxir wrote: post #7

A repeated trend is that Claude Code only gets 70-80% of the way, which is fine and something I wish was emphasized more by people pushing agents. This bullet point is funny: > Treat it like a slot machine > Save your state before letting Claude work, let it run for 30 minutes, then either accept the result or start fresh rather than trying to wrestle with corrections. Starting over often has a higher success rate th…

Thanks for the tip - we employees should run and re-run the code generation hundreds of times even if the changes are pretty good. That way, the brass will see a huge bill without many actual commits. Sorry boss, it looks like we need to hire more software engineers since the AI route still isn't mathing.

Don’t forget to smash the power looms as well.

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#52

Post by byzantinegene »

philomath_mn wrote: post #32
lumost wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

once upon a time - engineers often had to concern themselves with datacenter bills, cloud bills, and eventually SaaS bills. We'll probably have 5-10 years of being concerned about AI bills before the AI expense is trivial compared to the human time.

AI bills are already trivial compared to human time. I pay for claude max, all I need to do is save an hour a month and I will be breaking even.

on the other hand, it could also you mean you are overpaid

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#53

Post by randmeerkat »

preommr wrote: post #25
minimaxir wrote: post #7

A repeated trend is that Claude Code only gets 70-80% of the way, which is fine and something I wish was emphasized more by people pushing agents. This bullet point is funny: > Treat it like a slot machine > Save your state before letting Claude work, let it run for 30 minutes, then either accept the result or start fresh rather than trying to wrestle with corrections. Starting over often has a higher success rate th…

> A repeated trend is that Claude Code only gets 70-80% of the way, which is fine and something I wish was emphasized more by people pushing agents. I have been pretty successful at using llms for code generation. I have a simple rule that something is either 90%>ai or none at all (exluding inline completions, and very obvious text editing). The model has an inherent understanding of some problems due to it's trainin…

> I have a simple rule that something is either 90%>ai or none at all…

10% is the time it works 100% of the time.

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#54

Post by mixdup »

The first example was helping debug k8s issues, which was diagnosed as IP pool exhaustion, and Claude helped them fix it without needing a network expert

But, if they had an expert in networking build it in the first place, would they have not avoided the error entirely up front?

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#55

Post by aprilthird2021 »

Graziano_M wrote: post #51
throwmeaway222 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the tip - we employees should run and re-run the code generation hundreds of times even if the changes are pretty good. That way, the brass will see a huge bill without many actual commits. Sorry boss, it looks like we need to hire more software engineers since the AI route still isn't mathing.

Don’t forget to smash the power looms as well.

Is it OK to be a Luddite?

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/97/05/18/r...?

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#56

Post by quintu5 »

jonstewart wrote: post #22
ants_everywhere wrote: post #4

I've been trying Claude Code for a few weeks after using Gemini Cli. There's something a little better the tool use loop, which is nice. But Claude seems a little dumber and is aggressive about "getting things done", often ignoring common sense or explicit instructions or design information. If I tell it to make a test pass, it will sometimes change my database structure to avoid having to debug the test. At least tw…

The hilarious part I’ve found is that when it runs into the least bit of trouble with a step on one of its plans, it will say it has been “Deferred” and then make up an excuse for why that’s acceptable. It is sometimes acceptable for humans to use judgment and defer work; the machine doesn’t have judgment so it is not acceptable for it to do so.

My favorite is when you ask Claude to implement two requirements and it implements the first, gets confused by the the second, removes the implementation for the first to “focus” on the second, and then finishes by having implemented nothing.

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#57

Post by benreesman »

minimaxir wrote: post #7

A repeated trend is that Claude Code only gets 70-80% of the way, which is fine and something I wish was emphasized more by people pushing agents. This bullet point is funny: > Treat it like a slot machine > Save your state before letting Claude work, let it run for 30 minutes, then either accept the result or start fresh rather than trying to wrestle with corrections. Starting over often has a higher success rate th…

The slot machine thing has a pretty compelling corollary: crank the formal systems rigor up as high as you can.

Vibe coding in Python is seductive but ultimately you end up in a bad place with a big bill to show for it.

Vibe coding in Haskell is a "how much money am I willing to pour in per unit clean, correct, maintainable code" exercise. With GHC cranked up to `-Wall -Werror` and some nasty property tests? Watching Claude Code try to weasel out with a mock goes from infuriating to amusing: bam, unused parameter! Now why would the test suite be demanding that a property holds on an unused parameter...

And Haskell is just an example, TypeScript is in some ways even more powerful in it's type system, so lots of projects have scope to dabble with what I'm calling "hyper modern vibe coding": just start putting a bunch of really nasty fastcheck and generic bounds on stuff and watch Claude Code try to cheat. Your move, Claude Code, I know you want to check off that line on the TODO list like I want to breathe, so what's it gonna be?

I find it usually gives up and does the work you paid for.

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#59

Post by AzzyHN »

minimaxir wrote: post #7

A repeated trend is that Claude Code only gets 70-80% of the way, which is fine and something I wish was emphasized more by people pushing agents. This bullet point is funny: > Treat it like a slot machine > Save your state before letting Claude work, let it run for 30 minutes, then either accept the result or start fresh rather than trying to wrestle with corrections. Starting over often has a higher success rate th…

Not to mention, if an employee could usually write pretty good code but maybe 30% of the time they wrote something so non-functional it had to be entirely scrapped, they'd be fired.

Re: How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

#60

Post by oblio »

philomath_mn wrote: post #32
lumost wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

once upon a time - engineers often had to concern themselves with datacenter bills, cloud bills, and eventually SaaS bills. We'll probably have 5-10 years of being concerned about AI bills before the AI expense is trivial compared to the human time.

AI bills are already trivial compared to human time. I pay for claude max, all I need to do is save an hour a month and I will be breaking even.

$200h * 8 * 5 * 4 * 12 = $384 000 per year.

You're like in the top 0.05% of earners in the software field.

Of course, if you save 10 hours per month, the math starts making more sense for others.

And this is assuming LLM prices are stable, which I very much doubt they are, since everyone is price dumping to get market share.

Post reply on HN