501–510 of 604 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's just my feeling. It asks to update/upgrade continuously.
It's completely open source, but is under heavy continual development (likely a lot of AI coding). On launch, it checks for updates and autoupdates.
AI services are only minorly incentivized to reduce token usage. They want high token usage, it makes you pay more. They are going to continually test where the limit is, what is the max token usage before you get angry. All AI companies will continue to trade places for token use and cost as cost increases. We are in tepid water pretending it is a bath pretending we aren’t about to be boiled frogs.
People said this about AWS too. "Why would they save you money??". It turns out that every time they reduce prices, they make more money, because more people use their services. AI companies have the same incentive. Make it cheaper and people will use it more, making you more money (assuming your price is still above cost). And of course they have every reason to reduce their on costs.
Since the price they are charging is still way, way above their operating costs there's no surprise really that they end up making more from small price reductions.
If competition drove them to reduce costs to the point where their operating costs started to be a large factor, the paradox would disappear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Or just don't use AI to write code. Anecdata, but I'm still finding CC to be absolutely outstanding at writing code. It's regularly writing systems-level code that would take me months to write by hand in hours, with minimal babysitting, basically no "specs" - just giving it coherent sane direction: like to make sure it tests things in several different ways, for several different cases, including performance, comp…
How can a person reconcile this comment with the one at the root of this thread? One person says Claude struggles to even meet the strict requirements of a spec sheet, another says Claude is doing a great job and doesn’t even need specific specs? I have my own anecdata but my comment is more about the dissonance here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What level of subscription are you on? If you're complaining about running out of tokens but are happy to pay "whatever" for it, it should be Max 20x, yes? And one prompt drained all your tokens for the day on Max 20x?
I am on max 10x ($100 a month). I asked it to summarize a small codebase (2000 lines). Instead, it ran 4 agents in the background, and those agents went nuts, started reading everything and related dependencies, and sucked all my daily quota, forcing me to wait till 2 AM to continue using. Up until last month, a $100 plan was more than enough, and it was difficult to run out of tokens per day for me. Something fundam…
Some time ago I cleaned up a bunch of MCP tools I had installed some time ago and that did make a significant impact on token usage.
Most of this is about the billing system, which is apparently broken.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's completely open source, but is under heavy continual development (likely a lot of AI coding). On launch, it checks for updates and autoupdates.
It doesn't auto update. Maybe you have an extension?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But, how do you know the code is good? Honestly, this more of a question about scope of the application and the potential threat vectors. If the GP is creating software that will never leave their machine(s) and is for personal usage only, I'd argue the code quality likely doesn't matter. If it's some enterprise production software that hundreds to millions of users depend on, software that manages sensitive data,…
> I apply the Herbie Hancock philosophy when defining good code. When once asked what is Jazz music, Herbie responded with, "I can't describe it in words, but I know it when I hear it." That’s the problem. If we had an objective measure of good code, we could just use that instead of code reviews, style guides, and all the other things we do to maintain code quality. > I truly believe that most competent developers (…
> the tactical tornadoes get more of a speed boost than the people who care about maintainability.
Why are these not the same people? In my job, I am handed a shovel. Whatever grave I dig, I must lay in. Is that not common? Seriously, I am not being factious. I've had the same job for almost a decade.
I write detailed specs. Multifile with example code. In markdown. Then hand over to Claude Sonnet. With hard requirements listed, I found out that the generated code missed requirements, had duplicate code or even unnecessary code wrangling data (mapping objects into new objects of narrower types when won't be needed) along with tests that fake and work around to pass. So turns out that I'm not writing code but I'm r…