Maybe I'm just using it wrong, but CC hasn't been super helpful for me. I don't believe it's fixed any of my bugs so far. But I do like the CLI
6 weeks of Claude Code
551–560 of 603 posts
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#552Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's happening is that we are being bombarded by marketing on all fronts. These gushing statements are no different from the testimonials and advertorials from the days of yore.
It’s absolute lunacy to think everyone lauding Claude code is paid marketing/shilling. What’s actually happening is there’s a divide being created between engineers that know how to use it, and engineers that don’t or want to convince themselves that it’s useless or whatever. Group 2 will not fare well in the coming months.
I disagree. Given just how much money is being thrown at AI and the tone of the praise I think it's pretty likely that there are some large astroturf campaigns. Unfortunately the current generation is a lot worse at spotting misinformation.
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#553Earlier quoted context omitted.
Superwhisper is great. It's closed source, however. There may be other comparable open spurce options available now. I'd suggest trying superwhisper, so you know what's possible and maybe compare to open source options after. Superwhisper runs locally and has a one time purchase option, which makes it acceptable to me.
Talkito (I posted the link further up) is open source and unlike Superwhisper it makes Claude Code talk back to you as well - which was the original aim to be able to multitask.
Talkito looks to be just a front for cloud services https://github.com/robdmac/talkito#provider-configuration -- that's a really limited definition of "open source", especially for something that itself is AGPL licensed.
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#554I have about two weeks of using Claude Code and to be honest, as a vibe coding skeptic, I was amazed. It has a learning curve. You need to learn how to give it proper context, how to chunk up the work, etc. And you need to know how to program, obviously. Asking it to do something you don't know how to do, that's just asking for a disaster. I have more than 25 years of experience, so I'm confident with anything Claude…
>I was dreaming about some kind of neural interface, where I could program without writing any code. And I realized that with Claude Code, it's kind of here.
I had a similar thought about the Turing Test…
It as science fiction for decades… then it passed silently in the night and we barely noticed.
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#555Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmm not my experience. I've been aggressively trying to use both Cursor and Claude Code. I've done maybe 20-30 attempts with Code at different projects, a couple of them personal small projects. All of them resulted in sub-par results, essentially unusable. I tried to use it for Python, Rust and Bash. I also tried to use it for crawling and organizing information. I also tried to use it as a debugging buddy. All of t…
Initially I loved it, overtime I agree with people that call it a slot machine, unless you’re very deliberate with it, it’d just that. Gambling.
This isn’t a fair representation at all.
I’ve been delighting all of my tedious tasks with as much context as I would give a person, and my personal win rate at this is substantially higher than I expected.
If you give it trash and expect gold, sure, gambling.
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#556Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have about two weeks of using Claude Code and to be honest, as a vibe coding skeptic, I was amazed. And, yet, when I asked it to correct a CMake error in a fully open source codebase (broken dependency declaration), it couldn't work it out. It even started hallucinating version numbers and dependencies that were so obviously broken that at least it was obvious to me that it wasn't helping. This has been, and cont…
This is typically the outcome, when you have it look at a generic problem and fix it, especially if the problem depends on external information (like specific version numbers, etc). You have to either tell it where to look it up, or ask it to ask you questions how things need to be resolved. I personally use it to work on native code, C++ (with CMake), Zig, some Python. Works fine.
Except the whole point of using AI is to be able to actively route around gigantic dumpster fires of fail like CMake.
The bug was the CMake-specific formulation and incantation of a Git tag. Something that should be in the documentation that it ingested.
If AI can't even fix something this simple, what's the point?
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#557Earlier quoted context omitted.
Talkito (I posted the link further up) is open source and unlike Superwhisper it makes Claude Code talk back to you as well - which was the original aim to be able to multitask.
Talkito looks to be just a front for cloud services https://github.com/robdmac/talkito#provider-configuration -- that's a really limited definition of "open source", especially for something that itself is AGPL licensed.
Talkito does indeed support all the popular TTS and ASR cloud providers so you can bring your own key. But even without a key, on Mac it can use the system default TTS and googles free ASR for input.
So whats the benefit? Well for Claude Code this wrapper effectively bridges those TTS/ASR systems and CC so the voice interface is now there (CC doesn't have one). It doesn't just rely on MCP either (although it does start an MCP server for configuring via prompting) but instead directly injects the ASR and directly reads out CC's output when on.
It is free and open source so folks can inspect it and check it's not doing anything nefarious, so that others can contribute if they should choose. And the license is what it is as that seems to be the advice on this forum if you want to make sure a company can't just make a paid service out of your work.
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#558Earlier quoted context omitted.
> to me Key words there. To you, it's a electric saw because you already know how to program, and that's the other person's point; it doesn't necessarily empower people to build software. You? Yes. Generally though when you hand the public an electric saw and say "have at it, build stuff" you end up with a lot of lost appendages. Sadly, in this case the "lost appendages" are going to be man-decades of time spent undo…
Being able to do it quicker and cheaper will often ensure more people will learn the basics. Electrical tools open up woodworking to more people, same with digital photography, more people take the effort to learn the basics. There will also be many more people making rubbish, but is that really a problem? With ai it’s cheap and fast for a professional to ask the AI: what does this rubbish software do, and can you cr…
> With ai it’s cheap and fast for a professional to ask the AI: what does this rubbish software do, and can you create me a more robust version following these guidelines.
This falls apart today with sufficiently complex software and also seems to require source availability (or perfect specifications).
One of the things I keep an eye out for in terms of "have LLMs actually cracked large-product complexity yet" (vs human-overseen patches or greenfield demos) is exactly that sort of re-implementation-and-improvement you talk about. Like a greenfield Photoshop substitute.
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#559I get downvoted every time I praise Claude. But everyone in this thread is getting upvoted for saying the same things. Can someone explain to me the difference?
You're replying to people who had negative experiences with LLMs and posted their nuanced criticisms with: "OK but have you tried Claude 4??" It's not helpful or justified within those conversations.
I guess I figured that, if someone told me they were scared of dying, and I happened to possess the secret to immortality, it would be worthwhile to share it with them.
Re: 6 weeks of Claude Code
#560Earlier quoted context omitted.
Abstractions and compilers are deterministic, no matter if a neckbeard is cranky about the results. LLMs are not deterministic, they are a guessing game. An LLM is not an abstraction, it's a distraction. If you can't tell the difference, then maybe you should lay off the "AI" slop.
I've been thinking about this - you're right that LLMs are not going to be deterministic (AIUI) when it comes to producing code to solve a problem. BUT neither are humans, if you give two different humans the same task, then, unless they copy one another, then you will get two different results. Further, as those humans evolve through their career, the code that they produce will also change. Now, I do want to point…
> BUT neither are humans, if you give two different humans the same task, then, unless they copy one another, then you will get two different results.
Thats true, but giving a human a task isn't coding - its project management