571–580 of 625 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not how it works at all. Why stop at $300M, why didn't they just say $1BN out the gate?
Of course it's how it works, how else do you justify a company that is making negative profit into some how being worth $300M? Like that's just the game, IDK why people accept it. It's not democratic and all it does it prime the population for fraud and abuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why burn his own money when he can get VC money instead?
If he believes in the product he could have kept 100% of his company.
> Checkpoints are a new primitive that automatically captures agent context as first-class, versioned data in Git. When you commit code generated by an agent, Checkpoints capture the full session alongside the commit: the transcript, prompts, files touched, token usage, tool calls and more. This thread is extremely negative - if you can't see the value in this, I don't know what to tell you.
What kind of barrier/moat/network effects/etc would prevent someone with a Claude Code subscription from replicating whatever "innovation" is so uniquely valuable here? It's somewhat strange to regularly read HN threads confidently asserting that the cost of software is trending towards zero and software engineering as a profession is dead, but also that an AI dev tool that basically hooks onto Git/Claude Code/termin…
"pfft! I could set all this up myself with a NAS xyz".
> Checkpoints are a new primitive that automatically captures agent context as first-class, versioned data in Git. When you commit code generated by an agent, Checkpoints capture the full session alongside the commit: the transcript, prompts, files touched, token usage, tool calls and more. This thread is extremely negative - if you can't see the value in this, I don't know what to tell you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why burn his own money when he can get VC money instead?
If he believes in the product he could have kept 100% of his company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure... you `git add` the context text generated by AI and `git commit` it, could be useful. Is that worth 60 million?
It's funny how HN'ers frequently judge ideas based on complexity of implementation, not value. I still remember the reaction when Dropbox was created: " It's just file sharing; I can build my own with FTP. What value could it possibly create ".
Ignoring the VC economics and awful name, I won’t be as pessimistic as everyone. I see the vision. That said, nobody knows what the AI future looks like. Entire’s entire thesis is a solution for something we don’t even know we need. It’s a massive bet and uphill battle. Traditionally, dev tool success stories come from grassroots projects of developers solving their own problems and not massive VC funded efforts that…
> Checkpoints are a new primitive that automatically captures agent context as first-class, versioned data in Git. When you commit code generated by an agent, Checkpoints capture the full session alongside the commit: the transcript, prompts, files touched, token usage, tool calls and more. This thread is extremely negative - if you can't see the value in this, I don't know what to tell you.
What kind of barrier/moat/network effects/etc would prevent someone with a Claude Code subscription from replicating whatever "innovation" is so uniquely valuable here? It's somewhat strange to regularly read HN threads confidently asserting that the cost of software is trending towards zero and software engineering as a profession is dead, but also that an AI dev tool that basically hooks onto Git/Claude Code/termin…
I do see value in this, but like you I think it’s too trivial to implement to capture the value unless they can get some kind of lead on a model that can consume these artifacts more effectively. It feels like something Anthropic will have in Claude Code in a month.
Say what you want about LLM-assisted software development, the chances are high that it will stay, meaning a non-trivial part of code will be written by an LLM.
So is it better to have
- git commit (mostly only code)
- magic or blackblock (meaning back and forth by developer with LLM, before commit)
- git commit (mostly only code)
...
(rinse and repeat)
- git commit (prompt and/or code)
- git commit (prompt and/or code)
...
(rinse and repeat)