91–100 of 185 posts
As long as I have a Claude subscription, why do they care what harness I use to access their very profitable token inference business?
This message from the Zed discord (from a zed staffer) puts it clearly, I think: “….you can use Claude code in Zed but you can’t hijack the rate limits to do other ai stuff in zed.” This was a response to my asking whether we can use the Claude Max subscription for the awesome inline assistant (Ctl+Enter in the editor buffer) without having to pay for yet another metered API. The answer is no, the above was a respons…
Art (prose, images, videos) is very different from code when discussing AI Agents. Code can be objectively checked with automated tools to be correct/incorrect. Art is always subjective.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems reasonable at first glance, but imagine applying it to other development tools — "You can't use Xcode/Visual Studio/IntelliJ to build a commercial IDE", "You can't use ICC/MSVC to build a commercial C/C++ compiler", etc.
In this case it’s “You can’t use our technology to teach your thinking machine from our stealing of other people’s work, because our AI is just learning stuff, not stealing, and you are stealing from us, because we say so.”
but also the prohibition goes way further as it's not limited to training competing LLMs but also for programming any of the plumbing etc. around it ....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The trick is to use Codex to write a Claude Code clone, Claude Code to write an Antigravity clone, and Antigravity to write a Codex clone. Good luck catching me, I'm behind 7 proxies.
or you just do it and be in the EU it's a clear anti-competive clause by a dominant market leader, such clauses tend to be void AFIK
Most people still haven’t heard of Anthropic/Claude.
(For the record, I use Claude code all day long. But it’s still pretty niche outside of programming.)
I am _much_ more interested in i. building cool software for other things and ii. understanding underlying underlying models than building "better claude code".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The trick is to use Codex to write a Claude Code clone, Claude Code to write an Antigravity clone, and Antigravity to write a Codex clone. Good luck catching me, I'm behind 7 proxies.
or you just do it and be in the EU it's a clear anti-competive clause by a dominant market leader, such clauses tend to be void AFIK
I still did not get very clearly what can and can’t zed, open code and other do to use max plan? Developers want to use these 3p client and pay you 200 a month, why are you pissing us off. I understand some abuser exists but you will never really be possible to ban them 100%, technically. Very poor communication, despite some bit of reasonable intention, could be the beginning of the end for Claude Code.
they lose money on 200/month plan, maybe even quite a bit. So that plan only exist to subsidize their editor.
Could be about the typical "all must be under our control" power fantasies companies have.
But if there really is "no moat" and open model will be competitive just in a matter of time then having "the" coding editor might be majorly relevant for driving sales. Ironically they seem to already have kind lost that if what some people say about ClaudeCode vs. OpenCode is true...
1. Pay for a stock photo library and train an image model with it that I then sell.
2. Use a spam detection service, train a model on its output, then sell that model as a competitor.
3. Hire a voice actor to read some copy, train a text to speech model on their voice, then sell that model.
This doesn't mean you can't tell Claude "hey, build me a Claude Code competitor". I don't even think they care about the CLI. It means I can't ask Claude to build things, then train a new LLM based on what Claude built. Claude can't be your training data.
There's an argument to be made that Anthropic didn't obtain their training material in an ethical way so why should you respect their intellectual property? The difference, in my opinion, is that Anthropic didn't agree to a terms of use on their training data. I don't think that makes it right, necessarily, but there's a big difference between "I bought a book, scanned it, learned its facts, then shredded the book" and "I agreed to your ToS then violated it by paying for output that I then used to clone the exact behavior of the service."
As long as I have a Claude subscription, why do they care what harness I use to access their very profitable token inference business?
Because Claude Code is not a profitable business, it's a loss leader to get you to use the rest of their token inference business. If you were to pay for Claude Code by using the normal API, it would be at least 5x the cost, if not more.