91–100 of 636 posts
The pet you get is generated based off your account UUID, but the algorithm is right there in the source, and it's deterministic, so you can check ahead of time. Threw together a little app to help, not to brag but I got a legendary ghost https://claudebuddychecker.netlify.app/
> "Anti-distillation: injecting fake tools to poison copycats" Plot twist: Chinese competitors end up developing real, useful versions of Claude's fake tools.
> Sometimes a regex is the right tool. I’d argue that in this case, it isn’t. Exhibit 1 (from the earlier thread): https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/22284 . The user reports that this caused their account to be banned: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47588970 Maybe it would be okay as a first filtering step, before doing actual sentiment analysis on the matches. That would at least eliminate obvio…
Is this really the use-case? I imagine the regex is good for a dashboard. You can collect matches per 1000 prompts or something like that, and see if the number grows or declines over time. If you miss some negative sentiment it shouldn't matter unless the use of that specific word doesn't correlate over time with other negative words and is also popular enough to have an impact on the metric.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are spamming the whole fucking thread with the same nonsense. It is instructed to hide that the PR was made via Claude Code. I don't know why people who are so AI forward like yourself have such a problem with telling people that they use AI for coding/writing, it's a weirdly insecure look.
I can do that right now with Claude Code without this undercover mode.. In fact I do it many times at work. What's the big deal in this? Do you not think it is an overreaction to panic like this if I can do exactly what the undercover mode does by simply asking Claude?
> So I spent my morning reading through the HN comments and leaked source. > This was one of the first things people noticed in the HN thread. > The obvious concern, raised repeatedly in the HN thread > This was the most-discussed finding in the HN thread. > Several people in the HN thread flagged this > Some in the HN thread downplayed the leak when the original HN post is already at the top of the front page...why…
Or, more simply: Because folks wanted it enough to upvote it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> my first knee-jerk reaction wouldn't be "this is for pretending to be human"... "Write commit messages as a human developer would — describe only what the code change does."
That seems desirable? Like that's what commit messages are for. Describing the change. Much rather that than the m$ way of putting ads in commit messages
VS Code has a setting that promises to change the prompt it uses to generate commit messages, but it mostly ignores my instructions, even very literal ones like “don’t use the words ‘enhance’ or ‘improve’”. And oddly having it set can sometimes result in Cyrillic characters showing up at the end of the message.
Ultimately I stopped using it, because editing the messages cost me more time than it saved.
/rant
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Comments are the ultimate agent coding hack. If you're not using comments, you're doing agent coding wrong. Why? Agents may or may not read docs. It may or may not use skills or tools. It will always read comments "in the line of sight" of the task. You get free long term agent memory with zero infrastructure.
Comments are great for developers. I like having as much design in the repo directly. If not in the code, then in a markdown in the repo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can do that right now with Claude Code without this undercover mode.. In fact I do it many times at work. What's the big deal in this? Do you not think it is an overreaction to panic like this if I can do exactly what the undercover mode does by simply asking Claude?
It's different if it's an institutional decision or a personal like in your case. Which is and I am repeating myself here borderline insecure.
There are now several comments that (incorrectly?) interpret the undercover mode as only hiding internal information. Excerpts from the actual prompt[0]: NEVER include in commit messages or PR descriptions: - The phrase "Claude Code" or any mention that you are an AI - Co-Authored-By lines or any other attribution BAD (never write these): - 1-shotted by claude-opus-4-6 - Generated with Claude Code - Co-Authored-By: C…
Ive seen it say coauthored by claude code on my prs...and I agree I dont want it to do that
"includeCoAuthoredBy": false,
in your settings.json.