lherron

…a long time.

From the outside it seems like these mathematicians are saying “you shouldn’t use ai to solve our most difficult problems because they have no practical value”.

Seems ok by me, let’s point all the gpu clusters at things that actually matter and let the math folks math.

Cool but isn’t everyone already doing this? Surprised this is what I saw at top of HN this morning.

Worst title ever. For once I feel the HN title should NOT match the article.

I uh…still use tmux send-keys. I’ll change as soon as I find a use-case it doesn’t solve. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

“Redesign the site using frotend-design skill”

https://race-to-270.vercel.app/

You really have to a) use Opus and b) use the frontend-design skill for decent results.

https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/plugins/...

Are they also going to refund all the extra usage api $$$ people spent in the last month?

Also I don’t know how “improving our Code Review tool” is going to improve things going forward, two of the major issues were intentional choices. No code review is going to tell them to stop making poor and compromising decisions.

It’s interesting to watch Ant try to ship every value-add product feature they can while they still have the SOTA model for agentic. When an open weights equivalent to Opus 4.5’s agentic capabilities comes out, I expect massive shifts of workloads away from Claude.

Don’t get me wrong, I think their business model is still solid and they will be able to sell every token they can generate for the next couple years. They just won’t be critical path for AI diffusion anymore, which will be good for all sides.

Reality is Ant can supply X tokens and they see demand for 10*X tokens. So they’ll charge whatever the top 10% of users are willing to pay, and slowly degrade the value of the subscriptions until everyone has moved to another supplier or migrated to the 10% price point. The draconian ToS that they sometimes enforce is their mechanism to degrade subscription value over time. Expect agent-sdk to be next on the chopping block, moving from oauth supported to api only. When they switch it they will rightly point out the docs never explicitly said it was allowed.

I think maybe you are not familiar with what /loop and the Claude cron tools do.

https://code.claude.com/docs/en/scheduled-tasks

I was surprised the author didn’t mention Yegge’s list (or maybe I missed it in my skim).

Gross.

Oh I think you misinterpreted my comment! I am very much a fan of this, wasn't throwing shade. I am just remarking on how my side-project scope today dwarfs my side-project scope of a year or two ago.

Somehow every 15 line shell script I write now turns into a 50kloc bun cli or tui app. Apparently there are many such cases.

They buried the lede. The last half of the article with ways to ground your dev environment to reduce the most common issues should be its own article. (However implementing the proper techniques somewhat obviates the need for CodeRabbit, so guess it’s understandable.)

Why would the self-hosted runner fee be per-minute instead of per-job? I don’t get it.

Freaking awesome. You should extend clicking on a link, similar to how this article describes infinite content:

https://worksonmymachine.ai/p/solving-amazons-infinite-shelf...

Gemini 3 = Skynet ?

Gotta be better than codex literally writing a python script to edit a file multiple times in a single prompt response.

Building an interactive shell inside their CLI seems like a very odd technical solution. I can’t think of any use case where the same context gathering couldn’t be gleaned by examining the file/system state after the session ended, but maybe I’m missing something.

On the other hand, now that I’ve read this, I can see how having some hooks between the code agent CLIs and ghostty/etc could be extremely powerful.

Still a toss-up for me which one I use. For deep work Codex (codex-high) is the clear winner, but when you need to knock out something small Claude Code (sonnet) is a workhorse.

Also CC tool usage is so much better! Many, many times I’ve seen Codex writing a python script to edit a file which seems to bypass the diff view so you don’t really know what’s going on.

I would add to the list of the vibe engineer’s tasks:

Knowing when the agent has failed and it’s time to roll back. After four or five turns of Claude confidently telling you the feature is done, but things are drifting further off course, it’s time to reset and try again.

Need someone to do this with the old THX test sound.

This “article” is clickbait. Controversial title with no substance, asking “why are companies investing heavily in a technology that works for some (limited but valuable) use cases, when they could invest in pure R&D for something that might be better someday”.

Progress, but the real unlock will be local MCP/desktop client support. I don't have much interest in exposing all my local MCPs over the internet.

Wow, I thought they would feel some pricing pressure from GPT5 API costs, but they are doubling down on their API being more expensive than everyone else.

Did I miss the total cost for each run in the article? Can't seem to find it.

If Sonnet is more expensive AND more chatty/requires more attempts for the same result, seems like that would favor GPT5 for daily driver.

Yeah but I still want a general purpose chatbot subscription also. So I’d have to buy Cursor + something else.

I guess Cursor makes sense for people who only use LLMs for coding.

With all the frontier labs competing in this space now, and them letting you use your consumer subscription through the CLI, I don’t understand how the Cursor products will survive. Why pay an extra $X/mo when I can get this functionality included in the $Y/mo I’m already paying OAI/Anthropic/GOOG?