redhale

When I browse the store, I specifically do it in a browser because the client is so unpleasant to use. For launching games I have no choice. I love Steam as a concept and company, but it is not an enjoyable app to use by its own merits, in my opinion.

If you're in the Claude ecosystem, Artifacts can fill a similar purpose. They've gotten really good, if you haven't checked back on them in a while. The recent Docs and Slides update especially is fantastic for working on deliverables in those formats.

And I think most people who hate Jira actually just hate the process their company has imposed inside of Jira.

The vanilla out of the box product is actually quite close to old Trello, in simplicity. But there are so many ways to fuck it up and overcomplicate it, and so many companies proceed to fuck it up and overcomplicate it.

> I can just pull out the Amex and everything works

Must be nice to have money to burn. But if I had to guess, this doesn't seem like representative consumer behavior that Anthropic or OpenAI should rely on holding up at scale.

> subscription gross margins are way lower than API and meaningfully reduce revenue per MW for both OpenAI and Anthropic

I don't know about everyone else, but there is no way in hell I would pay even $200 for API-priced tokens for personal use. So at least for my sample size of one, Anthropic's revenue would not be higher if they dropped their subscription plan (they would get $0 from me instead of $200 per month).

Wow, it only took AWS ... 24 years to develop this technology. Amazing progress, we're living in the future! /s

Could not agree more, this needs to be table stakes for any usage based service.

I'm definitely willing to be corrected, but I think it just means that this improvement is close to pure noise -- not good or bad necessarily. Just not a good signal.

To me the really bad sign is that this is the benchmark that they selected to highlight. Why not one of the less-saturated benchmarks where this harness could (in theory) show meaningful improvement over the OpenCode baseline? Seems fishy to me.

I don't want to be too negative, but ... all this for a 0.8% improvement in SWE-bench Verified (90.2 for OpenCode vs 91)? And why is this (saturated) benchmark the one coding benchmark chosen to showcase on the homepage?

Without trying it, this seems like its probably just a massive waste of tokens.

Same experience here -- Google Home has turned into absolute garbage, virtually unusable. It was never perfect but holy shit have they poured gasoline on the dumpster fire with whatever they have done with Gemini.

HN never fails to be disappointed.

I don't mean to pick on you, but the negativity of this post is pretty typical of HN. God forbid people try to inject a little joy into their day on our way to the AIpocalypse.

My gf loves the custom Codex "pet" she created that emotes as she uses Codex to build her recipe website. I don't care to turn the pet on when I'm using Codex, but I can't believe there are people who find a way to complain about it being an option. Please lighten up.

> being "90th percentile" (on what exactly?)

From context, I took this to mean 90th percentile in token usage. So yes, being a top token user does require extensive AI use.

This doesn't really match my experience, but all I have to counter your anecdotal evidence is my own anecdotal evidence.

In my opinion, concluding that Copilot is "winning" right now is like concluding that Internet Explorer was winning while Chrome was still young. It may be technically true, but it's easy to see the writing on the wall -- that it's only winning because it is the default option available at most companies.

I have never met a satisfied Copilot user, and as a consultant I met a lot of Copilot users. It's hard to believe how totally and completely Microsoft is shitting the bed. As you point out, they have the enterprise integrations. Why can't the build a good product with them? Generational blunder, in my opinion.

There seems to be an unstated assumption here that "handcrafted" code is somehow _better_ or _more desirable_ than AI-written code, all else being equal. I would ask for evidence of that claim.

I've worked in corporate environments for nearly two decades, and I can assure you that I have seen a lot of very low-quality "handcrafted" code running in production. I don't really see "handcrafted" as a signifier of quality, even if I agree that SOME SPECIFIC handcrafted code is better than SOME SPECIFIC AI-written code (and vice versa).

Oh nooooooo! /s

I cannot believe how tone deaf this quote is. Mind boggling. Veep, torture nexus-level parody.

> “Because you go on to X or you go on to Reddit and you go, why are people so mad at us when we've been doing the same thing for nine years?” Langley said. “And why are they so mad at us for things we don't do? And we just want people to be safe.”

I find this story to be heartwarming. I hope the employees flee to companies with missions and products more worthy of their talents.

This is literally the opposite of my experience, for whatever it's worth.

I went so far as to cancel my $200 Claude Max account (after having it since launch) in favor of the equivalent OpenAI subscription, primarily because I feel like it goes so much further. Also Astra is pretty great.

But to each their own! I'm sure this experience is very dependent on the types of work you're doing. I'm doing basic web app development as as simple personal assistant automation stuff.

This is the most IBM thing IBM ever IBM'd.

Not quite, or at least not in my experience.

The difference with AI is that the agent becomes the first level of triage. It (many times) asks the easy initial questions (did you turn it off and on again?) so I don't have to. Doesn't always work like this, but often enough.

You answered your own question.

This is a dumb/pointless headline + article imo. Its actually probably a GOOD thing that candy bars are smaller by default, for health reasons. What matters, and what the article fails to even mention, is the inflation-adjusted cost per gram. Not saying shrinkflation is not an issue, but this article does nothing at all to highlight it.

> its reliability, safety, efficiency problems. these problems exist at any scale

Respectfully, I disagree. When you have 5 users using an app sandboxed within the corporate firewall that just does some CRUD and basic workflows, these problems you're calling out really just don't matter much. Some do some of the time, but not much.

Obviously not all software falls into this category. But so, so much does. Do you know how many thousands of tiny applications are maintained by big all non-big-tech corporations? I've seen many of them up close -- the code is usually complete garbage (seriously, it's bad; and alas, most was written before the age of AI coding agents), and yet, the business continues to operate and use the software.

I largely agree, but when this point is brought up I always feel the need to go one step further:

For the vast majority of software out there, this quality gap simply doesn't matter. Not everything is big tech, needing internet scale. Most software built by developers at non-tech companies are simple line-of-business apps used by a handful to a few dozen or maybe a few hundred people to do a thing a bit better than the Excel spreadsheet that was used before.

And AI has essentially automated the development of this kind of software. Or rather, it has dramatically increased the ability of skilled developers to produce larger amounts of these kinds of systems.

Excel hardest hit.

His game has only a handful (like literally 5-8) players [0], at least on Steam.

[0] https://steamdb.info/app/1541710/charts/#1m

We already have these, and have for a while. Replit and Bolt exist for exactly this case. Not sure why GP didn't direct their friend to these tools (or if these tools are somehow the ones that failed in this example). In my experience, Replit and Bolt (and other similar tools) are quite good at this kind of 0->1 kind of thing.

This sucks and it makes me sad. The end of an era.

I really hope Anthropic doesn't follow, but I assume they will eventually because why wouldn't they? Google and Meta obviously will, with great enthusiasm.

Open models are the only hope, I guess.

Come on now, arguing it's a good feature is different than arguing that it should be turned on by default for everyone with no documented option to turn it off.

I like this feature as an OPTION that is DOCUMENTED. But that's not how it was rolled out. The CC team + processes clearly failed here. And this is far from the first example of this kind of slopiness.

I don't think it was malicious, but I do think it was quite obviously reckless/careless, and I feel like most of the comments here match that sentiment. Everyone and every team makes mistakes, but unfortunately I don't see the CC team really learning from those mistakes even though they keep happening.

CC is not a stable or reliable tool, it is bleeding edge, and that's a tradeoff you make when you pick it over other harnesses.

Sadly, it seems the pelican benchmark is now saturated. Time for Pelicanbench Pro!

I will never stop being fascinated with takes like this. Maybe you're right. But people said very similar things over the last few years and many of those statements look unbelievably naive in retrospect.

Sure, AI can auto-complete the line, but it can't write full functions.

Sure, AI can write functions, but it can't complete full features.

Sure, AI can write full features, but it can't build full applications.

Sure, AI can write full applications, but it can't build them in the right way / ask the right questions / write beautiful maintainable code / do what _I_ do..

Time will tell.

I more meant feature-level differences. For instance, Claude Code has agent teams, and Codex CLI does not. Or for a while, Codex had "/goal" and Claude Code did not (though now Claude Code has it too). To your point, it is usually possible to polyfill these gaps either with custom code/skills/hooks or with third party plugins.

This is "Feature Factory" thinking, and it is usually not ideal. Feature count is a poor metric to optimize against. Instead, ROI and delivered customer value should be the focus of product development investments.