robluxus

> For example, one operator’s price-comparison site listed a package that bought the equivalent of $3,333 worth of official Anthropic credit for 425 RMB — roughly $0.13 of usage per $1 spent.

Do these numbers make sense? $0.13 usage per $1 spent?

Maybe OP just used an ai editor to add their silly comments, so that would be fair game I guess? Or some humans just add silly comments. The article didn't stand out to me as emberrassingly ai-written. Not an em dash in sight :)

Edit: just found this disclaimer in the article:

> I’ll show the generating R code, with a liberal sprinking of comments so it’s hopefully not too inscrutable.

Doesn't come out the gate and say who wrote the comments but ostensibly OP is a new grad / junior, the commenting style is on-brand.

Interesting comment. Why is it common decency to call out how much ai was used for generating an artifact?

Is there a threshold? I assume spell checkers, linters and formatters are fair game. The other extreme is full-on ai slop. Where do we as a society should start to feel the need to police this (better)?

This is the actual essence of CATB, has very little to with your analogy:

-----

> The software essay contrasts two different free software development models:

> The cathedral model, in which source code is available with each software release, but code developed between releases is restricted to an exclusive group of software developers. GNU Emacs and GCC were presented as examples.

> The bazaar model, in which the code is developed over the Internet in view of the public. Raymond credits Linus Torvalds, leader of the Linux kernel project, as the inventor of this process. Raymond also provides anecdotal accounts of his own implementation of this model for the Fetchmail project

-----

Source: Wikipedia

> I just want to putz around with something in VSCode for a few hours!

I just googled "using claude from vscode" and the first page had a link that brought me to anthropic's step by step guide on how to set this up exactly.

Why care about pricing and product names and UI until it's a problem?

> Someone on HN told me Copilot sucks, use Claude.

I concur, but I'm also just a dude saying some stuff on HN :)

Maybe I just haven't worked at a large enough company yet, but it's fascinating to me how in some organizations a very common sense exercise of "let's have some stakeholders sit down and reason about what everyone wishes to do" could be revolutionary.

That scenario moves the goalpost towards a losing proposition. You have two important and urgent things and already know you fail at least one of them.

TFA is about non urgent important tasks that you want to show incremental progress on. If there are multiple of those then those short bursts of works actual work can be eaten up by context switching, reprioritization, scheduling, etc.

Do you use a specialized LLM for diagrams?

Yes. They are in the important but not urgent quadrant of the Eisenhower matrix.

This (ie. using the github issues on the repo) is great because it co-locates the mental notes breadcrumbs, the todo list and the project itself.

I use org-mode for personal project management, and by design it intermingles notes and todos. But it never fully clicked until I started putting the notes closer and closer to my repo (my workflow pre-dates github, but this approach makes me consider some modernization :))

This seems to work well for me when I only have a single (highest priority) project for the next couple months. But as soon as I have competing priorities, the context switches (or scheduling overhead) kill all the momentum that I could build up with small increments.