Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | atonse's commentslogin

Honestly, I have zero issues with legalizing marijuana (I'm not an expert on the effects), but I just don't like how the smell really travels and overwhelms local areas nowadays. Fair or not, I think it smells stronger than cigarette smoke (which smells more like a neutral smoke maybe?) so has a higher annoyance factor.

So over time, I've gotten more in the camp of "completely ok with the gummies being legal, not so sure about the smoking part anymore" - anyone else feel that way?


I fully agree. I personally think it should be at least socially unacceptable, or potentially ticketable, to smoke/vape anything in such a way that it someone that doesn't want to smell it can smell it. If someone wants to smoke on their land in the middle of nowhere I don't care, but if you live in society you can get your marijuana/nicotine fix without bothering everyone in your vicinity.

I am thankful to live in a town with a full ban on public smoking; weed and tobacco are legal to buy, just not to smoke or vape in the city center.

It's a clear and rational line - do unto yourself if you must, but keep the air clean and don't force others to share your nasty habit.


Yeah, the smell is sticky. Manhattan and Las Vegas seem to be full of stoners, if my nose is to be believed.

It makes me wonder how undetectable we really were when we smoked up when we were kids. I mean dang, I can smell the weed half a block from Chipotle after 9pm.


I have some neighbors who smoke weed...and you know Seattle rains most of the year but when late spring/summer comes we have to sometimes close our bedroom window at night and turn on the AC because the neighbors decided to just sit out in their backyard and smoke weed until 2 AM. Thankfully it doesn't happen super often.

I was an early user of conductor and used it a lot (like from maybe oct to Jan). But then there was some bug where maybe it wouldn’t release file descriptors or something where my laptop needed to be rebooted twice a day. So I stopped using it months ago.

But I’ve tried to reinstall it since and it just gets stuck in a weird infinite loop.

I liked conductor though. Hope you are able to fix those bugs and I can try again in a few weeks.


So to save the idea of $300 (logo design with "local" talent is never $300, it is only that cheap if you offshore it), they tried to ruin a business that presumably employs multiple LOCAL people full time (way more than $300) with 1 star reviews to "punish it"

This is an internet mob at its worst. Not an example of anything to emulate, in my opinion.


People hate AI, and this is one of very few ways people have to punish AI. It is bound to happen.

And in either case, this example destroys the framing that coffee shop owners are the ones who benefit from the systemic art theft employed by AI companies.


Except we can’t discount the fact that Jobs chose Cook as his successor. So there’s something Jobs clearly saw there, past being “diametrically opposed” to Jobs’ product obsession. Maybe Jobs felt there were enough product people.

Eh I don't see how this makes any sense. It's a huge corporation built on a legacy app that's just been near impossible to modernize despite their best efforts, what's the benefit?

My guess is that Atlassian is getting ready to just ditch Rovo and make a big push to embed Claude maybe?


Just yesterday I was happy to have gotten my weekly limit reset [1]. And although I've been doing a lot of mockup work (so a lot of HTML getting written), I think the 1M token stuff is absolutely eating up tokens like CRAZY.

I'm already at 27% of my weekly limit in ONE DAY.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47799256


I'm seeing the opposite. With Opus 4.7 and xhigh, I'm seeing less session usage , it's moving faster, and my weekly usage is not moving that much on a Team Pro account.

Four day workweek!

My personal Claude sub (Pro), I can burn through my limit in a couple of hours when using Opus. It's borderline unusable unless you're willing to pay for extended usage or artificially slow yourself down.

To me, it seems like the Pro tier is priced for using Sonnet a lot or Opus a little, and Max for using Opus a lot.

So that seems about what you should expect.


yeah similar for me - it uses a bunch more tokens and I haven’t been able to tell the ROI in terms of better instruction following

it seems to hallucinate a bit more (anecdotal)


I had it hallucinate a tool that didn't exist, it was very frustrating!

Anthropic intruduces fake tool calls to prevent distillation of their models. Others still distill. Anthropic distils third party models. Claude now hallucinates tools.

Brilliant.


> I'm already at 27% of my weekly limit in ONE DAY.

Ouch, that's very different than experience. What effort level? Are you careful to avoid pushing session context use beyond 350k or so (assuming 1m context)?


Yeah fair point. I have had a couple of conversations (ingesting a pretty complex domain and creating about 42 high fidelity tailwind mockups with ui.sh).

And this particular set of things has context routinely hit 350-450k before I compact.

That's likely what it is? I think this particular work stream is eating a lot of tokens.

Earlier this week (before Open 4.7 hit), I just turned off 1m context and had it grow a lot slower.

I also have it on high all the time. Medium was starting to feel like it was making the occasional bad decisions and also forgetting things more.


I'm mind blown people are complaining about token consumption and not communicating what thinking level they're using - if cost is a concern and you're paying any attention, you'd be starting with medium and seeing if you can get better results with less tokens. Every person complaining about token usage seem to have no methodology - probably using max and completely oblivious.

It's unsurprising when this is the first day that tokens have been crazy like this.

All of us doing crazy agentic stuff were fine on max before this. Now with Opus 4.7, we're no longer fine, and troubleshooting, and working through options.


> were fine on max before this

Ya...you may be who I'm talking about though (if you're speaking from experience). If your methodology is "I used 4.6 max, so I'm going to try 4.7 max" this is fully on you - 4.7 max is not equivalent to 4.6 max, you want 4.7 xhigh.

From their docs:

max: Max effort can deliver performance gains in some use cases, but may show diminishing returns from increased token usage. This setting can also sometimes be prone to overthinking. We recommend testing max effort for intelligence-demanding tasks.

xhigh (new): Extra high effort is the best setting for most coding and agentic use cases.


Sorry, in that case I misunderstood max to mean the subscription, max 20.

I am on xhigh.


Ah - xhigh is probably what you want. Their docs suggest xhigh for agentic coding, though judging by their blog high should be better than 4.6 max (ymmv)

I've always used high, so maybe I should be using xhigh


I'm actually in the process of switching all of my agents to sonnet, and going to try to drop down to medium.

I used up 1/3rd of my context in less than a day. I am working diligently to do whatever I can to lower token usage.


Iam at 22%, just two task. A bug fixing and a Scalar integration.

I'm at 35% :(

Tools like Figma are for an era (and persona) who still wants to have all the various knobs and dials to dial in exactly what they want. And that is one way of working if, like you said people are trying to be more thoughtful and know exactly what they want.

But for the other 95% of people, being able to just say "ok can you make it look more modern" and have 4 variants in 5 mins, (like me) Figma will lose users like me.

But then again I was never a "designer" – more a builder.


> Tools like Figma are for an era (and persona) who still wants to have all the various knobs and dials to dial in exactly what they want

The Anthropic video on that page at 0:53 literally shows them clicking a "knobs" button and adjusting the pixel CSS value.

I know it's not exactly the same ... but it has that functionality to a degree.


> But then again I was never a "designer" – more a builder.

Same here. I work in Claude Code all day long on slightly complex b2b apps, and the builder MVP for what I want to do with Claude.ai, to work on ideas is far simpler.

I just want to be able to create a React artifact prototype on claude.ai, then share it privately with a stakeholder (internal or external.) I want to allow those users to prompt changes, then see their changes in the artifact.

The bespoke design is not what I am really worried about at this phase. For b2b prototype stuff, claude.ai already does an excellent job with just a bit of project-specific prompting.

Why is this shared artifact building not yet doable? This seems "so simple." Yes, maybe some shared artifact specific git to allow version control is required, but is my ask really that hard, or unique?


I'm much closer to your persona than a professional designer. 5 years ago if I was going to spin up a landing page for a side project I was probably getting something mediocre together with bootstrap or material UI. Today I'd probably get something marginally better together with a tool like this. In both scenarios I'd end up with an undifferentiated but acceptable end state.

I've never paid for a figma seat. A couple of employers have so that I can collaborate with designers in the product, but I don't think this changes that.

In an era where it's cheaper and more common to end up at that undifferentiated state, the ability for companies to make their products go above and beyond it is more valuable, not less.

I see this across the board with AI. It lowers the bar to get to passable, but as slop fills the internet we're already seeing people place more value in good products, good writing, good art, thoughtful code architecture, etc. Everyone and their cousin's uber driver is vibe coding a SaaS startup no one's going to pay for right now.


> good writing, good art, thoughtful code architecture

If you are talking about a consumer product, one of these is not like the others.


[flagged]


Ah, slopper is hilarious. Too long has the title of builder just been an excuse to make dog shit UI and excusing yourself. If you're going to build user-facing tools, good UI/UX is a requirement not an option. Couldn't imagine this excuse flying in any other industry. Yeah I just made a chair where all 4 legs are different lengths and the back rest is in the middle of the seat, "I'm just more of a builder"

Would you like to attempt a more good faith interpretation on what I meant, and address that (you can even imagine doing this in front a user/client and iterating in minutes with them, ultimately getting even better outcomes), instead of inventing the most un-generous interpretation of what I said, that I'm just adding AI slop?

> > But for the other 95% of people, being able to just say "ok can you make it look more modern" and have 4 variants in 5 mins, (like me) Figma will lose users like me.

This does not describe thoughtful, good work. At best, this will be a one-armed bandit deal where you're gambling on something good in these 5 minutes. It sure sounds like a scenario where you will mostly accidentally end up with something good.


I don’t think I can interpret it in better faith. You’re excusing low quality output by calling yourself a “builder” (meaningless term btw), is “slopper” not an accurate term here? How else would you describe somebody who spends 5 minutes prompting an LLM on one of the most important aspects of a product?

Everyone who creates something is a “builder”, that term doesn’t excuse someone from not putting effort in. I don’t care if you aren’t a designer, it’s about the effort you put into your work :)


The obvious bad faith part of your argument is assuming that it's "low quality output." Another is using a blanket negative and dismissive term like slopper, without taking a chance to actually see the work output (at least in my case).

You also clearly misread what I said. I didn't say I spent 5 minutes prompting an LLM. I say the ability to get FEEDBACK (a revision) in 5 minutes is amazing. And I stand by that. That allows me to do 20 more revisions and do in a couple of hours what would take two weeks.

You seem to be romanticizing the concept of grunt work – that for something to have value or be of good quality, you have to put in some sort of minimum amount of time on it, and it has to be tedious. It's the same concept that nobody can make a good quality piece of furniture unless they used a hand saw and spoke sweet nothings to the tree before it was cut.

There are ways to do things quicker while preserving quality. I had already left a caveat saying that for the 5% of people that really want to push web design forward, totally, go ahead. But for the rest of us (including those of us who have lived and breathed code and engineering principles for decades), these tools are phenomenal for iterating quickly.

Anyway, the term builder is more about separating the goals from a vanilla "programmer" - even though i've programmed my whole life, it's always been in service of an outcome. And the outcome is almost never "good code for the sake of good code" - it has to serve a real outcome in the real world.

By the way, lots of good designers are also using coding agents now, so you can keep romanticizing grunt work while most of the market moves on.


> But for the other 95% of people, being able to just say "ok can you make it look more modern" and have 4 variants in 5 mins, (like me) Figma will lose users like me.

Perhaps this phrasing is what invited the interpretation you seem to be annoyed with.

There is not much to gain by suggesting everyone is simply bad faith.


No the bad faith part comes from assuming that the output is low quality, and that just because I get _feedback_ in five minutes (read again what I said) it somehow implies that I spent 5 minutes on it and then moved on, never to revisit.

I think you like the other person is assuming that 5 minutes = low quality. Instead of thinking "5 mins means you can make 8-10 iterations in an hour" or "5 minutes making the front end look pretty good means I can spend more time on the backend"

There are many good faith ways to interpret this.


There are many ways to interpret this, yes. I only mean to disrupt the framing you keep asserting of good and bad faith, I'm still not sure I understand what you are getting at.

No one is assuming the output is strictly low quality from what I can tell. I am personally evaluating the method you provided, which suggested you are championing a sloppy but highly iterative design flow against a seasoned curated suite for defining design. I dont see any reason to assume the other comment was doing anything otherwise.

You made a broad generalized strong claim and were met with the opposing force, which is actually acting from their own understanding of good faith, believe it or not (see how this analysis is void of meaning?).


I've been spending the last two days building a large number of mockups for a new product. Literally the last two days.

I'm wondering how i can CONTINUE that in this design thing, can i import something? Because they show it the other way... you can start and edit, and then export to claude code.

Until then, I guess it's back to just using CC


From the page:

> Import from anywhere. Start from a text prompt, upload images and documents (DOCX, PPTX, XLSX), or point Claude at your codebase. You can also use the web capture tool to grab elements directly from your website so prototypes look like the real product.


Thank you, I should RTFA next time.

Wonder what would happen if we unleashed Karpathy’s autoresearch on the pelican bicycle test. And had it read back the image to judge it.

Oh maybe it might continue to iterate on the existing drawing?


I've been using up way more tokens in the past 10 days with 4.6 1M context.

So I've grown wary of how Anthropic is measuring token use. I had to force the non-1M halfway through the week because I was tearing through my weekly limit (this is the second week in a row where that's happened, whereas I never came CLOSE to hitting my weekly limit even when I was in the $100 max plan).

So something is definitely off. and if they're saying this model uses MORE tokens, I'm getting more nervous.


Well I thought maybe Anthropic read this because my weekly limit (which I just hit, 24 hours before it resets), was just set back to 0.

But they're doing it for everyone (Max, Teams, etc). I guess I'm not a special snowflake! Let's hope the usage limits are a bit more forgiving here.


They reduced the cache TTL to one hour so if you leave your prompt sitting idle for an hour at 700,000 tokens the next time you hit enter send it it will be completely uncached and eat a ton of tokens. Something to look at.

Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: