I'm not condoning vandalism but I can empathize with the feeling that this alien thing is in my personal space, is a motorized vehicle on the sidewalk, is just as likely to cause a fall that no one will be held accountable for, and is taking a job from someone. I can see how that would be rage inducing. Perhaps surrounding it with traffic cones would be a better plan than actually damaging it.
I lived in Philadelphia (center city) and my other reaction based on simply attempting to keep a flowerpot on doorstep is, why have people not just stolen it yet?
These devices are a form of social pollution, whereby the desires and demands of others are mechanically proxied into common spaces.
When you negotiate others on the causeway, you are involved in human one-on-one exchanges with parity; each encountering the others on the level of interpersonal status, which is about the ways humans observe respect for each other.
But there can be no respect given nor received with a robot. It's an engine that's in competition for your space, presents as both a mechanical advantage and as handicapped, is not interesting nor appropriate to meet, and generally responds so stupidly and unpredictably that it's hazardous-- which makes its insertion into the commons an offense.
Combine the need for vigilance and avoidance with the realization that the robot annoyance is a proxy for someone else's privilege and as robots are instruments of private property extending deeply into common spaces and it's not a surprise to find people who are encroached upon by robots manifesting their displeasure through sabotage.
So, you feel the people who are providing software for free now somehow owe you support as well now that it is so easy to build software? How about making the onus on you to fix the bugs with a PR or two in the open source product you use?
I am not talking about free open source software here.
Two things I meant more specifically:
- Not every indie product is open source, so “send a PR” is often not an option.
- I am mainly talking about paid products. If a developer charges money and asks users to trust them early, I think some basic follow-through comes with that.
I have a lot of respect for open source maintainers. That is a very different relationship.
Why do you say they are not eating their own dogfood? That phrase seems to suggest something different to me than "crappy support". I'm not condoning crappy support but are there any 'at scale" SaaS platforms that actually have support?
I also don't want to be the bad guys here but:
"I'm paying $200/month for Claude Max on my own dime, not my company's. I'm a Technology Director at a Fortune 50 company, using Claude personally to learn and then advocate for the right tools in our enterprise environment. That context matters for what follows."
No it does not. It makes no difference if you pay or your company pays or if your product is making money or you are self-educating. If you feel that you are not getting a $200/month return on your investment then you should cancel your subscription. I also struggle to understand why you are using a $200/month plan to do investigation and testing when there are $25/month options.
Fair pushback on the framing. "Dogfooding" to me means: does Anthropic rely on their own product under real-world conditions enough that they feel these pain points and prioritize fixing them? It's less about support and more about product reliability signals. On the credentials — you're right, it reads like I'm fishing for VIP treatment. That wasn't the intent; the point was about how enterprise AI adoption actually works (practitioners test, validate, then advocate up the chain). I probably led with it too hard. And on the $200 plan: I'm running multi-agent workflows via Claude Code that are coming close to saturating even Max tier limits — the $25 option isn't a realistic fit for that workload and I was hitting my limits quite a bit. This is to build a couple personal projects but also give it a true test of how it would be used from an enterprise perspective vs. my side projects. No doubt there is some room for me to optimize as I learn more though. Hopefully I won't need to spend $200/month in the future when I'm more skilled with my prompts, use of projects, etc. That is another opportunity to leverage an agentic framework to assist users with adoption though (which might also help to manage their scaling challenges.)
I've thought about this a bit and I can't really see why someone would want to write AI content here other than to spam ads but they are handled quickly. Does anyone see AI content with a clear motivation or agenda here? There are very few rep based privileges right so that seems like an unlikely motivation as well.
Most of the HN bot accounts I see have a link-to-vibecoded-product in bio, and/or are trying to build up "organic" activity before a Show HN post for the same.
A less publicly-visible motive would be if they were building up accounts to use for paid-upvote schemes.
This is a venture capitalist driven community that attracts the sleaziest kind of spammers you could think of under the badge of growth hacking and networking. Besides this very obvious motivation to spam you have all kinds of nerds here eager to do it just because they can (on one of the most famous tech places where registration is made as easy as possible)
If even one person in a repo does not disable this will copilot have full access to the repo? How can I determine if other members of my team have turned this off or not?
I agree with OP, but I don't have a solid reason or precedent. In my case, I get the "high school bully" vibe from the current regime and its militant supporters. Bullies don't like it when a group doesn't fear and adulate them, so I just assume censorship of subcultures is coming soon.
In a merchantilist culture entrepreneurs are not exactly prized. I'll bet the presidential family acquihires a whole lot of small companies.
I lived in Philadelphia (center city) and my other reaction based on simply attempting to keep a flowerpot on doorstep is, why have people not just stolen it yet?
reply