[bcherny]

Hey, Boris from the Claude Code team here. I wanted to take a sec to explain the context for this change.

One of the hard things about building a product on an LLM is that the model frequently changes underneath you. Since we introduced Claude Code almost a year ago, Claude has gotten more intelligent, it runs for longer periods of time, and it is able to more agentically use more tools. This is one of the magical things about building on models, and also one of the things that makes it very hard. There's always a feeling that the model is outpacing what any given product is able to offer (ie. product overhang). We try very hard to keep up, and to deliver a UX that lets people experience the model in a way that is raw and low level, and maximally useful at the same time.

In particular, as agent trajectories get longer, the average conversation has more and more tool calls. When we released Claude Code, Sonnet 3.5 was able to run unattended for less than 30 seconds at a time before going off the rails; now, Opus 4.6 1-shots much of my code, often running for minutes, hours, and days at a time.

The amount of output this generates can quickly become overwhelming in a terminal, and is something we hear often from users. Terminals give us relatively few pixels to play with; they have a single font size; colors are not uniformly supported; in some terminal emulators, rendering is extremely slow. We want to make sure every user has a good experience, no matter what terminal they are using. This is important to us, because we want Claude Code to work everywhere, on any terminal, any OS, any environment.

Users give the model a prompt, and don't want to drown in a sea of log output in order to pick out what matters: specific tool calls, file edits, and so on, depending on the use case. From a design POV, this is a balance: we want to show you the most relevant information, while giving you a way to see more details when useful (ie. progressive disclosure). Over time, as the model continues to get more capable -- so trajectories become more correct on average -- and as conversations become even longer, we need to manage the amount of information we present in the default view to keep it from feeling overwhelming.

When we started Claude Code, it was just a few of us using it. Now, a large number of engineers rely on Claude Code to get their work done every day. We can no longer design for ourselves, and we rely heavily on community feedback to co-design the right experience. We cannot build the right things without that feedback. Yoshi rightly called out that often this iteration happens in the open. In this case in particular, we approached it intentionally, and dogfooded it internally for over a month to get the UX just right before releasing it; this resulted in an experience that most users preferred.

But we missed the mark for a subset of our users. To improve it, I went back and forth in the issue to understand what issues people were hitting with the new design, and shipped multiple rounds of changes to arrive at a good UX. We've built in the open in this way before, eg. when we iterated on the spinner UX, the todos tool UX, and for many other areas. We always want to hear from users so that we can make the product better.

The specific remaining issue Yoshi called out is reasonable. PR incoming in the next release to improve subagent output (I should have responded to the issue earlier, that's my miss).

Yoshi and others -- please keep the feedback coming. We want to hear it, and we genuinely want to improve the product in a way that gives great defaults for the majority of users, while being extremely hackable and customizable for everyone else.

[steinnes]

I can’t count how many times I benefitted from seeing the files Claude was reading, to understand how I could interrupt and give it a little more context… saving thousands of tokens and sparing the context window. I must be in the minority of users who preferred seeing the actual files. I love claude code, but some of the recent updates seem like they’re making it harder for me to see what’s happening.. I agree with the author that verbose mode isn’t the answer. Seems to me this should be configurable

[bcherny]

I think folks might be crossing wires a bit. To make it so you can see full file paths, we repurposed verbose mode to enable the old explicit file output, while hiding more details behind ctrl+o. In effect, we've evolved verbose mode to be multi-state, so that it lets you toggle back to the old behavior while giving you a way to see even more verbose output, while still defaulting everyone else to the condensed view. I hope this solves everyones' needs, while also avoiding overly-specific settings (we wanted to reuse verbose mode for this so it is forwards-compatible going fwd).

To try it: /config > verbose, or --verbose.

Please keep the feedback coming. If there is anything else we can do to adjust verbose mode to do what you want, I'd love to hear.

[verelo]

Not only what files, but what part of the files. Seeing 1-6 lines of a file that's being read is extremely frustrating, the UX of Claude code is average at best. Cursor on the other hand is slow and memory intensive, but at least I can really get a sense of what's going on and how I can work with it better.

[4gotunameagain]

> saving thousands of tokens and sparing the context window

shhh don't say that, they will never fix it if means you use less tokens.

[espeed]

Such as Claude Code reading your ssh keys. Hiding the file names masks the vulnerability.

[stingraycharles]

What annoys me is that I don’t have the choice anymore. It’s just decided that thinking is not possible to see anymore, files being read are very difficult to see, etc.

I understand that I’m probably not the target audience if I want to actually step in and correct course, but it’s annoying.

[ctoth]

I'm a screen reader user and CTO of an accessibility company. This change doesn't reduce noise for me. It removes functionality.

Sighted users lost convenience. I lost the ability to trust the tool. There is no "glancing" at terminal output with a screen reader. There is no "progressive disclosure." The text is either spoken to me or it doesn't exist.

When you collapse file paths into "Read 3 files," I have no way to know what the agent is doing with my codebase without switching to verbose mode, which then dumps subagent transcripts, thinking traces, and full file contents into my audio stream. A sighted user can visually skip past that. I listen to every line sequentially.

You've created a situation where my options are "no information" or "all information." The middle ground that existed before, inline file paths and search patterns, was the accessible one.

This is not a power user preference. This is a basic accessibility regression. The fix is what everyone in this thread has been asking for: a BASIC BLOODY config flag to show file paths and search patterns inline. Not verbose mode surgery. A boolean.

Please just add the option.

And yes, I rewrote this with Claude to tone my anger and frustration down about 15 clicks from how I actually feel.

[duncangh]

Dyslexic and also a prolific screen reader user myself. +1 and thank you for mentioning something that often gets (ironically) overlooked

[wahnfrieden]

Try Codex instead. Much greener pastures overall

[bcherny]

Hey -- we take accessibility seriously, and want Claude Code to work well for you. This is why we have repurposed verbose mode to do what you want, without the other verbose output. Please give it a try and let me know what you think.

[deaux]

Hi Boris, by far the most upvoted issue at 2550 on your github is "Support AGENTS.md" with 2550 upvotes. The second highest one has 563. Every single other agent supports AGENTS.md. Care to share why you haven't?

> Yoshi and others -- please keep the feedback coming. We want to hear it, and we genuinely want to improve the product in a way that gives great defaults for the majority of users, while being extremely hackable and customizable for everyone else.

I think an issue with 2550 upvotes, more than 4 times of the second-highest, is very clear feedback about your defaults and/or making it customizable.

[lgessler]

Let's be real here, regardless of what Boris thinks, this decision is not in his hands.

[bakugo]

> Every single other agent supports AGENTS.md. Care to share why you haven't?

Are you actually wondering, or just hoping to hear a confirmation of what you already know? Because the reason behind it is pretty clear, it doubles as both vendor lock-in and advertisement.

[patcon]

I'm sorry, this comment is opportunistic and a bit annoying to post here. Saying "keep the feedback coming" is not an invitation to turn this thread into the issue queue

[jarjoura]

I don't understand this take Boris:

> The amount of output this generates can quickly become overwhelming in a terminal

If I use Opus 4.6, arguably the most verbose, over thinking model you've released to date, OpenCode handles it just the same as it does Sonnet 4.0.

OpenCode even allows me to toggle into subagent and task agents with their own output terminals that, if I am curious what is going on, I can very clearly see it.

All Claude-Code has done has turned the output into a black box so that I am forced to wait for it to finish to look at the final git diff. By then it's spent $5-10 working on a task, and threw away a lot of the context it took to get there. It showed "thinking" blocks that weren't particularly actionable, because it was mostly talking to itself that it can't do something because it goes against a rule, but it really wants to.

I'm actually frustrated with Code blazing through to the end without me able to see the transcript of the changes.

[eoncode]

Sorry if this is just for giggles and doesn't add anything of value to the discussion, but I couldn't resist and asked Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Opus 4.6 to analyze the github issue that was opened.

Funnily enough, both independently sided with the users, not the authors.

The core problem: --verbose was repurposed instead of adding a new toggle. Users who relied on verbose for debugging (thinking, hooks, subagent output) now have broken workflows - to fix a UX decision that shouldn't have shipped as default in the first place.

What should have been done:

  /config
  Show file paths: [on/off]
  Verbose mode: [on/off]  (unchanged)

A simple separate toggle would've solved everything without breaking anyone's workflow.

Opus 4.6's parting thought: if you're building a developer tool powered by an AI that can reason about software design, maybe run your UX changes past it before shipping.

To be fair, your response explains the design philosophy well - longer trajectories, progressive disclosure, terminal constraints. All valid. But it still doesn't address the core point: why repurpose --verbose instead of adding a separate toggle? You can agree with the goal and still say the execution broke existing workflows.

[sdoering]

There are so many config options. Most I still need to truly deeply understand.

But this one isn't? I'd call myself a professional. I use with tons of files across a wide range of projects and types of work.

To me file paths were an important aspect of understanding context of the work and of the context CC was gaining.

Now? It feels like running on a foggy street, never sure when the corner will come and I'll hit a fence or house.

Why not introduce a toggle? I'd happily add that to my alisases.

Edit: I forgot. I don't need better subagent output. Or even less output whrn watching thinking traces. I am happy to have full verbosity. There are cases where it's an important aspect.

[bcherny]

You want verbose mode for this -- we evolved it to do exactly what you're asking for: verbose file reads, without seeing thinking traces, hook output, or (after tomorrow's release) full subagent output.

More details here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46982177

[Grimblewald]

I'm a Claude user who has been burned lately by how opaque the system has become. My workflows aren't long and my projects are small in terms of file count, but the work is highly specialized. It is "out of domain" enough that I'm getting "what is the seahorse emoji" style responses for genuine requests that any human in my field could easily follow. I've been testing Claude on small side projects to check its reliability. I work at the cutting edge of multiple academic domains, so even the moderate utiltity I have seen in this is exciting for me, but right now Claude cannot be trusted to get things right without constant oversight and frequent correction, often for just a single step. For people like me, this is make or break. If I cannot follow the reasoning, read the intent, or catch logic disconnects early, the session just burns through my token quota. I'm stuck rejecting all changes after waiting 5 minutes for it to think, only to have to wait 5 hours to try again. Without being able to see the "why" behind the code, it isn't useful. It makes typing "claude" into my terminal an exercise in masochism rather than the productivity boost it's supposed to be. I get that I might not be the core target demographic, but it's good PR for Anthropic if Claude is credited in the AI statements of major scientific publications. As it stands, trajectory in develeopment means I cannot in good conscience recommend Claude Code for scientific domains.

[tartoran]

>the session just burns through my token quota

Did you ever think that this may be Anthropic's goal? It is a waste for sure but it increases their revenue. Later on the old feature you were used to may resurface at a different tier so you'd have to pay up to get it.

[jatora]

What academic domains are you on the cutting edge of? Genuinely curious what specifically is beyond claude's capabilites

[SPICLK2]

I don't see how you can blame terminal applications - they typically have been able to dump around 1Mb of output per second for decades.

https://martin.ankerl.com/2007/09/01/comprehensive-linux-ter...

Could the React rendering stack be optimised instead?

[sigmarule]

I believe he is speaking of the effective resolution of TUIs, not pty throughput rates or fps, though I do agree with what you’re actually getting it.

[Aeolun]

> this resulted in an experience that most users preferred

I just find that very hard to believe. Does anyone actually do anything with the output now? Or are they just crossing their fingers and hoping for the best?

[bcherny]

Have you tried verbose mode? /config > verbose. It should do exactly what you are looking for now, without extraneous thinking/subagent/hook output. We hear the feedback!

[gwern]

> The amount of output this generates can quickly become overwhelming in a terminal, and is something we hear often from users. Terminals give us relatively few pixels to play with; they have a single font size; colors are not uniformly supported; in some terminal emulators, rendering is extremely slow. We want to make sure every user has a good experience, no matter what terminal they are using. This is important to us, because we want Claude Code to work everywhere, on any terminal, any OS, any environment.

If you are serious about this, I think there are so many ways you could clean up, simplify, and calm the Claude Code terminal experience already.

I am not a CC user, but an enthusiastic CC user generously spent an hour or two last week or so showing me how it worked and walking through an non-publicly-implemented Gwern.net frontend feature (some CSS/JS styling of poetry for mobile devices).

It was highly educational and interesting, and Claude got most of the way to something usable.

Yet I was shocked and appalled by the CC UI/UX itself: it felt like the fetal alcohol syndrome lovechild of a Las Vegas slot machine and Tiktok. I did not realize that all those jokes about how using CC was like 'crack' or 'ADHD' or 'gambling' were so on point, I thought they were more, well, metaphorical about the process as a whole. I have not used such a gross and distracting UI in... a long time. Everything was dancing and bouncing around and distracting me while telling me nothing. I wasted time staring at the update monitor trying to understand if "Prognosticating..." was different from "Fleeblegurbigating..." from "Reticulating splines...", while the asterisk bounces up and down, or the colored text fades in and out, all simultaneously, and most of the screen was wasted, and the whole thing took pains to put in as much fancy TUI nonsense as it could. An absolute waste, not whimsy, of pixels. (And I was a little concerned how much time we spent zoned out waiting on the whole shabang. I could feel the productivity leaving my body, minute by minute. How could I possibly focus on anything else while my little friendly bouncing asterisk might finish at any instant...?!) Some description of what files are being accessed seems like you could spare the pixels for them.

So I was impressed enough with the functionality to move it up my list, but also much of it made me think I should look into GPT Codex instead. It sounds like the interfaces there respect my time and attention more, rather than treating me like a Zoomer.

[gwern]

(An example of something which may already exist but I didn't see in my demo - more thoughtfulness on how to handle long-running tasks, and let us switch to something else, instead of us busy waiting on CC. For example, perhaps use of the system bell? That's usually set to flash or update the terminal title, and you can set your window manager to focus a window on the bell. I have my XMonad set to jump to a visible bell, which is great for invoking a possibly slow command: I can go away and focus completely on whatever else I am doing because I know I will be yanked to the backgrounded command the instant it finishes. I even set up a Bash shortcut, `alert () { echo -n -e '\a'; }`, so I simply run stuff like `foo ; alert` and go away.)

[patcon]

The default view hiding files read is fully a regression imho. It is so helpful for sense of control, nevermind trust and human agency.

Please revert this

[walt_grata]

Just give multiple options in the config file. Give us the current default, what you now call verbose mode and the previous verbose mode. If Claude is as effective as marketing claims then maintaining all 3 options should be trivially doable, we've been doing more complex configuration in tons of apps for decades.

[kache_]

Hey, It's Damage Control person from Corporate Revenue Maximizing Team here, <5 paragraphs>

[ivanb]

One thing this specific feature was letting me do is seeing when Claude Code takes a wrong turn, read a wrong memory MD file. I used to immediately interrupt and correct its course. Now it is more opaque and there is less of a hint at CC's reasoning.

[subscribed]

And you burn more tokens. Works as intended I guess.

[gigatexal]

Boris! Unrelated but thank you and the Anthropic team for Claude code. It’s awesome. I use it every day. No complaints. You all just keep shipping useful little UX things all the time. It must be because it’s being dogfooded internally. Kudos again to the team!

[lysace]

> Terminals give us relatively few pixels to play with; they have a single font size; colors are not uniformly supported; in some terminal emulators, rendering is extremely slow.

That's why I use your excellent VS Code extension. I have lots of screen space and it's trivial to scroll back there, if needed.

I would really like even more love given to this. When working with long-lived code bases it's important to understand what is happening. Lots of promising UX opportunities here. I see hints of this, but it seems like 80% is TBD.

Ideally you would open source the extension to really use the creativity of your developer user base. ;)

[_heimdall]

Based on the comments here, it sounds like repurposing a boolean "verbose" mode and having that verbose mode actually be multi-state is confusing.

It might be worth considering a "verbose level" type setting with a selection of levels that describe the level of verbosity. Effectively, use a select menu instead of a boolean when one boolean state is actually multiple nested states.

Edit: I realised my use of "verbose" and "verbosity" here is it self ironically verbose, sorry!

[jpcompartir]

Thanks for the long and considered response, but this is a really ugly UX decision.

As others have said - 'reading 10 files' is useless information - we want to be able to see at a glance where it is and what it's doing, so that we can re-direct if necessary.

With the release of Cowork, couldn't Claude Code double down on needs of engineers?

[giancarlostoro]

What is the best way to get you guys feedback? There's a few things I tell Claude Code to do every project that I feel like Claude should just do by default, the biggest one is instead of using Grep so much, I have ripgrep installed, it makes searching for text inside the current folder so much easier and it is insanely faster. Claude seems to work way faster when it uses ripgrep, I don't know if its because MCP has some slowness or ripgrep is just that much faster, but I don't remember grep ever being so slow to this level either.

[Wowfunhappy]

Claude’s search tool _does_ use use ripgrep—ripgrep literally ships with Cluade Code. I guess the agent can also decide to invoke `grep` directly instead of using its search tool. I usually only see it do this for small searches…

[bird0861]

add that to your claude.md

[keremk]

For me, Opus 2.6 has been a huge regression. It now hangs for 10+ minutes on a task that it used to take a few minutes to complete, and all I see is some "Reading 3 files" etc. messages showing nothing else. The 2 issues where Opus 2.6 is absolutely not as good as 2.5 at all by miles and also showing just some obscure unnecessary messages makes me say "why?" Why did you decide to screw something up that was awesome and dumb it down and keep insisting that the "verbose" mode is the way to go?? Seriously who wants to see messages that are essentially the same? 2 patterns, 3 files read?? Seriously? Who is that mode for? Why is it even a default??

[jiggawatts]

> in some terminal emulators, rendering is extremely slow.

Ooo... ooo! I know what this is a reference to!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxM8QmyZXtg

[jinus7949]

Hello Boris. First of all, I apologize for replying unrelated to your post or comment. The reason I'm leaving a comment is because there's a critical issue currently going on regarding new accounts, with over 100 people commenting. This issue has been open for over three weeks. I'd appreciate it if you could look into it.

https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/19673

[rcbdev]

There must have been a more concise way to write this damage control.

[rednafi]

Maybe I am missing something but this still doesn't explain why Claude Code couldn't expose a flag and be done with it as the author mentioned.

[gchamonlive]

So in a nutshell Claude becoming smarter means that logic that once resided in the agent is being moved to the model?

If that's the case, it's important to asses wether it'll be consistent when operating on a higher level, less dependent on the software layer that governs the agent. Otherwise it'll risk Claude also becoming more erratic.

[cyanydeez]

I'm going to be paranoid and guess they're trying to segment the users into those that'll notice they're dumbing down the system via caches, limited model via quantized downgrade and those that expect the fully available tools.

[nullbio]

The solution was simple for me: Cancel my max sub, start using Codex instead. Hopefully others do the same and Anthropic will learn to listen to their users.

[pvalue005]

Hi Boris, did Claude Code itself author this change? I am curious as you said that all of your recent PRs were authored by Claude Code. If that's the case, just wondering what objective did you ask it to optimize for? Was it something like: make the UI simpler?

[sh34r]

Why does everything have to be in the TUI? I like the TUI. But I also want all the logs. And I do mean all of them.

Of course all the logs can’t be streamed to a terminal. Why would they need to be? Every logging system out there allows multiple stream handlers with different configurations.

Do whatever reasonable defaults you think make sense for the TUI (with some basic configuration). But then I should also be able to give Claude-code a file descriptor and a different set of config optios, and you can stream all the logs there. Then I can vibe-code whatever view filter I want on top of that, or heck, have a SLM sub-agent filter it all for me.

I could do this myself with some proxy / packet capture nonsense, but then you’d just move fast and break my things again.

I’m also constantly frustrated by the fancier models making wrong assumptions in brownfield projects and creating a big mess instead of asking me follow-up questions. Opus is like the world’s shittiest intern… I think a lot of that is upstream of you, but certainly not all of it. There could be a config option to vary the system prompt to encourage more elicitation.

I love the product you’ve built, so all due respect there, but I also know the stench of enshittification when I smell it. You’re programmers, you know how logging is supposed to work. You know MCP has provided a lot of these basic primitives and they’re deliberately absent from claude code. We’ve all seen a product get ratfucked internally by a product manager who copied the playbook of how Prabhakar Raghavan ruined google search.

The open source community is behind at the moment, but they’ll catch up fast. Open always beats closed in the long run. Just look at OpenAI’s fall into disgrace.

[troupo]

> Opus 4.6 1-shots much of my code, often running for minutes, hours, and days at a time.

This is verifiable bullshit. Unless you explicitly explain how it "runs for days" since Opus's context window is incapable of handling even relatively large CLAUDE.md files.

> The amount of output this generates can quickly become overwhelming in a terminal, and is something we hear often from users. Terminals give us relatively few pixels to play with; they have a single font size; colors are not uniformly supported; in some terminal emulators, rendering is extremely slow.

No. It's your incapability as an engineer that limits this. And you and your engineers getting high on your own supply. Hence you need 16ms to draw a couple of characters on screen and call it a tiny game engine [1] For which your team was rightfully ridiculed.

> But we missed the mark for a subset of our users. To improve it,

AI-written corporate nothingspeak.

[1] https://x.com/trq212/status/2014051501786931427

[indemnity]

Do you feel that a terminal UX will remain your long term interface for Claude Code? Or would you consider a native interface like Codex has built?

[mnky9800n]

This kind of attitude, above all else, is why anthropic is winning imo. Thanks.

[adastra22]

Ignoring user input?

[2001zhaozhao]

At some point we need to start preferring GUIs instead of terminals as the AI starts giving us more and more information. Features like hover-over tooltips and toggle switches designed for mouse operation might really start to matter.

Maybe "AI IDEs" will gain ground in the future, e.g. vibe-kanban

[troupo]

We could do complicated UIs in terminals in the 1990s.

Unfortunately, vibe coders cannot do that anymore.

[bibabaloo]

Yes I don't understand why Claude code needs to be a terminal app.

It doesn't compose with any other command line program and the terminal interface is limiting.

I'm surprised nobody has yet made a coding assistant that runs in the browser or as a standalone app. At this point it doesn't really need to integrate with my text editor or IDE.

[metaltyphoon]

Please for the love of God no. I rather have something completely agnostic of an IDE. OpenCode is doing the right thing IMO

[ftchd]

boris-4.6-humble

[benn67]

I’m just some tinkerer and signed up just to say this. These are my thoughts after reading the blog post and ur response in full.

I subscribe to max rn. Tons of money. Anthropic’s Super Bowl ads were shit, not letting us use open code was shit, and this is more shit. Might only be a single straw left before I go to codex (no one’s complaining about it. And the openclaw creator prefers it)

This dev is clearly writing his reply with Claude and sounding way too corpo. This feels like how school teachers would talk to you. Your response in its length was genuinely insulting. Everyone knows how to generate text with AI now and you’re doing a terrible job at it. You can even see the emdash attempt (markdown renders two normal dashes as an emdash).

This was his prompt “read this blog post, familiarize yourself with the mentioned GitHub issue and make a response on behalf of Anthropic.” He then added a little bit at the end when he realized the response didn’t answer the question and got so to fix the grammar and spelling on that.

Your response is appropriate for the masses. But we’re not. We’re the so called hackers and read right through the bs. It’s not even about the feature being gone anymore.

There is a principle we uphold as “hackers” that doesn’t align with this that pisses people off a lot more than you think. I can’t really put my finger on it maybe someone can help me out.

PS About the Super Bowl ads. Anyone that knows the story knows they’re exaggerated. (In the general public outside of Silicon Valley it’s like a 50/50 split or something about people liking or disliking AI as a whole rn. OpenAI is doing way more to help the case (not saying ads are a good thing). ) Open ai used to feel like the bad guy now it’s kinda shifting to anthropic. This, the ads and open code are all examples of it. (I especially recommend people watch the anthropic and open ai Super Bowl ads back to back)

[retsibsi]

> This dev is clearly writing his reply with Claude

> You can even see the emdash attempt (markdown renders two normal dashes as an emdash)

He says he wrote it all manually.[0] Obviously I can't know if that's true, but I do think your internal AI detector is at least overconfident. For example, some of us have been regularly using the double hyphen since long before the LLM era. (In Word, it auto-corrects to an en dash, or to an em dash if it's not surrounded by spaces. In plain text, it's the best looking easily-typable alternative to a dash. AFAICT, it's not actually used for dashes in CommonMark Markdown.)

The rest is more subjective, but there are some things Claude would be unlikely to write (like the parenthetical "(ie. progressive disclosure)" -- it would write "i.e." with both dots, and it would probably follow it with a comma). Of course those could all be intentional obfuscations or minimal human edits, but IMO you are conflating the corporate communications vibe with the LLM vibe.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46982418

[andai]

Also open source CC already.

And stop banning 3rd party harnesses please. Thanks

Anthropic, your actual moat is goodwill. Remember that.

[xigoi]

> Anthropic, your actual moat is goodwill.

You mean the company that DDoSed websites to train their model?

[cactusplant7374]

In what terminals is rendering slow? I really think GPU acceleration for terminals (as seen in Ghostty) is silly. It's a terminal.

Edit: I can't post anymore today apparently because of dang. If you post a comment about a bad terminal at least tell us about the rendering issues.

[bcherny]

VSCode (xterm.js) is one of the worst, but there's a large long tail of slow terminals out there.

[latchkey]

As someone who's business is run through a terminal, not everyone uses ghostty, even though they should. Remember, that they don't have a windows version.

[kaizenb]

Thanks Boris, great insights for builders.

[Paodim]

clause is perfect every time, no quibbles, the IT industry is simply has to adapt to the new shift. surely people who earn a living by writing code will find fault with it, but even with Claude, code will not write itself, its a simple shift from writing code to make code work better/integrate/tweak/refine/personalize/customize it, thank you Boris and team we are over the moon over

[Paodim]

I am not a programmer and detest the terminal environment, while I design complexity, i need simple interfaces, claude is now guiding all dev based on my initial design spec, makes beatuful notebooks that can be uploaded directly to colab or github, no UX at all, no usability issues, this is the lastet baby we made yesterday starborn.github.io/copp-notebook thank you Claude engineering team for something that is flying very high and takes me with it, starborn.github.io/copp-notebook

[1718627440]

> I am not a programmer and detest the terminal environment

As someone who finds formal language a natural and better interface for controlling a computer, can you explain how and why you actually hate it? I mean not stuff like lack of discoverability, because you use a shell that lacks completion and documentation, that have been common for decades, I get those downsides, but why do you detest it in principle?

[Jean-Papoulos]

You've reached the stage where if something is possible in CC, someone out there is using it. Taking anything away will have them ask for it back ; you need to let people toggle things. https://xkcd.com/1172/

[notanastronaut]

It's got to be hard to find the right balance, what works for most users, and somehow include those who have workflows that involve using a rapid temperature rise as a way to signal a control. <xkcd1172>

[exabrial]

@boris

Can we please move the "Extended Thinking" icon back to the left side of claude desktop, near the research and web search icons? What used to be one click is now three.

[eldarrr]

so its the users who are dumb :-)

[tom_m]

Yea yea, that's a cool story, but can you make it cheaper maybe?

[holoduke]

To be honest I think there should be an option to completely hide all code that Claude generates and uses. Summaries, strategies, plans, logs, decisions and questions is all I need. I am convinced that in a few years nobody cares about the programming language itself.

[NateEag]

Please don't post LLM output and pretend it's your writing.

I never thought I'd long for the days when people posted "$LLM says" comments, but at least those were honest.

[Wowfunhappy]

On the contrary, I feel like most AI products aimed at non-programmers haven't really set the world on fire, with the exception of the basic chatbot interface (ie ChatGPT).

Focusing on programmers seems to have really worked for Anthropic. (And they do also have Claude Cowork).

[nubg]

this was written with claude lmao what a disgrace not to put a disclaimer.

use your own words!

i would rather read the prompt.

[benn67]

Same. It feels like an insult to read someone’s ai generated stuff. They put no effort into writing it but we now have to put extra effort to reading it because it’s longer than normal.

[lombasihir]

ok claude

[gambiter]

> We can no longer design for ourselves, and we rely heavily on community feedback to co-design the right experience. We cannot build the right things without that feedback.

How can that be true, when you're deliberately and repeatedly telling devs (the community you claim to listen to) that you know better than they do? They're telling you exactly what they want, and you're telling them, "Nah." That isn't listening. You understand that, right?

[adriand]

I’m witnessing him respond in real time with not just feedback but also actual changes, in a respectful and constructive manner - which is not easy to do, when there are people who communicate in this rude of a manner. If that’s not listening, then I don’t know what is.

And it shouldn’t need to be said, but the words that appear on the screen are from an actual person with, you know, feelings.

[puppymaster]

interesting. they have been pretty receptive to my pull comments and discourse on issues. To each's anecdote I suppose.

[fasbiner]

This is an extremely disappointing response. The issue is your dev relations people being shitty and unhelpful and trying to solve actual problems with media-relations speak as if engineers are just going to go away in a few days.

Arrogant and clueless, not exactly who I want to give my money to when I know what enshitification is.

They have horrible instincts and are completely clueless. You need to move them away from a public-facing role. It honestly looks so bad, it looks so bad that it suggests nepotism and internal dysfunction to have such a poor response.

This is not the kind of mistake someone makes innocently, it's a window into a worldview that's made me switch to gemini and reactivate cursor as a backup because it's only going to get worse from here.

The problem is not the initial change (which you would rapidly realize was a big deal to a huge number of your users) but how high-handed and incompetent the initial response was. Nobody's saying they should be fired, but they've failed in public in a huge way and should step back for a long time.

[latchkey]

This is an insanely good response. History, backstory, we screwed up, what we're doing to fix it. Keep up the great work!

[ares623]

would've been better to post the prompt directly IMO

[rmujica]

it reads like AI generated or at least AI assisted... those -- don't fool me!