> prompts where we'd ask for e.g. 15 sections, would only do 10 sections and then ask "Would you like me to continue?".
I can’t speak to any kind of identifiable pattern but man that behavior drives me up the wall when it happens.
When I run into a specific task that starts to trigger that behavior, even a clean session with explicit instructions directing it to complete ALL sub steps isn’t enough to push it to finish the entire request to the end.
What I learned from all this is that OpenAI is willing to offer a service compatible with my preferred workflow/method of billing and Anthropic clearly is not. That's fine but disappointing, I'm keeping my Codex subscription and letting my Claude subscription lapse but sure, it would be nice if Anthropic changed their mind to keep that option available because yes, I do want it.
I'm a bit perplexed by some comments describing the situation like OpenCode users were getting something for free and stealing from CC users when the plan quota was enforced either way and were paying the same amount for it. Or why you seem to think this post pointing out that Anthropic's direct competitor endorses that method of subscription usage is somehow malicious or manipulative behavior.
Commerce is a two-way street and customers giving feedback/complaining/cancelling when something changes is normal and healthy for competition. As evidenced by OpenAI immediately jumping in to support OpenCode users on Codex without needing to break their TOS.
Idk if I disagree with anything you're saying, I'm just saying it's a very small minority that and are upset enough to both cancel and announce they are cancelling their subscription is all.
I think I just understand that companies only offer heavily subsidized services in return for something - in this case Anthropic gets a few things - to tell investors how many daily actives are on CC, and a % of CC users opting into data sharing. Plus control of their UX, more feedback on their product, future opportunities to show messages, etc. It's really just obvious and normal and I don't get why anyone would be upset that they removed OC access.
I recently mentioned in another comment that Fedora 43 on my Ideapad is the first “just works” experience I’ve had with my multi monitor setup(s) on anything other than Windows 11 (including MacOS where I needed to pay for Better Display to reach the bar of “tolerable”).
Zero fiddling necessary other than picking my ideal scaling percentage on each display for perfect, crisp text with everything sanely sized across all my monitors/TVs.
I gave up on Linux Mint for that exact reason. I wasted so much time trying to fine tune fonts and stuff to emulate real fractional scaling. Whenever I thought I finally found a usable compromise some random app would look terrible on one of the monitors and I’d be back at square one.
Experimental Wayland on Linux
Mint just wasn’t usable unfortunately and tbh wasn’t a big fan of Cinnamon in general (I just really hated dealing with snaps on Ubuntu). I did tweak Gnome to add minimize buttons/bottom dock again and with that it’s probably my favorite desktop across any version of Linux/MacOS/Windows I’ve ever used!
I kept reading endorsements of Fedora's level of polish/stability on HN but was kinda nervous having used Debian distros my entire life and I’m really happy I finally took the plunge. Wish I tried it years ago!
> I kept reading endorsements of Fedora's level of polish/stability on HN but was kinda nervous having used Debian distros my entire life and I’m really happy I finally took the plunge. Wish I tried it years ago!
This. I don't know why, but people forget about Fedora when considering distros. They rather fight Arch than try Fedora. So, did I. Maybe its Redhat. Wish I switched earlier, too. (Although I heard this level of polish wasn't always the case.)
I love Fedora so much. Everything just works, but that's not that special compared to Ubuntu. What is special is the fucking sanity throughout the whole system. Debian based distros always have some legacy shit going on. No bloat, no snap, nothing breaking convention and their upgrade model sits in the sweet spot between Ubuntu's 4 year LTS cycle and Arch's rolling release. Pacman can rot in hell, apt is okay, but oh boy, do I love dnf.
Tho, Fedora has some minor quirks, which still make it hard to recommend for total beginners without personal instructions/guidance IMO. Like the need for RPMFusion repos and the bad handling/documentation of that. Not a problem if you know at all what a package manager, PKI and terminal is, but too much otherwise.
I dual booted Fedora back when it was still called Fedora Core from version 6 until 11-ish. I had it installed on a laptop and had a lot of driver issues with it and eventually didn't bother with dual booting when I moved to a new laptop.
I'm now looking to get off Windows permanently before security updates stop for Win 10 as I have no intention of upgrading to Win 11 since Linux gaming is now a lot more viable and was the only remaining thing holding me back from switching earlier. I've been considering either Bazzite (a Fedora derivative with a focus on gaming) or Mint but after reading your comment I may give vanilla Fedora a try too.
So far I've tried out the Bazzite Live ISO but it wouldn't detect my wireless Xbox controller though that may be a quirk of the Live ISO. I'm going to try a full install on a flash drive next and see if that fixes things.
Give it a try! Although, I do all my gaming on a Playstation. In Fedora, the Steam and NVIDIA Fusion repos come preinstalled and can be enabled during installation or in Gnome's 'Software' or the package manager later, but I can't speak to that. The opensource AMD drivers are in the main repo no action needed. ROCm too, but that can be messy and is work-in-progress on AMD's side. Can't vouch for the controller, but people claim they work. Guess, that's the live image. I heard, games with anti-cheat engines in the kernel categorically don't work with Linux, but this may change at some point. In that case, or if you want "console mode", a specific gaming distro may be worth considering, otherwise I would stick to vanilla. Good luck! Hope I didn't promise too much ;)
You are right, I got that mixed up. To be fair, I somehow also thought of yearly releases for Fedora, which isn't the case. It's every six months, so the relation remains identical, just off by a factor of 2 :D
The first time I’ve had my multi-monitor setup(s) “just work” on Linux is recently installing Fedora 43 on my Ideapad. (After becoming exhausted trying to tweak Linux Mint to get tolerable sizing across all the screens).
Wayland per-monitor fractional scaling is delightful and after a couple gsettings tweaks restoring minimize/bottom dock I’ve been loving the polish and snappiness of Gnome. I also had to switch the WiFi backend from wpa_supplicant to iwn due to connection problems on one specific WiFi network but now it’s totally stable.
macOS multi-monitor support and scaling is a constant thorn in my side that was marginally improved by paying for Better Display. Windows 11 really is the most solid option for various monitor combinations not in Apple's happy path of resolutions/sizes.
But I don’t really like the ergonomics of using even clean de-bloated Windows as my main dev machine, so was very pleased to have such a great out-of-the-box experience trying Fedora for the first time.
It persists across updates, can be customized with extremely granular control over what is removed/re-enabled, or using the default mode which works fantastically for most users with minimal risk of disabling something many people might prefer to keep (e.g Xbox app).
I’ve been using it for years on every machine/VM with Windows 11 installed. The OS gets out of my way completely both in terms of functionality and distractions like ads.
I cannot recommend it enough, I am eternally grateful to the maintainers for making Windows 11 feel like a modernized Windows 7 experience.
Ugh, well at least this was the nudge I needed to cancel my Claude Pro subscription... I've already had a bad taste in my mouth watching the rate limits on the plan get worse and worse since I first subscribed and I have a few other subscriptions to fall back on while I've been evaluating different options. I literally never use the regular Claude Chat web UI either, that's pretty much 100% Gemini since I get it via my Google One plan.
OpenCode makes me feel a lot better knowing that my workflow isn't completely dependent on single vendor lock-in, and I generally prefer the UX to Claude Code anyway.
Exactly, if a comment just feels a little off but you're unsure, do a quick scan of the profile, takes 15-30 seconds at most to get sufficient signal.
If it's actually AI, the pattern becomes extremely obvious reading them back-to-back. If no clear pattern, I'll happily give them the benefit of the doubt at that point. I don't particularly care if someone occasionally cleans up a post with an LLM as long as there is a real person driving it and it's not overused.
The other day on Reddit I saw a post in r/sysadmin that absolutely screamed karma farming AI and it was really depressing seeing a bunch of people defending them as the victim of an anti-AI mob without noticing the entire profile was variations of generic "Does anyone else dislike [Tool X], am I alone? [generic filler] What does everyone else think?" posts.
That happy path works okay for a while but provides very little margin for when the battery inevitably starts to degrade. I’m a few years in and now every few days it’s started to die at around 8pm (yet claims the battery health is still just barely outside replacement range which is … quite convenient for Apple).
I literally only use Siri on my Apple Watch, I’ve only triggered it accidentally on my iPhone and have the hot word disabled on all my other devices. Of course, all I ever use it for is setting timers and alarms on the watch, but still…
Right, I am a daily user of agentic LLM tools and have this exact problem in one large project that has complex business logic externally dictated by real world requirements out of my control, and let's say, variable quality of legacy code.
I remember when Gemini Pro 3 was the latest hotness and I started to get FOMO seeing demos on X posted to HN showing it one shot-ing all sorts of impressive stuff. So I tried it out for a couple days in Gemini CLI/OpenCode and ran into the exact same pain points I was dealing with using CC/Codex.
Flashy one shot demos of greenfield prompts are a natural hype magnet so get lots of attention, but in my experience aren't particularly useful for evaluating value in complex, legacy projects with tightly bounded requirements that can't be easily reduced to a page or two of prose for a prompt.
I’m well aware, as I said I am regularly using CC/Codex/OC in a variety of projects, and I certainly didn’t claim that can’t be used productively in a large code base.
But that different challenges become apparent that aren’t addressed by examples like this article which tend to focus on narrow, greenfield applications that can be readily rebuilt in one shot.
I already get plenty of value in small side projects that Claude can create in minutes. And while extremely cool, these examples aren’t the kind of “step change” improvement I’d like to see in the area where agentic tools are currently weakest in my daily usage.
I would be much more impressed with implementing new, long-requested features into existing software (that are open to later maintain LLM-generated code).
Fully agreed! That’s the exact kind of thing I was hoping to find when I read the article title, but unfortunately it was really just another “normal AI agent experience” I’ve seen (and built) many examples of before.
I can’t speak to any kind of identifiable pattern but man that behavior drives me up the wall when it happens.
When I run into a specific task that starts to trigger that behavior, even a clean session with explicit instructions directing it to complete ALL sub steps isn’t enough to push it to finish the entire request to the end.
reply