> $168k

Billions of dollars of annual revenue go through Claude Code, and the people who work on it must be a lot of millions in headcount.

The time matters a fair bit, it's probably time someone can't spend breaking things in the name of new features, but if rewriting the stack had even a tiny impact on retention or driving higher usage, it would pay back that $168k.

▲

sscaryterry 20 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If only paying the $168k was some sort of a guarantee. Vibing doesn't give you that.

You might get more maintainable code for $168k by hiring humans, but if its something bespoke it isn't going to get you far (or far quickly).

Vibing is straight out gambling right now, the thing is, I don't know who the house is any more.

▲

nomel 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's going to take an order of magnitude longer though, delaying any of that revenue significantly. I'm sorry, but we're talking 11 days here. What does "maintainable" even mean with impossible time-scales like this now!?

▲

sscaryterry 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The new normal is there is no normal. No common sense, FOMO, YOLO, everything combined is what we're living right now :)

▲

nkrisc 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Perpetual complete rewrites. When there’s more bugs the LLM can fix, rewrite the whole codebase. Repeat ad infinitum.

	▲	pdimitar 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		True on the premise, remains to be seen if that's what's going to happen in practice. In my work I have Fable/Opus add bespoke linters and tie them to verify/precommit tasks (including in CI) so nothing of the reworks and 15+ initiatives we have in flight ever regresses. Some discipline will remove that worry of yours. It's not nice to immediately assume that the rewrite's orchestrator (Jarred) did not use discipline. He even outlined a few false starts.