dotnet00|12day ago

Probably similar to the guy who was gloating on Twitter about building a service with vibe coding and without any programming knowledge around the peak of the vibe coding madness.

Only for people to start screwing around with his database and API keys because the generated code just stuck the keys into the Javascript and he didn't even have enough of a technical background to know that was something to watch out for.

IIRC he resorted to complaining about bullying and just shut it all down.

ARandumGuy|12day ago

Any cost/benefit analysis of whether to use AI has to factor in the fact that AI companies aren't even close to making a profit, and are primarily funded by investment money. At some point, either the cost to operate these AI models needs to go down, or the prices will go up. And from my perspective, the latter seems a lot more likely.

xianshou|12day ago

Rug pulls from foundation labs are one thing, and I agree with the dangers of relying on future breakthroughs, but the open-source state of the art is already pretty amazing. Given the broad availability of open-weight models within under 6 months of SotA (DeepSeek, Qwen, previously Llama) and strong open-source tooling such as Roo and Codex, why would you expect AI-driven engineering to regress to a worse state than what we have today? If every AI company vanished tomorrow, we'd still have powerful automation and years of efficiency gains left from consolidation of tools and standards, all runnable on a single MacBook.

ChuckMcM|12day ago

Excellent discussion in this thread, captures a lot of the challenges. I don't think we're a peak vibe coding yet, nor have companies experienced the level of pain that is possible here.

The biggest 'rug pull' here is that the coding agent company raises there price and kills you're budget for "development."

I think a lot of MBA types would benefit from taking a long look at how they "blew up" IT and switched to IaaS / Cloud and then suddenly found their business model turned upside down when the providers decided to up their 'cut'. It's a double whammy, the subsidized IT costs to gain traction, the loss of IT jobs because of the transition, leading to to fewer and fewer IT employees, then when the switch comes there is a huge cost wall if you try to revert to the 'previous way' of doing it, even if your costs of doing it that way would today would be cheaper than the what the service provider is now charging you.

KronisLV|11day ago

> "Now we don't need to hire a founding engineer! Yippee!"

This feels like a bit of a leap?

That's like saying "I just bought the JetBrains IDE Ultimate pack and some other really cool tools, so we no longer need a founding engineer!" All of that AI stuff can just be a force multiplier and most attempts at outright replacing people with them are a bit shortsighted. Closer to a temporary and somewhat inconsistent freelance worker, if anything.

That said, not wanting to pay for AI tools if they indeed help in your circumstances would also be like saying "What do you need JetBrains IDEs for, Visual Studio Code is good enough!" (and sometimes it is, so even that analogy is context dependent)

I'm reminded of rule 9 of the Joel Test: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel-test-12-s...

hluska|12day ago

It get even darker - I was around in the 1990s and a lot of people who ran head on into that generation’s problems used those lessons to build huge startups in the 2000s. If we have outsourced a lot of learning, what do we do when we fail? Or how we compound on success?

pshirshov|12day ago

That's why I stick to what I can run locally. Though for most of my tasks there is no big difference between cloud models and local ones, in half the cases both produce junk but both are good enough for some mechanical transformations and as a reference book.

RobinL|12day ago

This is why unlimited plans are always revoked eventually - a small fraction of users can be responsible for huge costs (Amazon's unlimited file backup service is another good example). Also whilst in general I don't think there's much to worry about with AI energy use, burning $24k of tokens must surely be responsible for a pretty large amount of energy

BiteCode_dev|12day ago

There is no way those companies don't loose ton of money on max plans.

I use and abuse mine, running multiple agents, and I know that I'd spend the entire month of fees in a few days otherwise.

So it seems like a ploy to improve their product and capture the market, like usual with startups that hope for a winner-takes-all.

And then, like uber or airbnb, the bait and switch will raise the prices eventually.

I'm wondering when the hammer will fall.

But meanwhile, let's enjoy the free buffet.

mccoyb|12day ago

Looked at your tool several times, but haven't answered this question for myself: does this tool fundamentally use the Anthropic API (not the normal MAX billing)? Presuming you built around the SDK -- haven't figured out if it is possible to use the SDK, but use the normal account billing (instead of hitting the API).

Love the idea by the way! We do need new IDE features which are centered around switching between Git worktrees and managing multiple active agents per worktree.

Edit: oh, do you invoke normal CC within your tool to avoid this issue and then post-process?

unshavedyak|12day ago

Max $100 or $200?

I'm on $100 and i'm shocked how much usage i get out of Sonnet, while Opus feels like no usage at all. I barely even bother with Opus since most things i want to do just runout super quick.

v5v3|12day ago

>My Claude Code usage would have been $24k last month if I didn't have a max plan, at least according to Claude-Monitor.

In their dreams.

qwertox|12day ago

Does Claude Max allow you to use 3rd-party tools with an API key?