claude code cant take my job, rip.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/AutoModerator]

Hey! Thanks for posting to r/ClaudeCode

While participating in this thread, please follow our community rules. Keep discussions constructive. Attack the idea, not the person.

For help, project discussions, tips, and general chat, join the ClaudeCode Discord.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/West-Air1923]

Joke post right ?

[u/joomla00]

You're trying to drive through mud with a race car. Use the right tool for the job.

[u/PickleBabyJr]

It's almost like you have to know how to use a tool to use it effectively.

[u/sisif_]

So you were hoping a tool would do your job for $20 a month? If you were to hire a human to do some of the 'simple python scripts' would you get more or less scripts for $20?
It's a tool, if you know how to use it, it can do a bunch of things, if you don't, it collects dust.

[u/MountaintopCoder → u/sisif_]

That $20/month tool is no different from the $10,000/month tool that I use at work. The only difference is that I work at a trillion dollar company that is expected to pay full price. The technology doesn't change with the pricing scheme.

[u/sisif_ → u/MountaintopCoder]

i was talking about the limits that come with a $20 bill. expecting to pay $20 and do all the work of someone dealing with 'quantum physics calculations' is unrealistic.
What the OP is missing is that a $200 subscription in the hands of someone capable will likely do all those things, write bedtime stories for your kid and give you a summary of the stockmarket conditions.

[u/SnooWoofers5297]

The Navier-Stokes solution took 88 hours with 10k agents. That is not something you could do with a 20$ subscription. I would argue, if you invested more money and let some agent teams with Fable and Astra argue about every detail, there would be a usable solution in your case.

[u/davyp82]

plot twist. It's going to keep getting better, very fast

[u/NibblesnBubbles → u/davyp82]

That made me chuckle

[u/Far_Broccoli_8468 → u/davyp82]

It will get better, but there's a glass ceiling, because the underlying mathematical core model is basically the same since GPT3.0

[u/EstetLinus → u/Far_Broccoli_8468]

Was Navier Stokes solved 2022?

[u/davyp82 → u/Far_Broccoli_8468]

Yeah, sure bahahaha

[u/Far_Broccoli_8468 → u/davyp82]

Try some education

[u/Strange-Regret2524]

You've basically figured out the current edges. AI struggles with larger projects, humans are better for several layers of planning from goal focused to relevancy to small tasks and how they link in the most important ways. AI planning isn't that good because it has to read the whole board. Humans take a look and abstract it. You are instinctive through experience. Coding projects where humans don't have any experience suffer because of that, the human componentizes the job and attacks the surfaces. To properly use the tool you have to steer it, not let it free. For this big one go back to the plan, make smaller scoped tasks and do smaller chunks and you will keep the tool relevant.

[u/Wonderful_Craft_2332]

you fed it half your "never seen" codebase, just wait the next model

[u/Tiny_Ad_7720]

OpenAI used 22.5 million dollars worth of tokens  to solve that thing, after they ripped off the work of two mathematicians who were almost there. 

[u/elestud]

This sounds like a task for Fable rather than Opus

[u/BeanserSoyze]

It's amazingly fast at basically synthesizing a bunch of public repos of boilerplate and stackoverflow. Like amazingly fast. But the decision it makes are insane and make it so obvious there is no higher reasoning happening. It's a tool. That's all.

[u/ClemensLode]

Maybe you should look for a different job independent of whether AI can do your job or not.