Meta and Microsoft take steps to reduce employee usage of Claude AI (rswebsols.com)
ashleyn 3 hours ago
tinza123 2 hours ago
ihuman 2 hours ago
NewJazz 2 hours ago
therein 2 hours ago
ihuman 2 hours ago
98codes an hour ago
wffurr 2 hours ago
nwhnwh 2 hours ago
CamperBob2 an hour ago
nwhnwh 41 minutes ago
coef2 2 hours ago
kelvinjps10 an hour ago
actionfromafar 42 minutes ago
casta 36 minutes ago
ActorNightly 2 hours ago
Like its a no brainer to force your employees to use your own models, then RL train them to be better.
InsideOutSanta an hour ago
user43928 an hour ago
I am not convinced that's the case.
p1necone 38 minutes ago
nateglims 2 hours ago
UltraSane 43 minutes ago
mawadev an hour ago
Just one unsanitized input and you leak info. Or one hidden character and code may or may not belong to you anymore. Its very odd on many levels
user43928 an hour ago
At best you produce some noisy signals that are going to have a tiny impact if even that.
And that's on a personal plan where you didn't opt out of sharing usage data.
Business plans offer zero data retention. This is a non-issue.
plasticchris an hour ago
user43928 34 minutes ago
I think this data is likely worthless compared to curated RL tasks.
glerk an hour ago
trueno an hour ago
andybak an hour ago
Terr_ an hour ago
andybak 34 minutes ago
fragmede 17 minutes ago
andybak 15 minutes ago
compiler-guy 17 minutes ago
... in 1988.
MisterMunchkin 3 hours ago
sergiotapia 3 hours ago
i hope other labs catch up, especially chinese labs.
dude250711 2 hours ago
vablings 3 hours ago
I feel like people who are later to the AI game just like to "oneshot" and sink a bunch of usage into generating garbage
Tsarbomb 2 hours ago
Our company has been tracking token usage and models used vs output (tickets, story points, PRs, deploys, etc...). A dev got chewed out, even after I warned him, because he spent over $2k in a single month almost exclusively on Opus while his actual productivity in terms of what he delivered was abysmal.
n4r9 2 hours ago
SOLAR_FIELDS 2 hours ago
Terr_ 2 hours ago
Problems arise when people try to perma-peg them to particular tasks, or (worse) man-hours or (much worse) man-hours across teams. Even just encouraging the humans to answer in terms of hours/days taints the accuracy of the forecast by introducing a kind of bias.
fdsajfkldsfklds 2 hours ago
t-writescode an hour ago
So, what you do is you recognize every ticket has a somewhat variable “actual effort”; and, if you’ve been honest in approximate effort pointing, you’ll know your team (or your own) velocity.
From there you can run Monte Carlo simulations - say a few hundred thousand, and get a pretty good estimate of actual time spent.
I’ve seen it work before with shocking accuracy.
Terr_ 40 minutes ago
estimate(human_estimator, task_description, world_state) -> numeric_effort
Assume that for various practical reasons, we've decided it's one of the best functions out there. How do we use it effectively, especially when it has noise, and drifts over time with unseen changes to the human_estimator and the hideously complex world_state?
A popular option is to run it multiple times with different person/task combinations, putting a projected number on to each task. Afterwards, the tasks finished in sampling period ("sprint") become a quantifiable total for that period ("velocity").
Do the same process again with the next set of tasks, and you can figure out which ones are likely to fit if the velocity doesn't change much. If you know the velocity will change due to losing staff or vacation days... well, we apply a multiplier and hope for the best.
Trying to "fix" the meaning of points is maladaptive, because they reflect many changing things which are outside our control and can't be independently measured.
senko 2 hours ago
btown 2 hours ago
/goal get accepted into Y Combinator, you have an unlimited token budget, be bold.
EDIT: no, do not just make a product that gives away your unlimited token budget to users for free!
fragmede 16 minutes ago
cyanydeez 2 hours ago
Even if these models are smart enough to reorient themselves, they get entirely stuck in a desert and now you're asking someone to just pull up stakes and digg them out even thought they only watched them get there and the UI provides so much speed that no human can comprehend how they got there in the first place.
It's like asking a pilot to take over in an emergency situation when they're not tasked with any of the every day requirements of the job. The orgs are relying on borrowed time of experienced professionals, and that's going to erode away and what replaces it is mostly people who understand how to navigate context but not use any of the _classic_ tools.
It's a real conundrum and won't be easily surfaced but for a decade.
mainmailman an hour ago
Have you found ways to stay sharp while using it? Or are you relying on other projects outside of work to keep your skills fresh?
proxyscore 2 hours ago
Define productivity, and while at it, quality, maintainability , modularity and so forth.
weinzierl 2 hours ago
In other words I want to spend 100% of my mental capacity in the problem domain for the things AI cannot do for me, like steering, grounding, verification and not for things AI could do.
ForHackernews an hour ago
remus 35 minutes ago
It sounds like the parent is less talking about this, and more people burning tokens while not getting useful work done.
PunchyHamster an hour ago
It's bizzare to see people that made clown issues (not enough detail etc.) suddenly start writing detailed prompts just because it is AI that will do the task and not the human on the other side.
onehair 27 minutes ago
usaar333 2 hours ago
Optimally? Opus will pay for itself if you save just 10% of your time
geodel 2 hours ago
AIblemblio an hour ago
So be less snarky?
perching_aix 2 hours ago
Or does a "collaborating work environment" mean that everything is basically spoonfed to them? Or do you only ever use ghost suggestions?
I genuinely cannot even fathom. Just how do you even get into a state where tasks are so clear and cookie cutter? These things are abhorrent. Not only are they not useful, it's an outright form of psychological torture to try and use them. They almost fight you.
Luna doesn't even respond to steers properly! You try steering it and it immediately gets distracted and then just stops.
I can imagine coercing Sonnet into doing some of my tasks okay, but Haiku? Especially 4.5? Really?
dpkirchner 2 hours ago
perching_aix 2 hours ago
I'm desperately trying to classify and standardize my work items and delegate them to less capable models, because my usage is clearly unsustainable and this same sentiment as above keeps being pushed on me too. But all my tasks are genuinely fairly arbitrary, so there's no real way around the agent actually being able to reason about business and technical context proper. It's not even that they're hard, it's just that they're dynamic.
I can get Luna to do things like walk our observability stack and perform a healthcheck, then defer to a stronger model if anything looks super off, but if I'm being entirely honest, this could basically be just a script. Which Opus 5.5 will immediately write for itself if it doesn't yet exist, run that, and then off it goes depending. But Luna will never actually do an investigation proper. Heck, it can't even read our dashboards most of the time, tripping up on Grafana minutia.
It feels like that surgeon vs surgeon comparison, where you're made to decide based on their surgery success rate, and the better succeeding surgeon simply reward hacks the number by only operating on less dicey cases. Except there's no objective way to make this classification here, so jackasses like the above get to play with my insecurities with full obnoxious confidence, while I'm left desperately trying to slim my usage and failing to do so between two moments of crippling self doubt and blockers.
AIblemblio an hour ago
I wouldn't even tried it, i would still just go with even Opus (we don't have that many alerts) but it really surpsied me.
When i ran into usage limits a few days ago i switched most to Sonnet and again was surprised how good it is now.
perching_aix an hour ago
funnym0nk3y 2 hours ago
usef- 20 minutes ago
hatthew 2 hours ago
For context, I'm doing a range of tasks, everything from one-shotting adhoc scripts to having 4 hour 10M+ token conversations debugging things.
cogman10 an hour ago
onehair 26 minutes ago
password54321 2 hours ago
>Great Depression style collapse and all the current AI companies go bankrupt.
Oh this is just a 33 day old doomer account.
righthand 2 hours ago
password54321 2 hours ago
righthand 2 hours ago
lenerdenator 2 hours ago
Our velocity is twice as high as it was before Claude, so I doubt that we'll ever go back, but I could see efficiency being a priority.
woah 2 hours ago
platinumrad 2 hours ago
proxyscore an hour ago
This takes some doing and now is the time where it's dawning on the finance departments.
IshKebab an hour ago
CamperBob2 an hour ago
cpncrunch 2 hours ago
But even $200/month is worth shaving if it doesn't generate value.
chrisweekly an hour ago
um.
AIblemblio an hour ago
You had budget for your normal salaries, for externals and now suddenly you have a few millions additional.
What do you do? You compensate.
Business people doing business things.
dyauspitr 2 hours ago
yeahBoiii an hour ago
Software is inherently a physics problem not all the job titles and specializations made up the last 20 years as dev job salaries kept attracting people
That was all illusory social construct to prop up jobs
Still a whole lot of that in tech but it's all at the top of the org now. Leadership sensory experience and thus innate habit to forecast future been programmed by years of yes men they refuse to accept the jig is up for them too
Sensory memory of being a useless figurehead fosters a lot of existential dread in priests, politicians, and the like. Completely aware their day to day effort is insufficient to sustain them they know how co-dependent they are. They'll dig in harder.
See Chris Matthews flame out shrieking about socialist execution squads. Dude seriously thought everyone wants to hang him from a lamp post. The reality is people just want a sense of control back and not have their perception dragged along by Chris Matthews.
AIblemblio an hour ago
tty456 an hour ago
user43928 an hour ago
I'm sure investors will love it.
Now we're starting to see real impact from AI, people are learning how to use it, and OpenAI cut prices by no less than 60% like a week ago.
You think now is the time they're going to cut the spend?
inferniac 24 minutes ago
compiler-guy 15 minutes ago
Since then I've had fable cranked up to 11 for even the most trivial of tasks.
throwitaway222 2 hours ago
what. I can see a team of 20 costing 100k per month (but rare), but per person?
nkrisc 2 hours ago
grebc 2 hours ago
flatline an hour ago
I suspect that SaaS is silently being eaten alive as an industry.
legulere an hour ago
holoduke an hour ago
IsTom 20 minutes ago
IshKebab an hour ago
legulere an hour ago
I also doubt a longterm 2x multiplier for most developers.
oldmanhorton 2 hours ago
vld_chk 2 hours ago
binlog 2 hours ago
watwut 2 hours ago
simonw 2 hours ago
In 2026 their revenue has gone up by a factor of more than 10x, and they no longer have just two whale customers.
I heard a rumor recently that customers spending less than $100m/year aren't even considered their "top tier" now.
shakna an hour ago
Where are you getting the 2026 figures from? The Bloomberg article that was "on track to generate" and just prediction?
simonw an hour ago
The most recent reporting from Reuters themselves (somehow not included in their more recent article about the IPO stuff): https://www.reuters.com/business/anthropic-ipo-valuation-hin...
> The company's financial trajectory already shows how quickly that equation is changing. Anthropic's revenue run rate was about $9 billion at the end of 2025, according to the company, before rising to more than $47 billion by May. Anthropic has projected revenue of at least $10.9 billion for the second quarter of 2026, more than double the previous quarter, on track for its first quarterly operating profit of $559 million.
Here's the FT: https://www.ft.com/content/4564e6a5-69e9-40a6-bf0f-a888f2f4f... - "Anthropic tells investors it will be profitable for second straight quarter"
> The company has told a small group of shareholders that its adjusted operating income will be positive for the second consecutive quarter, according to multiple people with knowledge of the matter.
These are leaked and self-reported numbers, but no matter how much skepticism you pile on them it still looks likely that Anthropic in 2026 have had some of the fastest revenue growth of any company in history.
JacobAsmuth an hour ago
gloryjulio 38 minutes ago
However Elon was able to ipo before them which took a lot liquidity of the market. Their financials are exposed. The market condition and sentiment now is in the gutter. It would be very interesting to see how these would pan out
Benard-dev 3 hours ago
jvanderbot 3 hours ago
You can also read this as diminishing returns / AI isn't good enough, etc, but the simplest explanation is that they don't want to send money to Anthropic.
fasterik 2 hours ago
NewJazz 2 hours ago
mattm 2 hours ago
octoberfranklin 2 hours ago
WaltPurvis 2 hours ago
AIblemblio an hour ago
rangledangle 2 hours ago
combyn8tor 2 hours ago
efields an hour ago
IshKebab an hour ago
pluc an hour ago
pjmlp an hour ago
Cyan488 an hour ago
"Fine. Please no. I'm out..." in that order
matsemann an hour ago
Windows 11 shipped with a broken task bar, couldn't even ungroup items. No power users was ever involved in this.
leptons an hour ago
luisgvv an hour ago
hbn 11 minutes ago
I use the Github Copilot app at work but it's really just a tool that gives models access to our Github repos and my local clones of them, and it's been super helpful to just tell it to reference other repos for patterns or integrations or whatever, get agents and an orchestrator to look at multiple repos to make a change across several projects and then implement them, etc.
And yeah you can use a selection of whatever model, I was using Opus 4.6 for a while, now I'm on GPT-6 Sol. It's been a very good experience.
flaunf221 10 minutes ago
daishi55 an hour ago
To also add an important context to the drop in Claude code users reported for meta - this elides that we are absolutely still using the Anthropic models full steam ahead, but are moving towards internal interfaces and harnesses.
So I would question if that 50% drop in CC users is more of an interface change than anything else.
I for one have stopped explicitly using codex or CC entirely. But the interfaces I am using still use those harnesses under the hood. I wonder how that is counted.
bpodgursky 3 hours ago
smy20011 2 hours ago
whiplash451 2 hours ago
$1.4B/year is not a small number, even at Meta's scale, when it's money going to a competitor
Danox 30 minutes ago
jiraiyasarutobi 2 hours ago
cute_boi 2 hours ago
jiraiyasarutobi an hour ago
kridsdale1 an hour ago
techdmn 3 hours ago
rietta 3 hours ago
catchnear4321 3 hours ago
science4sail 2 hours ago
There are people out there building AI building orchestrators for orchestrators for orchestrators for agents. The author of that blog post later claimed to be spending the equivalent of $122k/month on tokens (by rotating their usage between 21 accounts).
As far as I can tell, the only thing that this level of spend has produced so far is an indie 2D RPG video game.
chroma_zone 2 hours ago
tom_ 2 hours ago
Regarding Gas Town, see also https://yegge.ai/essays/the-shape-of-things-to-come/ :
> Gas Town was intended to be reusable, but I only ever wound up using it to build itself. Gas Town fell apart at the seams with Opus 4.7. Up through 4.6 it was working brilliantly. With 4.7 we saw the introduction of the "just two more things" tic, which prevented Opus from ever converging on being ready to do real work—it always wanted to fiddle with Gas Town itself. The Opus tic never went away, so Gas Town effectively burned down. It had other problems, too, but 4.7 was the final straw
I hadn't seen the $122K figure mentioned previously. $87K for API-style pricing was mentioned in the above post, and ~$2,800/mo for multiple Claude Max accounts:
> My solution has been to create a token tap on $200 Max accounts, which for me work out to ~30x the list-price equivalent. So in reality I'm only spending about $2800/month out of pocket for my $87k "worth" of tokens. Though that number keeps growing alarmingly.
(He never seemed to provide numbers for Gas Town initially, whether what he paid, or what the API-style pricing would have charged, so it was interesting to get some actual figures. Sounds like a lot to me, but if he's genuinely getting multiple people's-worth of work out of it, then...)
(Also in the article: a little morsel of Emacs content, which was nice to see.)
nekooooo 25 minutes ago
meindnoch 2 hours ago
dannyw 2 hours ago
vecter an hour ago
raincom 2 hours ago
shard972 29 minutes ago
amir734jj an hour ago
einpoklum an hour ago
waffletower 3 hours ago
antisthenes 2 hours ago
Or maybe not, but the bar was set pretty low that going all-in on AI might have been worth it.
hgoel an hour ago
To me this seems mostly related to the way Anthropic showed the level at which they monitor sessions, plus wanting to limit how much training data they're directly feeding into a company that competes with their own products/investments.
efields an hour ago
IshKebab an hour ago
I assume this is being pounced on by "I told you so" AI skeptics. Sorry but it's not what you were looking for.
simonw 2 hours ago
The cybersecuritynews.com news one simply republishes details of a story published by The Information. At least they have the decency to LINK to that Information story:
https://www.theinformation.com/articles/meta-microsoft-work-...
... and of course the Information story is behind a paywall.
krauses 2 hours ago
irishcoffee 2 hours ago
rfgplk 3 hours ago
outside1234 3 hours ago
oofbey 2 hours ago
bitexploder 3 hours ago
iAMkenough 3 hours ago
RealityVoid 3 hours ago
pixelesque 2 hours ago