Comment by stingraycharles
6 hours ago
Anthropic can't win in this case.
They don't use Claude Code, they get accused that they don't even trust it themselves.
They use Claude Code, they get accused the code is shit because it's slop.
I think dogfooding is known to be a legitimate approach here.
The idea is that Claude Code is surprisingly buggy and unrefined for something created by the very tool and processes that are supposed to be replacing us as we speak.
The idea is that sculpted ideal code is rarely the best choice.
At the same time I'd say sloppy code (human or AI generated) is rarely the best choice. I'd say the best is in between.
And they don't use our version of CC, or with our settings. They have flags for internal use only.
> Anthropic can't win in this case.
Sure they can. The solution is pretty simple and in your own post. Choose either:
* Make the product good to the point code is no longer slop and shit.
* Stop hyping the quality when it isn’t there.
* Do a hybrid approach. Use their own product but actually have competent humans in the loop to make the code good.
This is not hard. Be honest and humble and that criticism goes away. It’s no one’s fault but Anthropic’s that they hype up their product to more than it can do and use it carelessly to build itself. It’s not a no-win scenario if you’re the one causing your own obviously avoidable problems.