As someone who finds a huge amount of enjoyment in developing using Opus 4.6 in Claude code, I’d love to know what other harnesses people use that deliver the same experience as CC. CC is a vibe-coded mess, but it works very well for me.
I do a lot of work in R and find codex (5.4 & 5.3-codex) just totally drop the ball with R. Anthropic’s models are far better with R, so I use them.
But I do wonder how much the harness affects performance.
Would GPT-5.3-Codex perform just as well if it was plugged into CC?
1. The main page asks for an email to be notified when the hoodie is available to buy, but I can add the goodie to my shopping cart and proceed to check out
2. The product page mentions a 6’ model but there is no model in the images
3. The check out page says “there are no payment options, please contact us”
I setup the LiveSync plugin in an LXC on one of my proxmox servers, since I was going to have to host the MCP server too (so Claude could read from it).
It doesn't require iCloud/GDrive, I just exposed the corresponding port through a cloudflare tunnel and set up the apps to connect through it.
Two things to call out: the first is it does not work if your phone is on do not disturb or silent/vibrate. He's aware of this and it's a permissions thing you need an exception for. He's applied for the exception but it's unlikely he'll get it because it's supposed to be for stuff that's like life or death. I think for his usage he's OK with that, and he has spent a lot of time working on it the past months so he just wanted to ship it at this point. The second is that it's obviously paid. I think that's fine if he had gotten the permission unblocked but I'd be a little hesitant to recommend buying it right now.
Yes, I did have it enabled. Though the terms say you "must have it enabled", not "must not have had it enabled". Perhaps there is a roll-out difference.
Well this feels scammy, or at least annoying AF. I tried toggling it on to see if that would make the credit appear, even though I'd never had it on before and never needed to use it, and since my balance was under $5, it auto-charged me $15. All I wanted to do was try to make the free $20 banner appear, and I didn't get that either.
I’m not sure if the analogy is yours, but the scribe note really struck a chord with me.
I’m not a professionally trained SWE (I’m a scientist who does engineering work). LLMs have really accelerated my ability to build, ideate, and understand systems in a way that I could only loosely gain from sometimes grumpy but mostly kind senior engineers in overcrowded chat rooms.
The legality of all of this is dubious, though, per the parent. I GPL licensed my FOSS scientific software because I wanted it to help advance biomedical research. Not because I wanted it to help a big corp get rich.
But then again, maybe code like mine is what is holding these models back lol.
Sharing for advancing humanity / benefit of society, and megacorps getting rich off it, is not either-or. On the contrary, megacorps are in part how the benefit to society materializes. After all, it's megacorps that make and distribute the equipment and the software stacks I am using to write code on, that you are using to do your research on, etc.
I find the whole line of thinking, "I won't share my stuff because then a megacorp may use it without paying me the fractional picobuck I'm entitled to", to be a strong case of Dog in the Manger mindset. And I meant that even before LLM exploded, back when people were wringing their hands about Elasticsearch being used by Amazon, back in 2021 or so.
Sharing is sharing. One can't say "oh I'm sharing this for anyone to benefit", and then upon seeing someone using it to make money, say "oh but not like that!!". Or rather, one can say, but then they're just lying about having shared the thing. "OSS but not for megacorps/aicorps" is just proprietary software. Which is perfectly fine thing to work on; what's not fine is lying about it being open.
> "OSS but not for megacorps/aicorps" is just proprietary software
why? it's not like it's binary. It could well be that it's open source but can't be used by a company of X size. I'm not a lawyer but why couldn't a license have that clause? I would still class that as being open, for some definition of open
LLMs are one thing, but when you bring ES in AWS example, as outlined in the article, the problem is not the software being used; it's being _made proprietary_. It's about free and open software remaining free and open. Especially to the end user.
I do a lot of work in R and find codex (5.4 & 5.3-codex) just totally drop the ball with R. Anthropic’s models are far better with R, so I use them.
But I do wonder how much the harness affects performance.
Would GPT-5.3-Codex perform just as well if it was plugged into CC?
reply