the big difference with Iran is the strait of hormuz. It doesn't matter how "well" it goes if it stays closed and torpedos the global economy

> inconsistent communication

I feel like "inconsistent communication" is putting it lightly, with trump going back and forth between "we won", "we'll take the oil", and "whatever we'll leave" often within the same day.

It does matter because oil is a global commodity, the fact that the US is a net exporter doesn't stop the prices from going up and other follow-on impacts to the global economy.

It means that US isn't hit the hardest. There's no "we have to end the war this month or our country grinds down to a halt". Just the slow grind of economic pressure that, I remind, affects more countries than just the US - and many of them far stronger.

US leadership can just say "this isn't enough to deter us" and proceed with the rest of the war however they want.

The Iranian regime is betting that they can outlast Donald Trump on this front. Trump's War is very unpopular and they don't care what the Iranian people think or suffer through.

> US is a net oil exporter, and not exactly starved for Gulf oil

I suggest not taking anything Trump says as the truth: https://xcancel.com/chrismartenson/status/203952370406177223...

Holy shit, thats really saying the quiet part loud.

“Does it matter?”

Yes, Who cares about the rest of the world?

Nations shutting down, businesses shutting down, and all because the elected leader of America got involved in a war to avoid accusations of pedophilia.

And lest we forget, this is the nuclear superpower. Thank god there is no conspiracy theory about Nukes being useful so far. I have more faith that the administration will bend towards conspiracies than away from them.

I don't see Iran trying, and failing, to hold the world economy hostage as a reason to go against "no negotiations with terrorists".

If oil hits $200/barrel and inflation is double digits, people will have different priorities.

I haven't had issues with malware since windows vista

Do you expect objective well throught out options from users who use Windows for 5 minutes every few years?

Imagine tourists who visit your country for a weekend telling you what's wrong with your country.

yeah claude is great... but only if you pay $100-$200 a month

Many people buy two separate Claude pro subscriptions and that makes the limit become a non-issue. It works surprisingly well when you tend to hit the 5 hourly limit after a few hours, and hit the weekly limit after 4-5 days. $40 vs $100 is significant for a lot of people.

I hit limit of Pro in about 30 minutes, 1 hour max. And only when I use a single session, and when I don't use it extensively, ie waits for my responses, and I read and really understand what it wants, what it does. That's still just 1-2 hours/5 hours.

What do you do to avoid that?

You're probably having long sessions, i.e. repeated back-and-forth in one conversation. Also check if you pollute context with unneeded info. It can be a problem with large and/or not well structured codebases.

The last time I used pro, it was a brand new Python rest service with about 2000 lines generated, which was solely generated during the session. So how I say to Claude that use less context, when there was 0 at the beginning, just my prompt?

So you had generated 2000 lines in 30 minutes and ran out of tokens? What was your prompt?

I’d use a fast model to create a minimal scaffold like gemini fast.

I’d create strict specs using a separate codex or claude subscription to have a generous remaining coding window and would start implementation + some high level tests feature by feature. Running out in 60 minutes is harder if you validate work. Running out in two hours for me is also hard as I keep breaks. With two subs you should be fine for a solid workday of well designed and reviewed system. If you use coderabbit or a separate review tool and feed back the reviews it is again something which doesn’t burn tokens so fast unless fully autonomous.

Thanks for the tip, didn’t think of using 2 subscriptions at the same company.

When reaching a limits, I switch to GLM 4.7 as part of a subscription GLM Coding Lite offered end 2025 $28/year. Also use it for compaction and the like to save tokens.

I'm using it via Copilot, now considering to also try Open Code (with Copilot license). I don't know if it's as good as Claude Code, but it's pretty good. You get 100 Sonnet requests or 33 Opus request in the subscription per month ($20 business plan) + some less powerful models have no limits (i.e. GPT 4.1), while extra Sonnet request is $0.04 and Opus $0.12, so another $20 buys 250 Sonnet requests + 83 Opus requests. This works for me better since I do not code all day, every single day. Also a request is a request, so it does not matter if it's just a plain edit task or an agent request, it costs the same.

Btw. I trust Microsoft / GitHub to not train on my data more (with the Business license) than I would trust Antrophic.

To be honest it feels very worth my $200/mo. And I “only” make $80k/year. I used to have two ChatGPT subs but Claude is just so much better.

Yeah a trend that I've noticed in online comments is people taking LLM generated text and just removing punctuation and making it all lowercase. It's like dude, it's still so obvious xD

> Your objective has explicit instruction that car has to be present for a wash.

Which is exactly how you're supposed to prompt an LLM, is the fact that giving a vague prompt gives poor results really suprising?

In this case, with such a simple task, why even bother to prompt it?

The whole idea of this question is to show that pretty often implicit assumptions are not discovered by the LLM.

not to mention the OP mentioned 22 LTS which isn't even the most current LTS

Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should!

I feel so attacked right now

the $10 plan makes a great backup to claude or codex and the inline completions are nice

I think there's some middle ground possible between those two black and white groupings