> I’m terrified that there’s going to be a doctor’s office sometime that does the same, with more serious consequences.

they can send scheduling info, appt reminders, etc via SMS but (1) they must allow opt out, and (2) they cannot send medical info this way — that's where HIPAA requires encrypted "patient portal" messaging because SMS can be intercepted or accessed by others.

That's good to know - I'll tell him to check that with his current doctors' offices, and make sure that he makes it clear for any new practices he visits that he only does phone calls and postal mail.

> From my quick research online, it seems they've gone digital-only for season tickets because they don't want people just reselling them to turn a profit. They want actual season-long fans, so now if you transfer too many games they can track it and ban you.

this is a common clause in season-ticket memberships, but it doesn't actually work all that well. for instance, resale on the ticket marketplace is tracked and counts, but in general transfers alone are not penalized. so people do transactions outside of the official platforms, sell / trade in fb groups, etc.

RatGPT

> And as for the critics, tell me I don't get it

> Everybody can tell you how to do it, they never did it

> —jay-z

sure, but undo isn't the only path to a newer better version of the code

it's easy to see how the product (claude code) could be abstracted to spec form and then a future version built from that without inheriting previous iterations tech debt

ehh, as long as the overall starting architecture is decent, it's not hard to do tiny refactors across components

claude code, the app, is also not some radically complex concept (even if the codebase today is complicated)

but hey, that's why people do version breaking rewrites

they prioritize bugs based on what impacts the largest amount ($) of customers — fixing every bug of a huge complex project rarely makes sense if the impact of the bug on revenue is tiny

i think you are conflating anthropic (the startup) with claude code (the leaked source of one of said startup's products)

i.e., the claude code codebase doesn't need to be good right now [^1] — so i don't think the assumption that this is an exemplary product / artifact of expert agentic coding actually holds up here specifically

[^1]: the startup graveyard is full of dead startups with good code

I'm not taking a "zero technical debt" stance. Every successful startup eventually ends up treating their 1.0 codebase as a legacy burden. That's the cost of doing business, but it is a real cost. If Anthropic could have kept their code quality high with a few clever tricks and a few extra tokens, surely they would have.

So I take this whole episode as confirmation that code which is subject to high-velocity low-supervision work by agents decays quickly even under ideal circumstances.

> ... but I have to push back on the idea that Anthropic will be acquired. Their most recent valuation was $380B, and even if they wanted to be acquired (which I doubt) essentially no company has the necessary capital.

isn't that pretty much why anthropic and openai are racing to IPO?

we really need some more precise terms here to make that line clear: something like "black-box vibe coding" vs "gray-box vibe coding"

I like those.

Or maybe vibe slop vs. vibe-checked code.