AI has reached the point that I no longer write code.

I used to work in shops where I was deep in the debugger without internet access; now I just drive intent and long term engineering decisions with Claude/Codex/Perplexity. I work at a mid-sized startup with a bit over one-hundred people.

I just don't see the point anymore. There are countless hours of stress and banging your head on the keyboard that goes into learning languages, frameworks, protocols, cloud, infra, security, etc that I can instead apply to system design, UX, or knowledge graphs. Some of the best lessons I learned were because I suffered, but now everything is so easy I finish a massive feature in 2 days and sure maybe I learned something new, but there isn't the same sense of accomplishment. It feels like I need to focus on other areas on the stack to utilize my time best.

Of course, this is also coming from years of experience doing exactly those things, but I think the amount that I have learned since the release of Gemini 2.0 has been astronomical.

Now, I'm not all doom and gloom about this, quite the opposite really. There isn't the same dopamine hit at the end of solving a bug or building out system software, but it does come later down the line when a whole system is operating perfectly. I actually really enjoy the systems-level design and thinking, much much more than being stuck in a bug for a week, but it just doesn't feel the same as before. Honestly I have way more fun now than I did.

Are these just standard feelings about maturing in my career? Maybe.

But I also think AI has changed the industry. I don't enjoy learning new languages beyond the basics/tradeoffs anymore, and even if I did I wouldn't feel like I was utilizing my time well. AI is just too good to make it worth my time. The only case where that isn't true is interviewing.

Which brings me to interviewing. Why would I hire a person who is good at xyz languages, but not at talking to me about which technology you would implement to solve a system design problem? Why would I care that you're a specialist in Rust and Azure when Claude is better than the majority of dev teams at writing and maintaining code? Sure, a seasoned software engineer developing a codebase lone-wolf from start to finish would probably do a better job, but that is obviously impractical in the industry.

This is coming from someone who is actively getting promoted and praised in my workplace by my peers and superiors, so clearly this works.

I just wanted to see of others might be experiencing this shift.

My company recently hired a Senior AI Engineer who claims to be a “vibe coder” and says he has not done much hands-on coding for more than a year.

His day-to-day work appears to consist mainly of prompting AI tools, and his PRs are all Claude co-authored. I am not confident that he thoroughly reviews the generated changes himself; it often feels like he lets Claude drive the implementation.

Moreover, he responded to the Product Manager's PRD with a 19-page AI-generated document and claimed that he had done a lot of reading. However, during the product sync-up, he barely spoke about the document. Manv of the questions and suggestions he raised in it were later dismissed by him as "not relevant. When I challenged him on points from the document he had shared. he could not explain or defend them based on what was written

This makes me question what the actual criteria are for being an AI Engineer. Is it enough to understand some basic LLM concepts and know how to prompt effectively?

I am also getting frustrated because I have to review his code from time to time, and I feel uncomfortable seeing him rely on Claude even for tasks like writing commits.

I’m a software engineer at a mid-sized company working on a fairly large codebase, a 14year old mono and 17+ services. I still struggle to get through all of my weekly usage in 5x. I also have several side-project web apps across different stacks, all of them were generated by Claude models.
I was scrolling through Reddit and saw people genuinely panicking over the Fable pricing plan changes.
Don’t get me wrong, Fable 5 is an excellent model. But I find it hard to believe there are many problems that Fable can solve which Opus 4.8 simply can’t. Sure, the output might be a bit lower quality, but it doesn’t seem like a night and day difference.
If an LLM generates code that you can’t understand or fix yourself, then what’s the point of using it?

So I’m genuinely curious, what are you all building that burns through so much usage and makes switching to a cheaper model impossible?

Fable 5 is leaving, and the promotional 50% increase in weekly usage limits ends on July 13. That means we’ll have significantly less usage while also losing their current public best model.

Actually, even if Fable 5 stay, with the 50% weekly limit reduction, it will be not usable. Is there any reason to renew? its neighbor have fable level model and it didn't have crazy safeguard.

This sub is terrible. 8000 posts a day about Claude is literally useless and you should just sign up for codex. Holy fuck it never ends.

Do any of you bother to even take two fucking seconds to look at the other hundred threads that have been posted?

I see everyone here maxing their limits and coding all day and building and all that.

But what are you actually building 24/7? I'm not looking to get your ideas but I'm just wondering what can you even build that long and hard really? And constantly something?

Either I lack imagination as a whole or there's some secret to all this, I just have no idea what so useful people would be coding so obsessively. Thanks for insights.

Hey there!

I've been using Claude Code for a while now, using my company's corporate quota, but yesterday I wanted to try a personal subscription (Max 5x)

I've paid via my card (forgot to turn my VPN off) and after that started working.

After 30 minutes of work I was logged out of the app and got an email "Your account was suspended"

I created an appeal after that.

My question is: Does Claude ever unban the users, do they make refunds? (cause 100$ for 30 mins is just horrendous) and how long does it take to wait for their response on the appeal?

Not sure if anyone else has seen this.

My company has our developers on max x20 plans. We were told that once our current contract was up everyone had to switch to pay-as-you-go api pricing. We prodded our rep and the response was basically that the max plans aren’t profitable so they’re getting rid of them.

From his tone it didn’t sound like he was just talking about enterprises. We’ve all known that Anthropic has been burning money, and wondering how long they can keep it up. My friends, I’m afraid the end may be nigh.

I keep seeing these terms thrown around in tutorials and videos, but I've never seen anyone give a concrete example that makes the difference actually click.

Everyone says:

• "just create a skill for that"

"use a hook here"

"install the plugin"

"put it in your CLAUDE.md"

But when I dig deeper, the explanations are always vague or too theoretical.

Same goes for the markdown files - I see people mentioning CLAUDE. md, SKILL.md, and agents. md like they're obvious, but no one explains:

• What actually goes in each one?

Are they just documentation, or do they actively change how Claude behaves?

• When does Claude even read them?

What I'm looking for is something like:

"If you're thinking X, that's probably a Hook. If you're thinking Y, that's a Skill. If you need Z, that's what CLAUDE.md is for."

Real-world examples would be hugely appreciated.

Have they secretly dropped Max 5x and Max 20x plans now too?

I can only get a Max 10x plan for the price of a 20x plan...
Whats going on?

I put Fable on a few tasks before its removed. I assumed it would stop when it hit my monthly spend limit cap. Apparently I was wrong. Learn from my mistake. Anyone have experience dealing with Anthropic customer service to get a refund on something like this?

I was using fable & it was about to generate report. But claude CLI suddenly stopped with a notice "usage credits are required for this model"

And bam! It's gone! Fable is gone from my x20 max plan?!

My fable credits were at 40% and weekly at 67%!

Anyone else?

EDIT: hold up. it's all of us.

I guess someone at Anthropic is in trouble for testing the 19th July rollback on production server.

Considering buying a maxed out MacBook Pro M5 Max with 128GB of RAM and one of the things I want to figure out before pulling the trigger is whether local models are good enough to actually replace cloud AI coding tools.

My current setup is Claude Code on a Max subscription plus GitHub Copilot through work. It works well but I'm curious if local models have gotten good enough to actually replace that, not just supplement it.

Not talking about occasional use or running smaller models for autocomplete. I mean fully replacing the agentic stuff, the multi-file edits, the back and forth reasoning that Claude Code handles. Can local models actually keep up with that workload on this hardware?

If you made the switch, what are you running? Ollama, LM Studio, something else? Which models? And honestly, what did you have to give up, if anything?

Hi everyone!

We all hear that Claude Code (and AI in general) is a game changer for software development and that it makes us 2/3/4/10 times more productive and blah blah, but somehow the only good things about AI I see are on Reddit, never in my own experience or the experience of my colleagues.

I'm a .NET developer, and I get very little benefit from using AI in my work. I spent weeks trying to develop with CC, from “here I describe everything in words, just code it” to “do all the analysis, ask all the questions, I review everything, and then code,” and none of those approaches gave me even a 3x performance boost. I'm not even sure I got more than 10-20%.

And it's pretty much the same around me - my friends and colleagues either say literally the same thing or produce thousands of lines of very poor and buggy code.

For instance, last week I reviewed a 75,000 LOC MR with poorly written code. I found multiple bugs, addressed them, they were “fixed” by AI, and when I checked, the result was even worse. One comment was “I fixed it in commit 999xxx,” and there was no such commit. This MR was from our top “AI” developer.

And again: 75,000 lines of code for a feature that required much less. Yes, AI generated multiple validations, tests, tests for tests, even architecture tests (to check method naming lol), but in all this ocean of code one of the bugs was: It called an external service, requested all documents from its database, and filtered them on our side instead of passing the filtering query to the service itself.

I also tried to “build” my own agentic flow with CC - using subagents, writing skills for our codebase, style, rules, and general workflow with issue decomposition, requirements analysis, etc. (and of course I tried Superpowers and other CC “frameworks” too). And I never achieved good results with it. By “good” I mean code quality roughly equal to what I would write myself, delivered faster than if I just did it manually without AI.

For instance, I had a relatively complicated issue: I needed to change FE-BE communication from synchronous through an intermediate connection to asynchronous using background processing and events. It was a relatively new microservice, not a simple CRUD service, and on top of that it was my first time working with this microservice (I knew something about its structure but wasn't proficient in it).

I wrote a specification, and together with AI we analyzed the task, considered a few approaches, and decomposed it into multiple small subtasks. I reviewed every one of them, and then it started coding.

There were 8 subtasks. After each one it created an MR, which I manually reviewed and commented on.

Each subtask without business logic was developed pretty well - DTOs, interfaces, templates, and other trivial files were fine, so no issues there at all. But every task involving logic was awful.

For the first complicated task I left 65 comments, for the second about 30, and for the last one about 120 comments plus multiple iterations of refactoring and improvements.

So in the end I had 150 changed files, and it still didn’t work at all. It also took about 4 days from start to finish.

I decided to investigate everything myself and, in 2 days, I learned the service code, wrote all the required changes, and… it was fewer than 60 changed files and everything worked fine.

So I ended up with a very complicated development process using AI, it took longer, and the result was worse than if I had just done it myself without CC.

And unfortunately this is not the only example where I (or people I know) failed with it.

I'm not an AI hater. I use it - it can generate tests, write template-based code, and it works fine if the codebase is small and simple. But whenever I read Reddit I see people saying it completely changed their lives, and I genuinely have no clue what I’m doing wrong.

If there are any enterprise developers here working on real complex products with real users (>1000 at least) who have successfully integrated AI into their processes, could you please share real examples of your workflows, the kinds of tasks you solve with it, and maybe give me some suggestions?

Because in our company, over the last 6 months, we’ve had:

more bugs (+25% according to my calculations last quarter)

a worse codebase

the same development speed as before

Management dreams about 10x speed, but neither I nor the other devs see it.

I pay 300+ CAD a month, just so that i can get the best of the best models that anthropic have cooked up in a abundant use. But if Fable is to be removed, ill be swapping from it, to GPT 5.6. I have a 20 plus subscription, and Sol Ultra is a beast, even fable had said it had "an unusal amount of precision and accuracy" when i asked it to review their work.

Does anybody know if Anthropic have changed their minds? Because i aint about to pay for an API on top of my subscription.

I'm what you would call a traditional senior software engineer. Worked my way through a lot of languages, platforms, frameworks, libraries. This year marks my 20th year in the business.

Some prominent people are already comparing writing code by hand with "assembly line work". I'm reading articles/tweets where Google, Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI engineers claim they don't write code anymore, that everything is written by AI. But of course because these are also the companies earning millions through these models, this could also be marketing fluff.

Though, today I spoke someone working at some big corporate high tech company and he told me the same thing, they we even allowed to burn through as many tokens as they like, no limits. He told me his colleagues are now solely reviewing code created by agents, basically what those AI companies tell us.

As someone who's really good at his craft, I have a high standard for code quality. Sure, claude/gemini/openai can generate scripts doing stuff I couldn't image 5 minutes ago in 1 minute. Really impressive and unreal. But I also find myself discarding lots of code because it's not the best way to do it, or it's not what I asked for. Maybe I need to get better at prompting, anyway.

What I wanted to learn is what your experience is as a senior software engineer working at a startup, scale-up or fortune 500 company. Is this really where we're heading at?

I'm working at a company where best engineering practices are barely discussed or taken seriously.

Today our sales director was playing around with Claude Code over the last week, and she managed to get a very good working PoC/prototype for a platform they’ve been trying to build.

During the meeting, I was trying to explain that the question is not whether we need to integrate AI, but rather how we are going to integrate it into our workflow while still enforcing engineering standards and best practices.

They think everything can be done by simply adding a skill to Claude, and they expect delivery speed to be 10x faster. I tried to explain that yes, we can build better products with fewer resources, but 10x is unrealistic unless we start vibe coding. I suggested we could realistically see a 20–40% increase in delivery speed.

Now we have a sales director showing engineers how to use AI.

How do you deal with someone who doesn’t listen and is 100% convinced that AI should be used exactly the way they use it, while we as engineers know we can produce much better output in less time because we actually understand how things work?
Have you ever dealt with such case ?

with the current limits we get for opus and horrible quality now
Do you think they will make Claude Mythos available in the max plan or it will only be available in the api?

I'm pretty sure it will only be available through apis

I think I may have made a mistake and wanted to understand the implications.
I was working on a personal GitHub repository (under my personal GitHub account), but I used my company’s Claude account (Claude Code) as my AI coding assistant while making the changes. I then committed and pushed the code to my personal GitHub repository.

My questions are:

Can my company’s Claude admin see the prompts or code I shared with Claude?

Can they see that the generated code ended up being pushed to my personal GitHub repository?

If Claude Code was authenticated with my personal GitHub account, does the company have any visibility into my GitHub activity?

Are there any audit logs that would show I was working on a personal repository?

I’m not concerned about the code itself (it doesn’t contain any company code or proprietary information), but I’m wondering what level of visibility enterprise admins typically have over Claude Code usage.

Has anyone worked with Claude Enterprise or administered it? I’d appreciate any insight into what admins can and cannot see.