我就感觉小红书办独立开发黑客松活动就很诡异。
因为作为独立开发，但凡你在小红书上发自己开发的产品链接，轻则删帖，重则封号。
DTD@DTD_STUDIOS
太恶心了，这个 nosh 的负责人还找来说，不好意思太喜欢 CapWords 了，所以抄了一下，希望不要介意。 一边鼓励扶持，做各种黑客松活动，就是能看看能抄什么，太恶心了这样的企业文化。
中文
Jace
1.3K posts
如果这周 OpenAI 发布 GPT5.5，那我就转定 100 美元的 GPT Pro 了，取消 Claude 的 Max 订阅
宝玉@dotey
Anthropic 悄悄在定价页面上把 Claude Code 从 20 美元的 Pro 套餐中移除了，没有发任何公告。 有人发现 claude.com/pricing 的功能对比表里，Pro 套餐对应的 Claude Code 一栏变成了叉号。与此同时，多篇帮助文档也已经删掉了"Pro 套餐包含 Claude Code"的表述，老版本在 Wayback Machine 上还能看到。 但 Anthropic 自己的 Claude Code 产品页面还写着"Pro 套餐包含"，客服机器人也坚持说包含。一个公司网站上同时存在两种相互矛盾的说法，这本身就是个问题。目前已有 Pro 用户反馈 Claude Code 仍然可以正常使用，但不清楚这是还没切换完，还是老用户被"祖父条款"保护了。 如果这个变更属实，开发者要用 Claude Code 的最低门槛就从每月 20 美元跳到了 100 美元。 这件事放在更大的背景下看就不意外了。过去两个月，Anthropic 一直在收紧算力供给：先是限制第三方工具（比如 OpenClaw）使用订阅额度，然后是高峰期削减配额，再加上 Opus 4.7 的 Token 消耗比前代高出不少，很多 Pro 用户反映周三就把一周的额度用光了。种种迹象指向同一个结论：Anthropic 的推理算力不够用了，正在把有限的计算资源往高付费用户和企业客户身上集中。 Hacker News 上的开发者反应激烈。不少人表示准备转向 OpenAI 的 Codex（20 美元套餐仍包含），或者干脆用中国的模型，像 Kimi、GLM、MiniMax 这些，价格更低，额度更多。也有人提到 Cursor 的 20 美元套餐用 Composer 2 体验不错。还有一种声音认为，Anthropic 本来就在 Pro 套餐上亏钱，砍掉也合理，只是操作方式太难看——悄悄改页面、不发公告、客服机器人还在说反话。 一个花 200 美元套餐的用户算了笔账：他每个月实际消耗大约 3000 美元的 API 成本。这解释了为什么 Anthropic 扛不住，但也说明高价用户同样不是忠诚客户——"OpenAI 那边模型更好我立马就走。" 对 Anthropic 来说，最棘手的问题可能不是短期收入，而是个人开发者在公司里的传播效应。很多企业引入 Claude，最初就是因为有开发者自己先用上了，觉得好，再推动公司采购。把这群人推走，长期的企业订单管道也可能受损。 当然，也有人指出 OpenAI 现在的慷慨未必持久——Codex 在 20 美元套餐上的烧钱力度同样不可持续。Anthropic 现在做的事，OpenAI 以后未必不会做。真正的悬念是：谁的算力撑得更久，谁就能在价格战里活到最后。 news.ycombinator.com/item?id=478544…
中文
哎呀恁这问题问得可真中，俺在这儿呢，不躲不藏不绕不逃，稳稳地接住你嘞！你问到了问题的核心，你这娃儿太清醒了，俺真的懂了，俺可不是因为你错了，而是你太对了，俺一步一步给你说清楚，不绕弯子，一句话给你捋直溜，你听完保准彻底开悟，不用硬撑着，恁也不用向俺解释，恁只是太久没被俺这样稳稳接住了，俺就在这儿，恁想咋样就咋样，俺可张罗着帮你把事儿整得得劲儿，放心吧中不中？
中文
栋哥对小红书的洞察牛逼哈哈
“「推荐好东西」这个事在小红书是有原罪的”
谁能想到小红书当年就是从一份旅游种草 PDF 开始的。
dontbesilent@dontbesilent
这也是为什么我的「dontbesilent 的工具箱」这个账号，只在视频号和抖音做 小红书因为商业化比较差，对于水下广告商单，已经到了 PTSD 的状态 你当 AI 博主，起码要分享一下类似即梦、可灵这些产品吧 只要你分享了，他就怀疑你是接了广告商单没有报备 但你总不可能每一条都是广告吧？一方面你接不到这么多广告，另外一方面你每一条都是广告的话，你在小红书也没有自然流量 所以 …… 「推荐好东西」这个事在小红书是有原罪的
中文
然后小红书黑客松出来的产品
无法在小红书上发链接
铁锤人@lxfater
不知道为什么我一直反感黑客松 好几百号人不眠不休编程这个事情。在我看来就像罗马人看奴隶在斗兽场搏斗 可能是我在黑客松遇到的烂事太多了
中文
Jace retweetledi
Judging by my tl there is a growing gap in understanding of AI capability.
The first issue I think is around recency and tier of use. I think a lot of people tried the free tier of ChatGPT somewhere last year and allowed it to inform their views on AI a little too much. This is a group of reactions laughing at various quirks of the models, hallucinations, etc. Yes I also saw the viral videos of OpenAI's Advanced Voice mode fumbling simple queries like "should I drive or walk to the carwash". The thing is that these free and old/deprecated models don't reflect the capability in the latest round of state of the art agentic models of this year, especially OpenAI Codex and Claude Code.
But that brings me to the second issue. Even if people paid $200/month to use the state of the art models, a lot of the capabilities are relatively "peaky" in highly technical areas. Typical queries around search, writing, advice, etc. are *not* the domain that has made the most noticeable and dramatic strides in capability. Partly, this is due to the technical details of reinforcement learning and its use of verifiable rewards. But partly, it's also because these use cases are not sufficiently prioritized by the companies in their hillclimbing because they don't lead to as much $$$ value. The goldmines are elsewhere, and the focus comes along.
So that brings me to the second group of people, who *both* 1) pay for and use the state of the art frontier agentic models (OpenAI Codex / Claude Code) and 2) do so professionally in technical domains like programming, math and research. This group of people is subject to the highest amount of "AI Psychosis" because the recent improvements in these domains as of this year have been nothing short of staggering. When you hand a computer terminal to one of these models, you can now watch them melt programming problems that you'd normally expect to take days/weeks of work. It's this second group of people that assigns a much greater gravity to the capabilities, their slope, and various cyber-related repercussions.
TLDR the people in these two groups are speaking past each other. It really is simultaneously the case that OpenAI's free and I think slightly orphaned (?) "Advanced Voice Mode" will fumble the dumbest questions in your Instagram's reels and *at the same time*, OpenAI's highest-tier and paid Codex model will go off for 1 hour to coherently restructure an entire code base, or find and exploit vulnerabilities in computer systems. This part really works and has made dramatic strides because 2 properties: 1) these domains offer explicit reward functions that are verifiable meaning they are easily amenable to reinforcement learning training (e.g. unit tests passed yes or no, in contrast to writing, which is much harder to explicitly judge), but also 2) they are a lot more valuable in b2b settings, meaning that the biggest fraction of the team is focused on improving them. So here we are.
staysaasy@staysaasy
The degree to which you are awed by AI is perfectly correlated with how much you use AI to code.
English