OpenRouter (and potentially Azure in the near future) are options if verifying for enterprise API use is too hard to stomach.
openrouter requires an openai api key.
Readit NewsDeleted Comment
rgbrenner commented on GPT-5 openai.com/gpt-5/... · Posted by u/rd
rgbrenner commented on Media's AI Anthropomorphism Problem readtpa.com/p/stop-preten... · Posted by u/labrador
the media but also the llm providers actively encourage this to fuel their meteoric valuations that are based on the eminent value that would be provided by AGI replacing human labor.
the entire thing — from the phrasing of errors as “hallucinations”, to the demand for safety regulations, to assigning intention to llm outputs — is all a giant show to drive the hype cycle. and the media is an integral part of that, working together with openai et al.
Deserves the blame? Absolutely.
Deserves all the blame? No, the LLM Agent (and those who wrote it) deserve some of the blame. If you wrote an agent, and the agent did that, you have a problem, and you should not have turned such an agent loose on unsuspecting users. You have some of the blame. (And yes, absolutely those users also have blame, for giving a vibe coding experiment access to their production database.)
why would the llm share any of the blame? it has no agency. it doesn’t “understand” anything about the meaning of the symbols it produces.
if you go put your car in drive and let it roll down the street.. the car has 0% of the blame for what happened.
this is a full grown educated adult using a tool, and then attempting to deflect blame for the damage caused by blaming the tool.
Very neat! Is the limit on Pro really only 7k tokens? So less than 7k words? I feel like I get more out of that. It feels like that would blow up pretty quickly with an ongoing chat, but I never hit that.
Or is this a Claude Code specific limit? I haven't used Claude Code extensively yet.
pro is the $20/mo plan that they recently started allowing access to claude code.. but i’ve heard users hit the rate limit with a few queries.. so imo that sounds about right. the chat interface has its own limits separate from claude code.
rgbrenner commented on How I program with agents crawshaw.io/blog/programm... · Posted by u/bumbledraven
Maybe it's because I only code for my own tools, but I still don't understand the benefit of relying on someone/something else to write your code and then reading it, understand it, fixing it, etc. Although asking an LLM to extract and find the thing I'm looking for in an API Doc is super useful and time saving. To me, it's not even about how good these LLMs get in the future. I just don't like reading other people's code lol.
if you work on a team most code you see isn’t yours.. ai code review is really no different than reviewing a pr… except you can edit the output easier and maybe get the author to fix it immediately
rgbrenner commented on OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80% twitter.com/sama/status/1... · Posted by u/mfiguiere
I think I could share a trick that could help:
From my experience (so not an ultimate truth) Claude is not so great at taking the decision for planning by its own: it dives immediately into coding.
If you ask it to think step-by-step it still doesn’t do it but Gemini 2.5 Pro is good at that planning but terrible at actual coding.
So you can use Gemini as planner and Claude as programmer and you get something decent on RooCode.
This “think wisely” that you have to repeat 10x in the prompt is absolutely true
I think you misread my comment. I wasn't asking for help. I get consistent good output from Sonnet 4 using RooCode, without needing Gemini for planning.
Edit: I think I know where our miscommunication is happening...
The "think"/"ultrathink" series of magic words are a claudecode specific feature used to control the max thinking tokens in the request. For example, in claude code, saying "ultrathink" sets the max thinking tokens to 32k.
On other clients these keywords do nothing. In Roo, max thinking tokens is a setting. You can just set it to 32k, and then that's the same as saying "ultrathink" in every prompt in claudecode. But in Roo, I can also setup different settings profiles to use for each mode (with different max thinking token settings), configure the mode prompt, system prompt, etc. No magic keywords needed.. and you have full control over the request.
Claude Code doesn't expose that level of control.
rgbrenner commented on OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80% twitter.com/sama/status/1... · Posted by u/mfiguiere
I got the opposite experience. Not with Opus (too expensive), but with Sonnet. I got things done way more efficiently when using Sonnet with Roo than with Claude Code.
same. i ran a few tests ($100 worth of api calls) with opus 4 and didn’t see any difference compared to sonnet 4 other than the price.
also no idea why he thinks roo is handicapped when claude code nerfs the thinking output and requires typing “think”/think hard/think harder/ultrathink just to expand the max thinking tokens.. which on ultrathink only sets it at 32k… when the max in roo is 51200 and it’s just a setting.
Sounds similar to `ask_followup_question` in Roo
I trust that Claude Code is good, and I believe that most people commenting here are truthful to their experiences. However, I have a strange feeling that companies are using bots on these announcements comments.
Maybe I'm being overcautious, but one of the worst things (for me) that came from the AI rush of these past years is this feeling that everything is full of bots. I know that people have preferences, but I feel that I cannot trust anymore that a specific review was really made by a human. I know that this is not something new, but LLMs take it to the next level for me.
All of these reviews are irrelevant anyway because of the variations in the problems, skillset, project attributes (size, structure, etc), human variations in prompting, and a million other reasons.
You should just set aside some time to try out different tools and see if you agree there's an improvement.
For trying models, OpenRouter is a big time saver.