Anthropic is at a place where they need the world's best software engineers, and they're willing to comp at insane levels to get them. However: You simply cannot post a Linkedin job for "Really Good Software Engineer, comp $10M+" and make any sense of the inbound applications you'll get. They're not the first to figure this out, and they won't be the last: Successfully building a company, and using that company's products, is actually the best job interview you can ask for if you can pay for that caliber of candidate.
What you should be paying attention to: Stainless is shutting down, and their team is joining Anthropic to build, who knows, some dumb integration to make Hubspot data available in Claude, or something equally as boring. But, Stainless was successful. Be the next Stainless. The idea is already validated, these AI companies have already done this to a handful of companies and they're going to keep doing it.
> ... and their team is joining Anthropic to build, who knows, some dumb integration to make Hubspot data available in Claude, or something equally as boring.
Fun fact, I named it "Stainless" after Stainless Steel pipes, likening ourselves to a high-end plumbing supply shop. If you look at the earliest versions of stainlessapi.com on archive.org, you'll see our original motto was "Quality fittings for your REST API".
All that is to say, the incredibly "boring" infrastructural work of making "boring" APIs like Hubspot's more usefully accessible is absolutely the kind of thing I'm excited to do at Anthropic :)
(It also happens to be what got us all excited to work at stainless in the first place, but of course, we understand it's not for everyone!)
In short: we take your OpenAPI spec file and generate idiomatic, best in class SDKs in various languages, a highly customizable docs product (for your API and SDKs, with neat specific examples ready to be copy pasted), MCP servers, CLI clients, terraform providers.
Going further into it: the expected user experience for your team is that you create a PR in your own API repo, a GitHub action triggers builds for everything and gives you a summary via PR comments where you can directly see diagnostic feedback, see the exact diff for each SDKs, provide the commit message for your end users. Once your PR is merged we push changes to all your SDK/docs repos and prepare a release PR ready for your team to review and merge. You merge it, everything gets released to your end users.
Now what we build goes way further than that: we have a web platform where you can live edit your Stainless config file and preview your SDKs, a fairly complex diagnostic system, a really cool system that allows you to add your own custom code on top of any generated SDK directly via git — the whole repo is something you can modify to your wishes, we keep track of your custom changes and always reapply on top of the latest codegen output. And a lot of other features (I’m biased because I designed and implemented the public version but I personally really like our spec transforms, they let you apply changes to your spec file downstream, just by modifying your stainless config file).
I don’t understand your point, things look fairly clear to me, assuming you’re familiar with that part of the industry. We didn’t hide behind buzzwords and show you the end product right away
Yes, you do hide behind buzzwords. Because your actual front page is this: https://www.stainless.com/ not the sdk subpage
--- start quote ---
Best-in-class interfaces for developers and agents
Great agent experience is built on great developer experience. Stainless helps you deliver both, with robust and idiomatic SDKs, documentation that keeps up with your API, and state-of-the-art MCP servers, all derived from your OpenAPI spec.
It turned API specs into ssoftware devolopment kits and model context servers. Basically connecting existing tools to AI agents so they can actually use them.
They might be a big part of the reason why claude code can edit notion docs for you pretty easily
I think the question he tried to raise was "is this needed? Aren't today's / tomorrow's models well-enough equipped to deal with just OPEN API?"
(idk, just if I understand the question)
To be clear, because that has incorrectly been reported since at least 2024, none of the codegen at stainless has ever been AI based.
Alex vision has always been to generate code other engineers would love reading. It’s something I know the team is very proud of and what attracted most of us. We all joined because we wanted to raise the quality of developer experience across the board and I believe that we did it successfully
well you might say that, but they got bought, so in making nothing which no one needed they did find their perfect match, anthropic, who also builds nothing and sells hot air :D.
We might have our opinions on AI and slop, but in the end of the day this was a business play and it worked out for the players. Separate that from the actual product and u can respect they did really well for themselves.
In this case we actually were selling something specific. Customers got SDKs/MCP servers/docs websites + the whole release pipeline automation out of the deal. I don’t see where the claims of hot air come from. The SDKs we produce are used by millions of developers every single day. I mean, we worked really closely with the teams at Cloudflare, Mux, Lithic, Finch, Modern Treasury, Scale, and a lots of others. It’s not like we had just a pitch and only had Anthropic as a close customer.
Why do they need the best software engineers? I thought their product was supposed to replace such roles. Yet look at the positions they’re hiring for in marketing, finance etc.: https://www.anthropic.com/careers/jobs
Why aren’t they dogfooding their own products to replace such roles?
I've seen this at work. Giving Claude Code to a mediocre programmer gets you mediocre results. The really effective engineers with coding agent can accomplish a lot. Thousand monkeys...
I've also seen this. But I'll extend it to saying that giving Claude to a bad programmer gives bad results.
And seeing how people use it: good programmers review output and iterate to get better output. But bad programmers simply trust the output is good: they have no ability to review it themselves and often don't try.
With about 5-10h over the weekend using free tier Claude and ChatGPT I managed to put together a scraper for a particular thing on a website I’m interested, grab the item images, do an initial pass with local OCR, if it hit some keywords, run openCV to crop for better OCR and dump the hits for further investigation.
Nothing particularly advanced but it would have taken me a horrendous amount of time without it to be half as good, like it did when I built a similar scraper 10 years ago.
This is broadly true of a bunch of jobs/fields with LLMs, but particularly true for programming. They raise the floor to a point where a generally capable person can put something like that together, or come up with a passably okay visual design, or decent-enough written language. I've been using them heavily to get some laughably basic CAD work done for small 3d printed projects. Stuff that absolutely makes my mechanical engineer friends roll their eyes at me.
An expert can either use the tool more effectively, or see all the issues in a less experienced person's output.
Both of these are good things, the mistake a ton of people are making is experiencing industrial scale Dunning-Kruger and thinking "Only my expertise is still valuable, every other white collar role is done!"
The second-order mistake is thinking that raising the floor like that devalues expertise instead of increasing demand for it. The net-effect of me starting to play with CAD because it's a little easier now isn't that I don't hire my friends who are experts to make a tiny spacer I'm going to 3d print, I never would have hired them for that, it's that maybe I start learning the skills and decide to take on a more ambitious project where I do need to hire one of them for some help, or start ordering custom CNC'd parts -- scale that to the entire economy.
Maybe. A bad programmer is unlikely to get something even working so in that world nobody will depend on it because they can't even use it. A bad AI programmer (or non-programmer) can get the thing working so people will depend on it - the blast radius is now higher.
Effective AI use (in my experience) has human doing the load bearing parts by hand (schemas, api spec, overall architecture, domain types) then AI fills in the blanks.
Could you briefly describe your workflow for doing that or give a pointer to a blog you wrote/like that aligns with the process? Thanks in any case, happy designing ;-)
I'm not who you asked, but my workflow is the same it always was, just that one tool in the process is an LLM. That's it.
If I find a task to be annoying and repetetive, I use an LLM to do it, then validate it. The quality of my work only improves, and so does the speed, and I don't lose my skill over time.
I am exploring ways to document the design for the agent to read and update. What makes it difficult is the lack of structure. Spec writing is not my core skill. Schemas and APIs are easier, there are declarative ways to document them. Runtime concepts and workflows have less structure and writing prose seems so unstructured for my taste. Formal languages are too rigid. But I could not find a better way.
For me writing manpages as a spec worked well. While the format is unintuitive and tedious (at least to me), I used AI to format the manpages from my descriptions and rendered to PDF to review. Though it's been mainly useful for CLI utilities.
Once I got the manpages ready and the way I wanted, I just stored those in an empty project folder and told the agent to implement as specified in a language of my choosing.
Maybe for other development scenarios like GUI there is some "native" way to spec the project in a common format like this.
AI can let you downsize the number of employees that you have and maintain the status quo or it can let you maintain the number of employees, reduce technical debt, improve products, and services.
Do the economics work out ? You can downsize the devs you have, but you need to maintain a smaller stable of very expensive devs, and then factor in the token usage.
For example, a recent story about the openclaw creator using $1.3M of tokens/month. And let's assume he's getting paid $5M/yr which is probably a vast under estimate.
Is he providing value that a traditional software development org with normal developers couldn't provide for $20M/yr?
The issue is there’s non linearities involved. Although I don’t know I would use the open claw guy, but let’s take Isaac Newton. You can’t sum up people and arrive at an Isaac Newton worth of talent. He’s singular, unique, and irreplaceable at what he did. There were others similarly outsized in their ability to change things, and there are today as well. But you can’t funge talent at some level with more people - in fact as we know there’s a rapidly diminishing return on people investment.
Finally in some ways agentic workflows magnify the power of the individual who is adept at harnessing them, they don’t have to argue (much) with the agents to effect their ideas. I’ve found a lot of very bright engineers spend their days fighting to be heard by managers and peers who can’t / won’t understand them. By unshackling them from trying to debate down idiots, they deliver way way more, and of the right things, than they otherwise could have.
No? This is only true if you assume that Newton’s only notable achievement was the creation of calculus. Newton did far more for physics and classical mechanics than Leibniz. Did Leibniz also discover the universal law of gravitation? Did he match Newton’s prism experiments in some way? In what sense can Newton be replaced by Leibniz?
| Newton... He's Singular, unique, and irreplaceable at what he did.
Leibniz, literally parallel.
Was Newton just a smart guy at the right place and the right time. These smart folks require other smart folks to understand and verify what they did. There are many who have amazing pedigrees in history.
The $1.3 million doesn't mean much. The article stated he could've switched to a significantly cheaper option and cut the bill to $300k. That's still a lot but since he worked for the company that sells the tokens it isn't as though they were paying the retail cost.
Yes, $1.3M in token cost in less than 30 days and some days were even off-peak, if you can call it that with that insane scale that likely hides quite a lot of tokens in the lower bars.
I honestly believe that most Silicon Valley developers could have their pre-AI output replaced by 10 dollars/day in Gemini 3 pay as you go spend.
I don't think existing companies will bite that bullet, but I think you'll see AI native companies in five years with like, a baffling small number of people.
> Where are these hyper productive small companies running laps around bigger ones right now?
Getting bought by the bigger companies as it is currently the goal of most start-up since no one cares about monopolies and anti competitive behavior nowadays.
Maybe smart to convince everyone else to fire and slow down while you hire and speed up. I don't think it is actually planned, but perhaps smart in hindsite.
They need genius to promote the ceiling of LLM capability or dig out the potential of it. The best SEs often have better tastes in technique and business and they know why while knowing how. So there's a higher possibility for them to do master works quickly with the help and harness of LLM.
>Why do they need the best software engineers? I thought their product was supposed to replace such roles.
Who claimed that?
Their customers will be happy if their product replaces all the junior positions and midwit developers off the payroll. then that's already a huge saving to any company's bottom line.
Even if it doesn't directly replace workers, reducing the bargaining power of those spoiled SW devs and not having to give them huge raises all the time or they leave, is still enough. That's the whole point of layoffs and offshoring anyway.
Every tech company claims that they need the "best" software engineers. How often is that actually true? Are there reasonably reliable techniques to turn a mediocre engineer into one of the best?
That's not true. It self selects for people who are focused on making money, not for the best software guys. There are for sure some people in that venn diagram who overlap, but it is not that self-intersecting. This is mainly because the best software guys are rather more interested in doing their own thing and hacking on whatever interests them, rather than what their boss wants.
It also only self selects for those who want to work in stressful/long working day environments, rather than those who value stability.
> Successfully building a company, and using that company's products, is actually the best job interview you can ask for if you can pay for that caliber of candidate.
This tests for very different skills than being an exceptional programmer.
I did use the word "software engineer" there, but realistically what they're looking for is exactly the name of the role they wear: Member of Technical Staff. Software Engineer, businessman, product manager, designer, agentic harness engineer, cloud, devops, all rolled into one. They want people who can own the entirety of a product from end-to-end. A responsibility domain so vast that most peoples' first thought is to laugh, and that's exactly why they're acquiring companies; the responsibilities they're looking for mirror the role the founders and higher-level leadership in successful startups would have had. The lower-level engineers will probably be let go. They'll gladly pay $50M-$100M for just a dozen or so of the top people.
The reason why I avoided this term is that in Germany, there exists a quite strict of whatx an engineer (Ingenieur) is, which is defined in the laws of many federal states (Ingenieurgesetz [engineering law]). "Ingenieur" (engineer) is a protected professional title:
There exist some boundary cases under which as a software developer you can call yourself an "Ingenieur", but you have to be insanely careful about whether you actually satisfy the legal criteria (see (*)) - in most cases you don't and you are thus a criminal if you do.
The regulation is enforced if someone uses it as title, e.g “Diplom-Ingenieur Max Mustermann”. I am not aware of a court ruling for any other kind of use.
That being said, in Germany there is no official degree named Diplom-Ingenieur Softwareentwicklung, it is always Diplom-Informatiker. Also, the Expression “Softwareingenieur” is not used, the straightforward translation of software engineer would be either Informatiker (emphasizing the degree) or Softwareentwickler (emphasizing the skill).
This is no legal advice: As far as I know, the regulation is strictly about German titles, so putting “software engineer” in your LinkedIn CV is out of scope of this law.
>
Wait, does that mean that if I self describe as a software engineer on LinkedIn and get an offer by Germans id be breaking the law by accepting?
Using the German translation "Softwareingenieur" of "software engineer" on your LinkedIn page might easily get you into trouble.
Typically, as far as I know, law enforcement agencies only get active in the punishable act "Missbrauch von Titeln, Berufsbezeichnungen und Abzeichen" [abuse of titles, occupational titles and emblems] if the culprit gets denounced by someone or if there is a public interest, but everybody knows how easy it is to make enemies in your job or on the internet.
The candidate you're describing is a unicorn. Even assuming that this acqui-hire routine is a good way of finding such people, that doesn't answer the question why they're needed for "some dumb integration to make Hubspot data available in Claude, or something equally as boring" (as you suggested above).
I think you're overestimating the rationality of this game.
Having a successful business requires a lot of factors that don't really have anything to do with software engineering. Things like luck, connections, access to funding, good marketing, etc. And while have good engineers on the payroll undoubtedly helps, the good engineers aren't necessarily the ones getting a big fallout from the acquisition and may not stick around for long after the acquisition, especially if they get put on a project they don't care about.
What's the difference between a software developer and a software engineer?
The honest answer is that in most day-to-day contexts, the distinction is more about company culture and title preference than actual job duties. A "software developer" at one company might do more rigorous engineering work than a "software engineer" at another.
> and their team is joining Anthropic to build, who knows, some dumb integration to make Hubspot data available in Claude, or something equally as boring.
Normally I would say those Engineers would leave eventually, because there are not enough technical challenges and/or the pace is slower.
But I guess when you pay much above market rate that doesn't really matter.
> where they need the world's best software engineers
For what, to write regex to check for number of "fucks" given in prompts, or to write 20k LoC files with 20 levels of nesting ? As we saw in that Claude code leak recently.
I'm not sure how you can equate building a startup and selling to a bigger company as a great interview for developers. Maybe they have great engineers, but IME it's far more likely they've got good founders, marketing or sales on top of (perhaps) some stellar engineering.
All that's moot though if your fundamental premise is wrong. Why does Anthropic need "the world's best software engineers" to build on top of the models? Compentent developers can build APIs - sorry - MCP servers and other integration plumbing.
I think what you're missing is that prior to the acquisition, Anthropic was a customer of Stainless. They did not need to "rummage through [their] data and workflows" to understand the quality of their product.
> As we focus on Claude Platform capabilities and connecting agents to APIs, we’ll be winding down all hosted Stainless products, including our SDK generator. Starting today, new signups, projects, and SDKs will not be available.
"Hundreds of companies rely on Stainless to generate SDKs, CLIs, and MCP servers—the libraries, command-line tools, and connectors that let developers and agents use an API."
I'm waiting for the Enterprise space to wise up. For anyone who's ever worked with any reasonably large company as a vendor (especially a small one) you know how painful redlines in legal can be. Why TF haven't enterprise made it more painful for these events? Basically state that if the service is purchased/sold/shuttered prior to the contract expiry date that a significant penalty (e.g. full refund) is required and including some portion of investment made to onboard said service/product/tool.
I can't even imagine the money wasted on turn-and-burns in the F1000 alone. The US needs a wake up call with respect to consumer / buyer protections. The life of the snake oil salesman is plentiful these days, and you have a lot of AI-psychotic executives who can't seem to get enough.
> Why TF haven't enterprise made it more painful for these events?
They mostly have. By mostly refraining from dealing with startups and companies they deem either “too young” or "too small" to be reliable partners. And, when they do, imposing long sales cycles.
And thus the enterprise well is poisoned for most startups.
A place I worked some years ago we even had an escrow foisted on us by our larger partner in the agreement so that they’d be able to continue running the software we were building if we went under.
Honestly, it was a pain in the ass and meant that for them alone we ended up running an older version of the software than we offered to clients because as we developed its capabilities it became ever more integrated into our core platform and we weren’t about to escrow that.
When the agreement came up for renewal at the three year mark we managed to get the escrow clauses removed.
A lot of money is made this way. It'll take an act of Congress (or something on that level) but many of us are already "on the take" so to speak, so I doubt it'll ever happen.
This is why it's good to consider an open-source product backed by an enterprise support company. Growthbook is an example. If they go poof you still have dozens to hundreds of other companies, and open source base, and can collaborate with the other users (companies) to crate a foundation to carry on development if needed. Or just patch it yourself. There's a continuum depending on how critical and how deeply you exploit it.
what is the value in destroying those relationships? I assume it was acquisition to defend against another company owning a key part of their delivery pipeline, but killing the public product is just bad press.
the relationships and enterprise customers they have are probably wildly blown out of proportion and few if any actually used the product in production.
They can also keep the product running behind the scenes for a select few and just shut down the public facing part
What's WILD is people ending up relying on these essentially startup-slops that just serves to give you future technical debt once you have to eventually moved away because they got acquired by $INSERT_BAD_GUY_OF_THE_MONTH
The only people "relying" on this are other startups whose VC benefactors force them to use other products under their portfolio in order to goose up their numbers.
For context I was the founding member of our customer eng team, the main drive for Stainless adoption came from engineering teams who didn’t have the time/capacity/expertise to implement high quality SDKs + maintain the whole release pipeline automation across multiple languages. The pitch is „we want you to focus on your domain of expertises. We handle all the plumbing for your end users to have the best DX possible when using your services“. Which is IMHO very compelling
It is indeed, and I totally understand why people want something like that! Shame about the closing of the service though, which will pretty much make everyone turn away from similar solutions in the future if they're provided by a startup, as the rugpull Stainless is about to do will be a bitch to deal with for many.
The goal for the customers was to save time, little did they know Anthropic had other ideas for them :)
I see it differently. I don’t think it is fair to describe it as a rug pull, the sdks we generated are owned by customers and aren’t going away. They own the repositories. We also implemented a self-service option just for the transition out from Stainless SaaS.
The most important part in my opinion is that with Stainless we were able to prove that a profitable market for SDK codegen exists and that people do care a lot about the quality of the generated code. New and existing players can take advantage of the segment we contributed developing. We also proved that a whole set of companies are ready to pay to provide an excellent developer experience to their end users.
At the same time the whole ecosystem is being reinvented by AI, it is possible that Stainless as it was doesn’t make sense in a future where everything is agentic, it’s hard to say.
I personally believe there is still a lot of values that can be found in the space Stainless built — and I’m sure Fern and others will continue to grow and develop solutions around OpenAPI
You may not even see it. I worked in a startup whose founder had money dipped into about a dozen products in the cyber security vertical. Many of those startups, I later found out, had access or used products from others in his portfolio. Basically taking $50k and cycling it through all of them buying something from the other one. I doubt it was a money laundering scheme, but it sure was convenient to just add logos of "customers" to the Nascar pitch slide.
Go to the website of pretty much any AI startupslop, Google who led their series A, then Google who led the series A of the other AI startups (it’s always other AI startups) whose logos they show as users/testimonials/case studies on their landing page. You’ll start seeing a pattern.
that makes so much sense. I always wondered how the fuck did all those ZIRP era "hello world as a service" bullshit startups have any customers at all.
Stainless wasn’t created during the zero-interest era. And we had paying customers since literally the first month of existence. We developed everything in close collaboration with customers
It may be that there are many projects relying on Stainless, or, as a sibling comment points out, it may be portfolio-based stack selection rather than actual feature dependence.
Either way, it does seem irresponsible and tone deaf for an acquiring/hiring company and an acquired/hired company to send these conflicting signals. If one puts oneself out there as dependable in the face hopes and needs of other, smaller, up-and-coming projects, then a rapid wind-down for $ is incongruent with such a posture.
So much so that, at least for my part, I'd be quite reluctant to hire someone who had engaged in this sort of bob-and-weave pursuit.
Some clarity about existing users/SDKs would go a long way. Otherwise this reads like "we just bought OpenAI's front door and we're EOLing it. Hopefully no one was planning to use it in the future". Petty and pointless.
> As we focus on Claude Platform capabilities and connecting agents to APIs, we’ll be winding down all hosted Stainless products, including our SDK generator. Starting today, new signups, projects, and SDKs will not be available.
> If you’re a Stainless customer, visit app.stainless.com/transition for help transitioning from Stainless-managed products to other options. As always, you own the SDKs you’ve generated to date, and have full rights to modify and extend them however you wish.
If you have an account you can go to https://app.stainless.com/transition. The team spent a good amount of time working on a way for customers to switch to self-service
I don't think the generators themselves were open-sourced (only the generated SDKs were already open-source). That leaves three main (recommended) options:
* Manual Maintenance: Returning to the pre-Stainless era.
* Agentic Coding: Works to an extent, but you lose the deterministic, review-free output required to keep an SDK perfectly structured and coherent.
* Open-source Generators: Helpful for basic use cases, but they lack Stainless's full-stack features like multi-language generation and publishing, MCPs, and documentation.
Reach out to [email protected], the team can provide more details and clarify eligibility.
What I can say for sure is that the stlc approach comes with vanilla release–please support for the release flow (I worked on that part) and that stlc has been designed for both local and CI contexts. We also have extensive docs covering all of that
I'm viewing this as a user of non-Ant Stainless SDKs. I don't have an account or relationship with you guys, and thanks to your (excellent!) product, the surfaces I contact don't have a direct dependence on your services. But that surface is intimately informed by the nuances of your product! It'd be nice to allay (or confirm) people's fears about how this might impact your other prominent users!
Good point. FWIW if anyone reading this is a stainless user and is concerned about their situation you can reach out to [email protected]. I check with the team if they can update the article with a mention
On the contrary, destroying other people's things is a fundamental part of high-stakes capitalism. If that's what it is, you're describing it as petty and pointless because it's hurting you (or someone like you).
But hurting people can be the intent. If you're selling toys, you can make a business case for going out of your way to smash other people's toys, and that can become the main activity if it's advantageous enough.
'creating new things to make the world a better place' is marketing to a specific audience. There's other audiences who are just as willing to invest in 'will absolutely ruin any rivals', and that's hardly new. Right now it's very much in vogue but could become very unfashionable as people in general react to its inevitable effects.
Congrats to the team at Stainless, it's a great team to be joining over at Anthropic.
We were an ealy adopter of their Node SDK generator at Mux (and latterly their Typescript and other generators), and the product worked great, and I'm sad to see it be shut down.
At the same time, it's easy to understand why this is a complciated product/market to be in at the moment - it's very tempting and easy to vibe code SDKs from a OpenAPI spec files right now. I would think a lot of teams will just go in that direction (for better or worse), using the same toolchain that the product developers are using today for the product, for effectively no extra cost.
I feel like we are seeing agentic coding tools morph into walled gardens with these acquisitions. Anthropic has restricted claude code usage while OpenAI has sort of let Codex fill the void. I am curious to see how this continues to evolve.
This is the whole point and the reason for the lofty valuations. Get everyone to shift their work to be dependent on these tooling, to the point they can't imagine working in any other way, and then raise prices. Tale as old as enterprise software.
Tale as old as the word "startup" even. Uber/Lyft did it with taxis. DoorDash did it with food delivery. You run at a loss for years while destroying your legacy competition by just outlasting them, then once you have cornered the market you squeeze.
I understand the cynism but it’s not the case here. Stainless isn't a case of blitzscaling or running a loss for years to destroy the competition. The motto of the company is polished and robust and we invested a lot into generating what we think are the highest quality SDKs available. We could have shipped things way, way faster if the focus on design and quality wasn’t such an essential part of the development process
No but Anthropic and OpenAI are very much trying to use their positions to destroy everyone's ability to do things without their product, make AI essential, and then jack prices. Thats the only way this becomes profitable.
Obviously not, I do feel more than qualified given that I actively contributed to developing the company. None of what I wrote in the comment you responded to is a secret or is based on my personal judgement, we’ve been open about our values
Skill issue. Taxi companies aren't able to innovate and adapt and improve, despite the competition from Uber, preferring instead to use lobbying and regulations too survive in a post-Uber world.
Actually, it is a marketing issue. Taxis did innovate and did improve and imo are a better product than uber today. They have an app that is no different than what you expect with rideshare apps. Actually it is better, I can schedule a ride and get a flat rate with tip already baked in to places like the airport. No need to fret about surge prices at all, what I see when I schedule it today is what I pay when it comes tomorrow or next week or next month, whenever I've scheduled it.
But, no one uses it, because uber and lyft have become kleenex or coca cola: the brand name associated with the basic phenomenon, such that consumers cannot even think about the phenomenon without thinking first of the brand and probably resorting to the brand.
Last time I was in Vegas (in 2026), there was a $40/$60 surcharge to my destination because the taxicab commission was able to enact regulations that says taxis can charge that, while Lyft/Ubers to the same location did not have to pay it. I was waiting at a smaller hotel for 20 minutes for a taxi to arrive to the taxi stand. There was a line of people an no taxis in sight. The time before that, I got hit with the ole "credit card machine doesn't work" bit.
If they wannted to innovate, every taxi stand would have a QR code to download their app, you set your destination while you're waiting in the line (if there is one), you get in the cab, the driver scans the QR code from your phone, payment happens via CC in the app, no surprises either. The phone app would show you the route, and then give an estimated price, and if there's an overage due to traffic/other problem, give me a notification on my phone. It would also let me set preferences for conversation/temperature.
I'm reading "enshitification", and it describes this cycle of first losing money but acquiring customers, then switching focus to catering to businesses, then to themselves and at that point the tool is not what it was supposedly intended to be.
This is the same startup culture. The only innovation here is finding new way to swindle customers and businesses out of money.
Exactly. The goal of any VC by definition is to return a positive return on investment. I guess you might have a handful of exceptions, funds that are environmentally conscious, but profit remains paramount.
The new owner's plan is...to sunset the paid product immediately and give customers access to tooling to be able to continue generating SDKs on their own. From Stainless's post:
As we focus on Claude Platform capabilities and connecting agents to APIs, we’ll be winding down all hosted Stainless products, including our SDK generator. Starting today, new signups, projects, and SDKs will not be available.
If you’re a Stainless customer, visit app.stainless.com/transition for help transitioning from Stainless-managed products to other options. As always, you own the SDKs you’ve generated to date, and have full rights to modify and extend them however you wish.
As a customer, all-in-all, we were pretty pleased with the outcome. Stainless was a great partner to us, even in "the end," and I'm really happy for the team.
With respect, you were manipulated (either by founders or by investors). Startups leverage employees' pro-social leanings to make them feel good about a fundamentally anti-social enterprise.
Why wouldn't getting more customers the plan? Anthropic doesn't acquire companies to have a lower market share. There is clearly a consolidation and a rush to get as much of the developer market as possible.
Claude is just a tool. My team members are each free to choose the text editor or IDE that they are happiest with. In the near future, I hope to be able to say the same for coding agents. I really like Claude, but I don't track Claude resources in our repos. If something better comes along, I'm betting it will be perfectly happy to parse the markdown of my existing memory files, and nothing in the repo itself will force anyone else to know that I switched.
It kind of blows my mind that the majority of Claude users have just accepted that CLAUDE.md is a tracked file that the whole team has to standardize on and share. Coding agents are the ultimate API. They conform to however you prefer to interact. Is anyone really expecting to enforce standard operating procedures with this non-deterministic black box of magic?
Frontier AI labs is pivoting to something that can justified their IPO. just like OpenAI shut down other services and pivot more into coding. They want to show profitability before their mega IPO.
I don’t really see where the “walled garden” complaint is coming from. Anthropic spends a lot of effort to keep you from churning through trillions of tokens on their flat-rate subscription plan, but that’s a billing detail, and one that I honestly don’t share the outrage about. The technology part of CC is still totally open: skills, MCP, etc. are all open informal standards and there hasn’t been any movement to lock that down.
This is missing the forest for the trees and it comes across as adulation for a corporation, when in fact, customers come first. Why are you trying to police people's opinion about a product?
I never said I didn't _understand_ why Anthropic is doing this. What I'm saying is nobody wants Claude Code, the product. They want access to the model. Feeling strapped to a harness you don't enjoy working with and which may limit your productivity is not a good experience for users. Voicing that dissatisfaction is perfectly valid. No, it's not "egregious" or "wrong", but it's also _something_ rather than "not anything".
Do you know what also give users access to the model without forcing lock-in? A better product. Building it is a choice Anthropic decided not to make.
Just want to take this moment to say thank you to all the customers I had the opportunity to interact with during my time at Stainless as I expect lots of them are likely to be active in this thread. It has been an honor to work with you all and none of what happened over the past 4 years would have been possible without your trust and support
The decision is up to Anthropic. As part of the transition process we created a source-available version of the codegen named stlc and everything for customers to be able to self serve without relying on Stainless SaaS (including support for custom code, and more). I cannot comment on other considerations.
If you want to know more details regarding stlc you can reach out to [email protected]
stainless is a great piece of software. it was a really good risk to try to make a business out of openapi generators' maintainers not having enough time to fix bugs. everybody benefits. it sounds like nothing but similar ideas - like uv - save me time every day and turn me into an evangelist.
I used to love reading about everything Anthropic was building/doing but the way they’ve toyed with limits has really soured me on them so now I largely ignore the news except for when I decide to piss and moan. The AI space baffles me. One minute a company is the darling of the industry and the next they’ve drawn ire by taking a defense contract, introducing a bug that burns through all your tokens, cutting limits down to comical lows or just straight nerfing a model in production. It’s hard to keep up with how quickly public opinion turns on these companies but Anthropic has been especially rough lately.
I get that most of our new customers will use AI to generate client libs. But our existing customer base depends on our Stainless generated client libs. These OpenAPI schema > client lib providers had a bit of lockin since the client libs are all slightly different.
Migration's unfortunately not as easy as just switching to Speakeasy or Openapi generator w/o breaking existing customers.
Please reach out to [email protected], we worked on a self-service offering and the team can answer your concerns and help where possible.
Though I understand the frustration, sorry for this. If you end up looking for a competitor I would recommend fern over speakeasy, their offering is way better in my opinion (I’ve personally always seen fern as Stainless only real competition, I have lots of respect for what they’ve built)
There is a reason the EU has massive brain drain towards the US. This comes with the territory of being super unfriendly to corporations and high earners. It has its benefits too of course. Free healthcare, safety net, public transit, well maintained cities, happier median person.
While the EU does a good job optimizing life for the median person, it is a nightmare for the exceptional. It should find a way to fix this or the brain drain will continue.
Do you have any numbers to back that up, especially the massive brain drain? I’d like to think I’m overall a competent person who wouldn’t mind relocating for an interesting opportunity, but the US can get fucked for a what’s actually a long list of reasons.
There's this myth that only the absolute best, the crème de la crème of European engineers will emigrate to the US to work in tech there. That is simply not true. There are tens of thousands of extremely competent engineers here that either won't, or can't leave for the US, not even if offered 10x their current salary.
And to be frank, that's not only Europe.
The challenge with Europe is not talent, but funding - and that is related to those things you wrote, namely how companies are taxed in some European countries.
I think the core issue is really more the fragmented regulatory landscape when incorporating a business. I’m hopeful the 28th regime can help: https://the28thregime.eu/
I worked with both Alex (stainless) and Jarred (bun) at Stripe, and they were both notable for their high energy and output. I did find it amusing that Anthropic picked both the Xtripes up and wonder how many Xtripes at at Anthropic hiring their ex-coworkers.
Congrats to them both, and I'm not at all surprised! Great acquihires.
I met him via HN, and somehow got the opportunity to work closely with him on Stainless since the very early days, I can confirm he is awesome! He did such a fantastic work building the team and developing a very unique culture of excellence and kindness
Anthropic is getting extremely petty and especially against oai
- ad in superbowl about how they are the good guys.
- dow public PR stunt (they are the ones to give Palantir their model access).
- sues openclaw.
- threatens every use of cc in oss community.
- prevents other companies using claude saying they cant use when they compete.
- never released a single open weight model.
- Dario told OAI is Yolo'ing in compute and they are now doing the same.
- gas lighting developers and then after weeks acknowledging they fiddled with reasoning juice.
- fear mongoring on mythos and then geting compute later and acknowledging publicly once they realized its not significantly better than gpt 5.5 cyber.
It should be noted that this user is basically an OAI shill account. You can look through their history to see this quite clearly.
Anecdata, but I have a friend at OAI who claims that on both twitter and HN there is mild coordination of OAI employees to signal boost pro-OAI and anti-competitor messaging.
I think you would be right if their post was substantive in relation to the topic, but it's not. It's a list of grievances almost all of which are unrelated. Despite this, it was at the top of the replies to the topic.
The deeper issue is that the comment isn't adding anything to the conversation. It's simply a list of criticisms about Anthropic. If it were an analysis of why this acquisition is so bad, I'd agree with your stance. But the only thing the comment appears to do is try to make them look bad.
In the age of AI you can't "undo the claims" for randos on the internet. I mean it was hard enough before, but at this point it's now a direct money -> speech pipeline. Reputation will matter more than ever before.
> who claims that on both twitter and HN there is mild coordination of OAI employees to signal boost pro-OAI and anti-competitor messaging.
This happens for every single company that has twitter/HN/reddit users from the same company on the same platforms, I think it's also short of impossible to stop. I don't think I haven't worked in a single company in the last decade where that hasn't happened, in a range of scales.
If you weren't already, which you should have been really, you should be suspicious about anything you come across on the internet :)
It’s gotten better within the last month or so but historically there’s been an excessive amount of anti-OAI and pro-Anthropic activity on this site as well and I’ve seen numerous posts get downvoted and almost instantly flagged for calling this out more politely than you have here.
So at least anecdotally I really don’t think it’s fair to portray this as OAI doing some sort of social media psyop as if others aren’t engaged in similar behavior.
It’s also very possible that this user just has opinions and tends to think OAI is more developer friendly / that Anthropic is hostile to developers (which is common sentiment I’ve seen from many real people who are definitely not paid OAI shills or something)
HN did a massive 180 in the last month or two, and nearly every post or comment related to Anthropic is just a hate post.
The amount of anger against Anthropic on HN doesn't reflect anything I see in reality (and I work at a pretty big FAANG with Codex and Claude Code, both are great) so I do suspect that OAI is doing some guerrilla marketing here, while Anthropic isn't really marketing or doing PR at all.
> I do suspect that OAI is doing some guerrilla marketing here, while Anthropic isn't really marketing or doing PR at all.
That is a very HN-minded comment.
Sure, there's probably some accounts that are more or less controlled by the big AI labs here.
But looking at how humans have been acting for the last 20 years, you'll see that you don't need to pay people to promote things.
They'll do it freely, because they identify with it and they can't fathom other people not agreeing with them.
Do you really thing that the weekly posts about people dropping AWS for Hetzner are paid by the German company?
No.
People have limited time and money.
Some picked Claude, others picked Codex.
Claude seems to be the most popular in terms of content produced about it.
So some people probably picked Codex just because they don't want to be like everyone else.
Then they obviously have to talk down about Claude, because if Codex is not better, then they are not.
Simple.
And from my POV that's not a good thing because HN was the place where people didn't act like this.
It was pragmatism and honest debate.
Now it's becoming: my agent is better than X, my stack is better than Y...
on twitter it is pretty clear that openai employees engage in coordinated messaging in a way that I haven't seen from other frontier labs. i say that as someone who prefers codex/gpt-5.5
Honestly I expect it's just annoyed devs getting annoyed about the ratelimits on plans and post-hoc justifying. Now that Codex has far more capacity and their slot machine makes better outcomes (note: I am a heavy LLM-assisted coder) they feel like they have to justify their felt animosity towards these companies
Personally i've just been using Claude Code with a coding agent UI (vibe-kanban) that has wrapped over "claude -p" for more than half a year without problems. I'd only been coding interactively and well within the terms of their subscription plan. I'm not even that much of a heavy user, I'm only hitting 10-40% of my weekly quota on a given week, and I basically only use the subscription outside of what Anthropic considers peak hours.
And then I got caught in the collateral damage a few days ago when Anthropic announced changes to their subscription plan billing, just like every other user of that tool and similar tools like Conductor and Zed. So in a month I won't be able to use my Claude sub quotas for these tools, all because some other people are ruining it for everyone by using "claude -p" to run openclaw, hermes agent and autonomous dark factories that burn billions of tokens a day.
I would have been fine with the change, except Anthropic's messaging was very slimy. They tried to spin their change as a positive change even though it was clearly not for anyone who was using a "claude -p" wrapper over Claude Code for better UX. They're within their rights to change their subscription billing, but they still couldn't be honest to their own users about it. Evidently, this kind of gaslighting and PR stunts is something they've done over and over in the last few months. It just didn't impact me until this time.
I care about AI safety and it would take a lot for me to switch from Anthropic to OAI, but I just wish they were less arrogant and cared about their users more. Right now their behavior is at best selfish (or overly consequentialist, and I don't mean that in a good way), and at worst actively hurting their AI safety efforts by pushing people to open-weight model alternatives which are way more dangerous than closed models due to people being able to remove their safeguards easily.
> They tried to spin their change as a positive change even though it was clearly not for anyone who was using a "claude -p" wrapper over Claude Code for better UX.
I feel like they were always fairly consistent (at least since OpenClaw came out) that wrapping claude -p in a non-Claude Code harness is disallowed by the subscription and requires using the API.
The lock-in to Claude Code is the price you pay for the subsidized tokens. If you don't want lock-in, that is what the API is for.
OpenAI and Anthropic are both private companies with lots of individual investors such as employees, secondary-market buyers, and so on, who stand to become multi-millionaires. So most of what you read about them here is probably colored by someone's financial interests. Not that it's gonna make a difference, but people are just being people.
Let's not pretend that any company will keep unsustainable limits forever. You can go to codex for free compute; they will enshittify the moment they build a meaningful lead over their competitors
After seeing the whole internet being enshittified I'm still shocked people don't see through these very transparent tactics that every tech company has employed since 2012 or so.
This is true of course and I don’t think these heavily subsidized plans will be around forever, but at the same time OpenAI is just less compute constrained than Anthropic right now as well so they’re in a stronger position to be able to offer these subsidies.
GPT models are also generally more token efficient right now and that helps too — you can go a lot further on a $20 subscription with Codex than Claude Code as a result of this.
Ultimately I think many day to day tasks just need to shift away from the latest frontier models towards models that are faster, cheaper, and still perform well enough & you can phase out subsidies while keeping total cost reasonable.
Yeah it's crazy how they're burning developer goodwill. I've personally cancelled and resent them for not being able to delete my claude code session (that button was misteriously the only one in the UI to throw an error, I tried every day for two weeks).
Maybe you're right about the rest, but about the topic, how does "this!" equal to Anthopic being petty against OpenAI? Is OpenAI using Stainless a lot already, or is it something else? Your comment seems to be missing how the first and last line are related. FWIW, I don't think anyone involved here is "the good guys".
It's not official. It's literally the same thing as 'freedom fries'. The executive branch can't rename the Department of Defense, only Congress can, and they haven't. The instant Trump leaves office, the only people who will still refer to it as the DoW will be die-hard 'Trumpers'.
For some reason I don't see you calling OAI petty when they donated $20M to Trump & worked a secret deal with Hegseth to usurp Anthropic and erase the red lines they had in place.
Starting a race to the bottom where every AI company agrees to "all lawful use" such as mass domestic surveillance and fully autonomous weapons, probably increasing p(doom) by some amount.
All to stick it to Anthropic. That's not petty to you?
To me it is an order of magnitude bigger than all of the stuff you've described. I suspect some people here just work for OAI.
Why? They started the whole chatbot paradigm. They took the leap and are very generous with free tiers.
I know people are upset about the non-profit thing but the fact is that was pretty much the only way forward if they wanted to have LLMs have the impact that they are having today. It's very much a question if they'll ever turn a profit. But overall I'm grateful OpenAI had the vision to get this ball rolling when companies like Google have been sitting on this for nearly a decade and were too afraid to invest a tiny portion of their billions to bring this to fruition because they were afraid of either cannibalization of their search business or offending a vocal minority of internet people.
They jumped into a contract with Hegseth, after Hegseth made it abundantly clear through his negotiations with Anthropic that any counterparty of his would have to assist with domestic mass surveillance and unsupervised lethal autonomous weapons, or face severe penalties.
I did and it couldn’t find evidence of Anthropic backtracking on Mythos fear mongering. I used Grok given it has access to all Twitter data and these kind of things would have been newsworthy on Twitter. The most I could find is this report showing Mythos isn’t any more groundbreaking that GPT 5.5. https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/our-evaluation-of-openais-gpt-5...
If you or anyone had any evidence to support GP’s claim I’d love a reference to it.
I'm finding these acquisitions (or acquihire?) are interesting. First Bun, and then Stainless. It's almost like Anthropic wanted to acquire every company that develops foundational technology that they themselves use.
Assuming they bet on Claude getting much better at coding over time, couldn't they themselves cover their own needs with technology that they built themselves?
Is some sort of autonomy over technology they use somehow the goal here?
“We believe that we need to own and control the primary technologies behind the products we make, and participate only in markets where we can make a significant contribution.”
Congratulations to the Stainless team for their hardwork.
We are offering a 50% off for the first year subscription price at www.apimatic.io for companies impacted by this.
If you're looking for a solid long term SDK and docs partner, APIMatic is the OG CodeGen serving companies like PayPal, Maxio and PayQuicker for the past 10 years.
I don't understand why they would buy this company?
Was stainless doing great?
Was stainless doing not great?
Did they just want to hire some extra skilled engineers?
Did they hire them so OpenAI's SDKs are gonna have a setback?
I had never heard of Stainless, but it is deeply concerning that Anthropic are able to use monopoly money to kill software at their whim. First Bun, and now this. It's one thing for a corporation to do it with their own money, because at some point the board will ask them why they're wasting money. But Anthropic isn't even profitable. They're doing this with billions of dollars of borrowed money. Same thing with OpenAI committing to purchasing an unholy amount of RAM supply and directly causing the 5x price jump, with money they don't have.
I don't understand how investors continue to fund this nonsense. Anthropic wasting money on this should be an overwhelmingly strong signal that the AGI hype is blatant fraud and that software engineers are clearly not being replaced by Anthropic's software if they have to buy more engineers for some tertiary, fifth-order concern so far removed from their main line of business. Yet they just keep getting more and more money dumped on them.
100% agree with everything you said. To your point, I don't understand why every acquisition like this isn't treated as a total failure on the part of the AI companies. If Claude is so good and software engineering is a dead career, why couldn't they have Claude Code fix its ridiculous resource consumption or rewrite itself in better fit language instead of buying a JS runtime? And I've never heard of Stainless, but generating API clients from a spec seems like the exact thing AI should be good at! It's totally ridiculous, the tech industry is completely rotten and I feel bad being a part of it.
Monopoly money is a figurative expression for "fake money", deriving from the board game "Monopoly", wherein players use fake bills as game pieces. I suppose it was ambiguous because I did not capitalize "Monopoly", my mistake there.
Okay, sorry, that was obvious in retrospect, I definitely feel kinda stupid now that I see it. In fact, I agree with your comment on almost all counts—I just see a lot of misuse of the term "monopoly" online, and I think I was led down a garden path by one of my sibling commenter's mention of Lina Kahn. No fault of yours, and I'm gonna delete my comment if I can :)
Rewriting the entire codebase into 1m loc that has never been read by a human is an obvious recipe for software that cannot be maintained. Anthropic is all-in on marketing the concept that humans will not be needed anymore, even as they hire more humans. Bun is dying for the sake of hyping up investors and consumers with misleading claims about the real capabilities of their models.
Fun fact: Jarred has been promising a blog post about the Rust rewrite, but has missed his target dates for publishing it. In other words, that blog post has now taken longer to write than generating and merging 1m loc. Go figure :)
We evaluated Stainless & Fern for our 8+ languages but ultimately I couldn’t justify the cost nor ceding control to another organization for something as important as platform DX.
We evaluated Stainless, Fern [1], and a few others for Docs & SDKs (soon, CLI) and ended up choosing Fern. Definitely glad we did after today's news. Hadn't seen WorkOS's work here though - thanks for sharing.
But Fern is a (great) Stainless competitor that went the open source way, so that could have been an option, at least for parts of it: https://buildwithfern.com/.
There is more context but I don’t think it’s my story to tell
I read stainless and immediately thought ‘stainless steel’. I thought some company developed the method and patented it. Now why would anthropic buy that.
But the truth is that this is actually not entirely impossible. The AI world is going crazier than this.
Hmm. I thought we didn't need libraries or tooling anymore and "AI" could just create everything we needed? I've even been assured that we don't even need programming languages anymore, the LLMs can just write whatever we need in assembly.
The acquisition process itself is not mentioned and they are shutting down the company. This is an acquihire. Congrats to the team, hope everyone made it out well and not just the top
Anthropic uses Stainless Docs for the API reference. It’s a custom integration that embeds the Stainless Docs react components directly in the Claude dashboard application.
(I worked on the Stainless Docs product at Stainless and implemented support for Anthropic’s embedding use case)
Anthropic technically use the Stainless docs platform for their docs, in that it’s all rendered by Stainless components. They just don’t use the full suite of Stainless tools for docs. The ability to use as little or as much as you like was a great feature of the Stainless docs product
Incredible and congrats. I'm doing a bit retro that during the boom of AI and LLM, I was busy doing my day job in Java CRUD and figuring things out about micro services.
It had never occurred to me to go like, "I'm going to make an open source product for LLM". How is something like built from scratch from an idea? And what is the idea?
For example, it is fairly straight foreword to build a dash board of something with React as front end + backend API. This will be a typical web app.
But stainless is something different, from my limited knowledge in this space, its appears to be SDK, something like OpenAI SDK that reduces boilerplate code to interact with LLM providers by providing list of tools (MCP), temperature, context memory and bunch of other parameters...
I'm really disappointed that such a great service is getting taken off the market. Happy for their team, but sad for the ecosystem.
This has to be somewhat anti-competitive. Why else sunset the SDK generator service but to hurt any other company (OpenAI, etc) who relies on these for their SDKs?
Surely part of the value is the talent, the rest comes from removing a tool like this from the open market? I wonder how much of each went into the final valuation.
I don’t think so. They were available to anyone with the money and Anthropic acted first.
I doubt attempting to hurt OpenAI was the primary reason for the acquisition.
Maybe it’s different now; Bill Gates “wanting to cutoff Netscape’s air supply” and threatening to cancel the Windows license of PC manufacturers who shipped Netscape’s browser on their PCs… now that’s anticompetitive. They had 95% market share.
Bill was like “That's a nice PC business you have there; would be a shame if something were to happen to it.”
With all the hype that AI will disrupt software companies, replace software engineers, etc. Why did Anthropic acquired Stainless when they have the best AI for coding, why don’t they use it to replicate Stainless.
Another acquisition. Another growth move.
Please don't stop. Grow, run as fast as you can. So what?
So you grow. So what?
Grow.
As you can.
Can't some stay small...
Just some.
All the marketing effort — I'm no pro, just my perception — is a constant pain for me.
Things I like, things I get used to, keep leaving the product.
The thing that might actually do some good — possibly — sits in a queue, never sees daylight.
So. Be a grown-up. An adult.
Yes, but not only the pure SDK generation. The vision has always been to develop a platform that manages the end-to-end release process. In the case of Anthropic and other enterprise customers we also worked closely with their teams on their API and SDKs design, such as the development of the various streaming helpers
Why can't they just partner with these companies? Why do they have to take all these products, open source projects, etc.. and just destroy all that value?
Hopefully Stainless' products will remain available to customers in some form, rather than having them hogged for internal use. Give it time, not all is lost.
For what it’s worth Stainless codegen output has always been owned by customers. The SDKs won’t disappear, and the team did spend quite a lot of time to make it possible to transition to self-service. I don’t see how that could be used against you
Good for them. We built similar tooling at that time, but backed by our own APIs. It's something that has a lot of value, that standardisation needs to exist, but it also makes a lot of sense to fold the team into a company like Anthropic that is so developer centric. Good luck to the team there.
The OpenAPI autogenerated clients kinda suck though.
My preferred approach for doing this is to have a hand-rolled SDK generator that reads the request, response and error models out of the microservice project and emits the same in each language targeted by the SDK, along with a minimal stub that calls the API.
You then spend 15 minutes at most, customizing the stub if needed, if you need custom behaviours like streaming.
Not talking about the generated clients, I'm talking about the spec itself. If the majority of API services don't even have an OpenAPI spec, they can't use tools like Stainless even if they wanted to. A lot is being left on the table by not working on that first issue: companies don't have an OpenAPI spec. Been on my mind to explore that issue, because I run one of those API services that don't have an OpenAPI spec, but I have other priorities pulling my attention away from that. I just wish it was all handled.
I generally recommend FastAPI, their OpenAPI generation isn’t always perfect if you have very polymorphic endpoints but it is really good compared to other tools I experienced. And is just a neat library that has been battle tested
Open source software isn't meaningfully insulated from this. Anthropic purchased Bun's maintainers as well and are effectively killing it, using it as a sacrifice to their AGI hype marketing. Could people fork it, technically yeah. Will anybody? Probably not, the original vision of Bun will probably go unmaintained while the main repo is destroyed with an AI Rust rewrite with 1m loc that no human ever read. If you were using Bun in your stack you're almost certainly going to be forced to switch to an alternative.
It's funny that Anthropic needs to spend millions acquiring a dev doc platform, can't they just vibe code something up with Mythos a few junior devs at Anthropic?
We have Dario claiming SWE development is obsolete and both OpenAI and Anthropic and big tech bros like Musk are still spending millions like this..
Stainless has a laundry list of VC investors that overlap with Anthropic. It wouldn't surprise me if they're the ones engineering these kind of deals to shore up their books by shifting a loss-making investment inside a profitable one.
Powerful AI is here as Dario said in 2024. Open your eyes. Anthropic acquired Stainless because they know how to use Claude better than their own employees
What you should be paying attention to: Stainless is shutting down, and their team is joining Anthropic to build, who knows, some dumb integration to make Hubspot data available in Claude, or something equally as boring. But, Stainless was successful. Be the next Stainless. The idea is already validated, these AI companies have already done this to a handful of companies and they're going to keep doing it.
Fun fact, I named it "Stainless" after Stainless Steel pipes, likening ourselves to a high-end plumbing supply shop. If you look at the earliest versions of stainlessapi.com on archive.org, you'll see our original motto was "Quality fittings for your REST API".
All that is to say, the incredibly "boring" infrastructural work of making "boring" APIs like Hubspot's more usefully accessible is absolutely the kind of thing I'm excited to do at Anthropic :)
(It also happens to be what got us all excited to work at stainless in the first place, but of course, we understand it's not for everyone!)
Going further into it: the expected user experience for your team is that you create a PR in your own API repo, a GitHub action triggers builds for everything and gives you a summary via PR comments where you can directly see diagnostic feedback, see the exact diff for each SDKs, provide the commit message for your end users. Once your PR is merged we push changes to all your SDK/docs repos and prepare a release PR ready for your team to review and merge. You merge it, everything gets released to your end users.
Now what we build goes way further than that: we have a web platform where you can live edit your Stainless config file and preview your SDKs, a fairly complex diagnostic system, a really cool system that allows you to add your own custom code on top of any generated SDK directly via git — the whole repo is something you can modify to your wishes, we keep track of your custom changes and always reapply on top of the latest codegen output. And a lot of other features (I’m biased because I designed and implemented the public version but I personally really like our spec transforms, they let you apply changes to your spec file downstream, just by modifying your stainless config file).
Does that make sense?
edit: they sure do
I don’t understand your point, things look fairly clear to me, assuming you’re familiar with that part of the industry. We didn’t hide behind buzzwords and show you the end product right away
--- start quote ---
Best-in-class interfaces for developers and agents
Great agent experience is built on great developer experience. Stainless helps you deliver both, with robust and idiomatic SDKs, documentation that keeps up with your API, and state-of-the-art MCP servers, all derived from your OpenAPI spec.
--- end quote ---
There would be no questions asked if you had the SDK's copy on your front page. Or whatever you wrote here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48191376
They might be a big part of the reason why claude code can edit notion docs for you pretty easily
Alex vision has always been to generate code other engineers would love reading. It’s something I know the team is very proud of and what attracted most of us. We all joined because we wanted to raise the quality of developer experience across the board and I believe that we did it successfully
We might have our opinions on AI and slop, but in the end of the day this was a business play and it worked out for the players. Separate that from the actual product and u can respect they did really well for themselves.
See https://www.stainless.com/customers/ for an overview
Why aren’t they dogfooding their own products to replace such roles?
And seeing how people use it: good programmers review output and iterate to get better output. But bad programmers simply trust the output is good: they have no ability to review it themselves and often don't try.
With about 5-10h over the weekend using free tier Claude and ChatGPT I managed to put together a scraper for a particular thing on a website I’m interested, grab the item images, do an initial pass with local OCR, if it hit some keywords, run openCV to crop for better OCR and dump the hits for further investigation.
Nothing particularly advanced but it would have taken me a horrendous amount of time without it to be half as good, like it did when I built a similar scraper 10 years ago.
Neither were very good code quality i’m sure.
An expert can either use the tool more effectively, or see all the issues in a less experienced person's output.
Both of these are good things, the mistake a ton of people are making is experiencing industrial scale Dunning-Kruger and thinking "Only my expertise is still valuable, every other white collar role is done!"
The second-order mistake is thinking that raising the floor like that devalues expertise instead of increasing demand for it. The net-effect of me starting to play with CAD because it's a little easier now isn't that I don't hire my friends who are experts to make a tiny spacer I'm going to 3d print, I never would have hired them for that, it's that maybe I start learning the skills and decide to take on a more ambitious project where I do need to hire one of them for some help, or start ordering custom CNC'd parts -- scale that to the entire economy.
On average, the output is still better than what a bad programmer would produce.
If I find a task to be annoying and repetetive, I use an LLM to do it, then validate it. The quality of my work only improves, and so does the speed, and I don't lose my skill over time.
Once I got the manpages ready and the way I wanted, I just stored those in an empty project folder and told the agent to implement as specified in a language of my choosing.
Maybe for other development scenarios like GUI there is some "native" way to spec the project in a common format like this.
For example, a recent story about the openclaw creator using $1.3M of tokens/month. And let's assume he's getting paid $5M/yr which is probably a vast under estimate.
Is he providing value that a traditional software development org with normal developers couldn't provide for $20M/yr?
Finally in some ways agentic workflows magnify the power of the individual who is adept at harnessing them, they don’t have to argue (much) with the agents to effect their ideas. I’ve found a lot of very bright engineers spend their days fighting to be heard by managers and peers who can’t / won’t understand them. By unshackling them from trying to debate down idiots, they deliver way way more, and of the right things, than they otherwise could have.
Leibniz, literally parallel.
Was Newton just a smart guy at the right place and the right time. These smart folks require other smart folks to understand and verify what they did. There are many who have amazing pedigrees in history.
Yes, $1.3M in token cost in less than 30 days and some days were even off-peak, if you can call it that with that insane scale that likely hides quite a lot of tokens in the lower bars.
HN thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48159227
I don't think existing companies will bite that bullet, but I think you'll see AI native companies in five years with like, a baffling small number of people.
Getting bought by the bigger companies as it is currently the goal of most start-up since no one cares about monopolies and anti competitive behavior nowadays.
Who claimed that?
Their customers will be happy if their product replaces all the junior positions and midwit developers off the payroll. then that's already a huge saving to any company's bottom line.
Even if it doesn't directly replace workers, reducing the bargaining power of those spoiled SW devs and not having to give them huge raises all the time or they leave, is still enough. That's the whole point of layoffs and offshoring anyway.
Possibly not if they are paying the full cost of inference
Dario Amodei
Oh, they do. That's why they buy actual engineers to fix the vibe-coded slop they produce en masse: https://x.com/jarredsumner/status/2026497606575398987
Unfortunately those engineers slowly succumb to the same slopcoding vibes, so they go and buy a bunch of new engineers.
There are plenty of other reasons to acqui-hire, but it is not the only or even the most effective way to hire the strongest engineers
Successful founder is deeply filtering for very uncommon skills. Effectiveness, grit, decision making, independence, technical plus sales ability.
University is a shit filter in comparison.
The current word is "taste" but even that is way too narrow. Intelligence is close, although usually too academic (hence the VC uni dropout theme).
The other big problem with a independent capable people is that they rarely apply for jobs.
It also only self selects for those who want to work in stressful/long working day environments, rather than those who value stability.
This tests for very different skills than being an exceptional programmer.
The reason why I avoided this term is that in Germany, there exists a quite strict of whatx an engineer (Ingenieur) is, which is defined in the laws of many federal states (Ingenieurgesetz [engineering law]). "Ingenieur" (engineer) is a protected professional title:
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ingenieur&oldid=2... (*)
Falsely claiming that you are an Ingenieur when you aren't (by the definition in the Ingenieurgesetz) is a punishable crime in Germany:
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Missbrauch_von_Ti...
There exist some boundary cases under which as a software developer you can call yourself an "Ingenieur", but you have to be insanely careful about whether you actually satisfy the legal criteria (see (*)) - in most cases you don't and you are thus a criminal if you do.
If so, is this ever enforced?
That being said, in Germany there is no official degree named Diplom-Ingenieur Softwareentwicklung, it is always Diplom-Informatiker. Also, the Expression “Softwareingenieur” is not used, the straightforward translation of software engineer would be either Informatiker (emphasizing the degree) or Softwareentwickler (emphasizing the skill).
This is no legal advice: As far as I know, the regulation is strictly about German titles, so putting “software engineer” in your LinkedIn CV is out of scope of this law.
Using the German translation "Softwareingenieur" of "software engineer" on your LinkedIn page might easily get you into trouble.
Typically, as far as I know, law enforcement agencies only get active in the punishable act "Missbrauch von Titeln, Berufsbezeichnungen und Abzeichen" [abuse of titles, occupational titles and emblems] if the culprit gets denounced by someone or if there is a public interest, but everybody knows how easy it is to make enemies in your job or on the internet.
I think you're overestimating the rationality of this game.
Having a successful business requires a lot of factors that don't really have anything to do with software engineering. Things like luck, connections, access to funding, good marketing, etc. And while have good engineers on the payroll undoubtedly helps, the good engineers aren't necessarily the ones getting a big fallout from the acquisition and may not stick around for long after the acquisition, especially if they get put on a project they don't care about.
What's the difference between a software developer and a software engineer?
The honest answer is that in most day-to-day contexts, the distinction is more about company culture and title preference than actual job duties. A "software developer" at one company might do more rigorous engineering work than a "software engineer" at another.
It's just not the distinction some people believe it to be.
Normally I would say those Engineers would leave eventually, because there are not enough technical challenges and/or the pace is slower. But I guess when you pay much above market rate that doesn't really matter.
For what, to write regex to check for number of "fucks" given in prompts, or to write 20k LoC files with 20 levels of nesting ? As we saw in that Claude code leak recently.
All that's moot though if your fundamental premise is wrong. Why does Anthropic need "the world's best software engineers" to build on top of the models? Compentent developers can build APIs - sorry - MCP servers and other integration plumbing.
If Anthropic can rummage through your data and workflows to deem you worthy of their grace, then that is seriously wrong.
For better or worse, it's an acquihire.
not anymore lol
I can't even imagine the money wasted on turn-and-burns in the F1000 alone. The US needs a wake up call with respect to consumer / buyer protections. The life of the snake oil salesman is plentiful these days, and you have a lot of AI-psychotic executives who can't seem to get enough.
They mostly have. By mostly refraining from dealing with startups and companies they deem either “too young” or "too small" to be reliable partners. And, when they do, imposing long sales cycles.
And thus the enterprise well is poisoned for most startups.
But buyers try to insert this language into partner/ biz dev contracts all the time.
Much less common for sales.
A place I worked some years ago we even had an escrow foisted on us by our larger partner in the agreement so that they’d be able to continue running the software we were building if we went under.
Honestly, it was a pain in the ass and meant that for them alone we ended up running an older version of the software than we offered to clients because as we developed its capabilities it became ever more integrated into our core platform and we weren’t about to escrow that.
When the agreement came up for renewal at the three year mark we managed to get the escrow clauses removed.
Hadn't heard of Stainless before today. Did it have enterprise customers?
Though that list isn’t complete
They can also keep the product running behind the scenes for a select few and just shut down the public facing part
For context I was the founding member of our customer eng team, the main drive for Stainless adoption came from engineering teams who didn’t have the time/capacity/expertise to implement high quality SDKs + maintain the whole release pipeline automation across multiple languages. The pitch is „we want you to focus on your domain of expertises. We handle all the plumbing for your end users to have the best DX possible when using your services“. Which is IMHO very compelling
It is indeed, and I totally understand why people want something like that! Shame about the closing of the service though, which will pretty much make everyone turn away from similar solutions in the future if they're provided by a startup, as the rugpull Stainless is about to do will be a bitch to deal with for many.
The goal for the customers was to save time, little did they know Anthropic had other ideas for them :)
The most important part in my opinion is that with Stainless we were able to prove that a profitable market for SDK codegen exists and that people do care a lot about the quality of the generated code. New and existing players can take advantage of the segment we contributed developing. We also proved that a whole set of companies are ready to pay to provide an excellent developer experience to their end users.
At the same time the whole ecosystem is being reinvented by AI, it is possible that Stainless as it was doesn’t make sense in a future where everything is agentic, it’s hard to say.
I personally believe there is still a lot of values that can be found in the space Stainless built — and I’m sure Fern and others will continue to grow and develop solutions around OpenAPI
I suspect a lot of larger orgs just have site-wide subscriptions with volume discounts that they don’t need.
In addition to the previously mentioned collusion, a lot of the time reported users/customers are literally just fake.
See for example Sam Altman's Loopt scam.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/C8feBk4luaE
Either way, it does seem irresponsible and tone deaf for an acquiring/hiring company and an acquired/hired company to send these conflicting signals. If one puts oneself out there as dependable in the face hopes and needs of other, smaller, up-and-coming projects, then a rapid wind-down for $ is incongruent with such a posture.
So much so that, at least for my part, I'd be quite reluctant to hire someone who had engaged in this sort of bob-and-weave pursuit.
> As we focus on Claude Platform capabilities and connecting agents to APIs, we’ll be winding down all hosted Stainless products, including our SDK generator. Starting today, new signups, projects, and SDKs will not be available.
> If you’re a Stainless customer, visit app.stainless.com/transition for help transitioning from Stainless-managed products to other options. As always, you own the SDKs you’ve generated to date, and have full rights to modify and extend them however you wish.
By self-service, do you mean that the SDK generators are now source-available so they can be run by end users locally?
* Manual Maintenance: Returning to the pre-Stainless era.
* Agentic Coding: Works to an extent, but you lose the deterministic, review-free output required to keep an SDK perfectly structured and coherent.
* Open-source Generators: Helpful for basic use cases, but they lack Stainless's full-stack features like multi-language generation and publishing, MCPs, and documentation.
But hurting people can be the intent. If you're selling toys, you can make a business case for going out of your way to smash other people's toys, and that can become the main activity if it's advantageous enough.
'creating new things to make the world a better place' is marketing to a specific audience. There's other audiences who are just as willing to invest in 'will absolutely ruin any rivals', and that's hardly new. Right now it's very much in vogue but could become very unfashionable as people in general react to its inevitable effects.
We were an ealy adopter of their Node SDK generator at Mux (and latterly their Typescript and other generators), and the product worked great, and I'm sad to see it be shut down.
At the same time, it's easy to understand why this is a complciated product/market to be in at the moment - it's very tempting and easy to vibe code SDKs from a OpenAPI spec files right now. I would think a lot of teams will just go in that direction (for better or worse), using the same toolchain that the product developers are using today for the product, for effectively no extra cost.
Did we all lose are critical thinking during COVID or something?
But, no one uses it, because uber and lyft have become kleenex or coca cola: the brand name associated with the basic phenomenon, such that consumers cannot even think about the phenomenon without thinking first of the brand and probably resorting to the brand.
Maybe I’ll try again in a few years.
If they wannted to innovate, every taxi stand would have a QR code to download their app, you set your destination while you're waiting in the line (if there is one), you get in the cab, the driver scans the QR code from your phone, payment happens via CC in the app, no surprises either. The phone app would show you the route, and then give an estimated price, and if there's an overage due to traffic/other problem, give me a notification on my phone. It would also let me set preferences for conversation/temperature.
This is the same startup culture. The only innovation here is finding new way to swindle customers and businesses out of money.
I very much doubt you would apply your expectation of altruism to yourself!
If you intend to sell it to the highest bidder eventually then what difference does it make what was your plan?
If a business had real values then they would never sell out (see lichess).
It kind of blows my mind that the majority of Claude users have just accepted that CLAUDE.md is a tracked file that the whole team has to standardize on and share. Coding agents are the ultimate API. They conform to however you prefer to interact. Is anyone really expecting to enforce standard operating procedures with this non-deterministic black box of magic?
The amount of money thrown at it means at some point the words Return on Investment were going to appear.
It’s the classic loss leader applied to trillion dollar (across the market) capital investments.
Allowing users to take advantage of their monthly/weekly/daily token limits with the software of their choosing is a perfectly valid expectation.
Restricting it to their own underperforming, buggy TUI client is textbook walled garden.
Because that's what the API is for.
This isn't hard to understand. The cost you pay for subsidized tokens is lock-in. If you don't want lock-in, there's the API.
This isn't egregious or wrong or anything. It's exactly what you'd expect out of a heavily subsidized product option.
I never said I didn't _understand_ why Anthropic is doing this. What I'm saying is nobody wants Claude Code, the product. They want access to the model. Feeling strapped to a harness you don't enjoy working with and which may limit your productivity is not a good experience for users. Voicing that dissatisfaction is perfectly valid. No, it's not "egregious" or "wrong", but it's also _something_ rather than "not anything".
Do you know what also give users access to the model without forcing lock-in? A better product. Building it is a choice Anthropic decided not to make.
Really walled garden is the only direction that makes sense--models will slowly become commodities
If you want to know more details regarding stlc you can reach out to [email protected]
I get that most of our new customers will use AI to generate client libs. But our existing customer base depends on our Stainless generated client libs. These OpenAPI schema > client lib providers had a bit of lockin since the client libs are all slightly different.
Migration's unfortunately not as easy as just switching to Speakeasy or Openapi generator w/o breaking existing customers.
Though I understand the frustration, sorry for this. If you end up looking for a competitor I would recommend fern over speakeasy, their offering is way better in my opinion (I’ve personally always seen fern as Stainless only real competition, I have lots of respect for what they’ve built)
*load-bearing* just started popping up like crazy with opus 4.7.
Although Claude will never hold a candle to Codex’s jargon, at least in my experience.
https://typespec.io/
(disclaimer: founder of Stainless and also friends with creator of TypeSpec)
A: Writing docs at an SF AI company for $500k TC.
B: Designing, maintaining, and implementing all features for a platform in the IoT sector in Spain — alone — for €40,000.
A: Spain? I just bought a villa near the beach, close to Alicante. Do you know it?
B: Yes..
While the EU does a good job optimizing life for the median person, it is a nightmare for the exceptional. It should find a way to fix this or the brain drain will continue.
And to be frank, that's not only Europe.
The challenge with Europe is not talent, but funding - and that is related to those things you wrote, namely how companies are taxed in some European countries.
Congrats to them both, and I'm not at all surprised! Great acquihires.
- ad in superbowl about how they are the good guys.
- dow public PR stunt (they are the ones to give Palantir their model access).
- sues openclaw.
- threatens every use of cc in oss community.
- prevents other companies using claude saying they cant use when they compete.
- never released a single open weight model.
- Dario told OAI is Yolo'ing in compute and they are now doing the same.
- gas lighting developers and then after weeks acknowledging they fiddled with reasoning juice.
- fear mongoring on mythos and then geting compute later and acknowledging publicly once they realized its not significantly better than gpt 5.5 cyber.
- signs a deal with Elon!
- now this!
Anecdata, but I have a friend at OAI who claims that on both twitter and HN there is mild coordination of OAI employees to signal boost pro-OAI and anti-competitor messaging.
well that ones obviously patently false
It sure does, readers should be informed of who says what. The speaker and their history is part of full communication, not just the words.
Naive credentialism is obviously bad, but reputation does matter.
This happens for every single company that has twitter/HN/reddit users from the same company on the same platforms, I think it's also short of impossible to stop. I don't think I haven't worked in a single company in the last decade where that hasn't happened, in a range of scales.
If you weren't already, which you should have been really, you should be suspicious about anything you come across on the internet :)
So at least anecdotally I really don’t think it’s fair to portray this as OAI doing some sort of social media psyop as if others aren’t engaged in similar behavior.
It’s also very possible that this user just has opinions and tends to think OAI is more developer friendly / that Anthropic is hostile to developers (which is common sentiment I’ve seen from many real people who are definitely not paid OAI shills or something)
HN did a massive 180 in the last month or two, and nearly every post or comment related to Anthropic is just a hate post.
The amount of anger against Anthropic on HN doesn't reflect anything I see in reality (and I work at a pretty big FAANG with Codex and Claude Code, both are great) so I do suspect that OAI is doing some guerrilla marketing here, while Anthropic isn't really marketing or doing PR at all.
Sure, there's probably some accounts that are more or less controlled by the big AI labs here.
But looking at how humans have been acting for the last 20 years, you'll see that you don't need to pay people to promote things. They'll do it freely, because they identify with it and they can't fathom other people not agreeing with them.
Do you really thing that the weekly posts about people dropping AWS for Hetzner are paid by the German company?
No.
People have limited time and money. Some picked Claude, others picked Codex. Claude seems to be the most popular in terms of content produced about it. So some people probably picked Codex just because they don't want to be like everyone else. Then they obviously have to talk down about Claude, because if Codex is not better, then they are not. Simple.
And from my POV that's not a good thing because HN was the place where people didn't act like this. It was pragmatism and honest debate.
Now it's becoming: my agent is better than X, my stack is better than Y...
Maybe you can get more headless use out of Codex but that's not gonna last. Investors are drying up and these companies need to get to profitability.
And then I got caught in the collateral damage a few days ago when Anthropic announced changes to their subscription plan billing, just like every other user of that tool and similar tools like Conductor and Zed. So in a month I won't be able to use my Claude sub quotas for these tools, all because some other people are ruining it for everyone by using "claude -p" to run openclaw, hermes agent and autonomous dark factories that burn billions of tokens a day.
I would have been fine with the change, except Anthropic's messaging was very slimy. They tried to spin their change as a positive change even though it was clearly not for anyone who was using a "claude -p" wrapper over Claude Code for better UX. They're within their rights to change their subscription billing, but they still couldn't be honest to their own users about it. Evidently, this kind of gaslighting and PR stunts is something they've done over and over in the last few months. It just didn't impact me until this time.
I care about AI safety and it would take a lot for me to switch from Anthropic to OAI, but I just wish they were less arrogant and cared about their users more. Right now their behavior is at best selfish (or overly consequentialist, and I don't mean that in a good way), and at worst actively hurting their AI safety efforts by pushing people to open-weight model alternatives which are way more dangerous than closed models due to people being able to remove their safeguards easily.
I feel like they were always fairly consistent (at least since OpenClaw came out) that wrapping claude -p in a non-Claude Code harness is disallowed by the subscription and requires using the API.
The lock-in to Claude Code is the price you pay for the subsidized tokens. If you don't want lock-in, that is what the API is for.
After seeing the whole internet being enshittified I'm still shocked people don't see through these very transparent tactics that every tech company has employed since 2012 or so.
GPT models are also generally more token efficient right now and that helps too — you can go a lot further on a $20 subscription with Codex than Claude Code as a result of this.
Ultimately I think many day to day tasks just need to shift away from the latest frontier models towards models that are faster, cheaper, and still perform well enough & you can phase out subsidies while keeping total cost reasonable.
Personally if I don't need a frontier model I use a local LLM. Or one of the Chinese ones through OpenRouter.
[0]: https://github.com/openai/openai-python
[1]: https://github.com/openai/openai-node
[0]: https://github.com/openai/openai-python
[1]: https://github.com/openai/openai-node
I was wondering what the Dow jones stock index thing was...
It took me a minute, but I am guessing this means department of war? It feels strange to see terminology evolve like this over my lifetime.
At first I thought this might've been a 'freedom fries' thing, but I guess it's pretty official now.
Expect grok to improve dramatically as Musk reverse-engineers the Anthropic services running on his hardware.
Starting a race to the bottom where every AI company agrees to "all lawful use" such as mass domestic surveillance and fully autonomous weapons, probably increasing p(doom) by some amount.
All to stick it to Anthropic. That's not petty to you?
To me it is an order of magnitude bigger than all of the stuff you've described. I suspect some people here just work for OAI.
I know people are upset about the non-profit thing but the fact is that was pretty much the only way forward if they wanted to have LLMs have the impact that they are having today. It's very much a question if they'll ever turn a profit. But overall I'm grateful OpenAI had the vision to get this ball rolling when companies like Google have been sitting on this for nearly a decade and were too afraid to invest a tiny portion of their billions to bring this to fruition because they were afraid of either cannibalization of their search business or offending a vocal minority of internet people.
2. non profit then for profit
3. least open ai lab there. when is the last time you read something interesting from them
4. collaboration with the military after anthropic backed out
5. scam altman
If you or anyone had any evidence to support GP’s claim I’d love a reference to it.
Assuming they bet on Claude getting much better at coding over time, couldn't they themselves cover their own needs with technology that they built themselves?
Is some sort of autonomy over technology they use somehow the goal here?
“We believe that we need to own and control the primary technologies behind the products we make, and participate only in markets where we can make a significant contribution.”
We are offering a 50% off for the first year subscription price at www.apimatic.io for companies impacted by this.
If you're looking for a solid long term SDK and docs partner, APIMatic is the OG CodeGen serving companies like PayPal, Maxio and PayQuicker for the past 10 years.
Reach out to [email protected] and I'll help you migrate.
PS: sorry for the shameless plug but sdks and APIs are my life and blood :-)
I hope they make it open source!
> Founded in 2022, Stainless has powered the generation of every official Anthropic SDK since the earliest days of our API.
edit: bah. no more HN before coffee.
Anthropic have bought out a tool their competitor used too, they even have an OpenAI case study still on the Stainless website.
GP:
> OpenAI
??
Was stainless doing great? Was stainless doing not great? Did they just want to hire some extra skilled engineers? Did they hire them so OpenAI's SDKs are gonna have a setback?
Mmmh
This. Probably to work on Anthropic's SDKs and tooling.
I know that common reasons for acquisitions are IP, talent, or reducing competition.
It seems like IP can't be the reason here. How is this strategically advantageous to Anthropic?
I don't understand how investors continue to fund this nonsense. Anthropic wasting money on this should be an overwhelmingly strong signal that the AGI hype is blatant fraud and that software engineers are clearly not being replaced by Anthropic's software if they have to buy more engineers for some tertiary, fifth-order concern so far removed from their main line of business. Yet they just keep getting more and more money dumped on them.
It almost sounds like you want Lina Khan back :-D
Fun fact: Jarred has been promising a blog post about the Rust rewrite, but has missed his target dates for publishing it. In other words, that blog post has now taken longer to write than generating and merging 1m loc. Go figure :)
We evaluated Stainless & Fern for our 8+ languages but ultimately I couldn’t justify the cost nor ceding control to another organization for something as important as platform DX.
[1] https://buildwithfern.com/
But Fern is a (great) Stainless competitor that went the open source way, so that could have been an option, at least for parts of it: https://buildwithfern.com/.
There is more context but I don’t think it’s my story to tell
But the truth is that this is actually not entirely impossible. The AI world is going crazier than this.
Seems like developer tools/tooling are a hot commodity to the current big AI companies?
Hmm.
(I worked on the Stainless Docs product at Stainless and implemented support for Anthropic’s embedding use case)
It had never occurred to me to go like, "I'm going to make an open source product for LLM". How is something like built from scratch from an idea? And what is the idea?
For example, it is fairly straight foreword to build a dash board of something with React as front end + backend API. This will be a typical web app.
But stainless is something different, from my limited knowledge in this space, its appears to be SDK, something like OpenAI SDK that reduces boilerplate code to interact with LLM providers by providing list of tools (MCP), temperature, context memory and bunch of other parameters...
aside from that, this is literally just an openapi to sdk generator, not like openai can't just generate one
This has to be somewhat anti-competitive. Why else sunset the SDK generator service but to hurt any other company (OpenAI, etc) who relies on these for their SDKs?
I don’t think so. They were available to anyone with the money and Anthropic acted first.
I doubt attempting to hurt OpenAI was the primary reason for the acquisition.
Maybe it’s different now; Bill Gates “wanting to cutoff Netscape’s air supply” and threatening to cancel the Windows license of PC manufacturers who shipped Netscape’s browser on their PCs… now that’s anticompetitive. They had 95% market share.
Bill was like “That's a nice PC business you have there; would be a shame if something were to happen to it.”
Convince your boss to buy my product. I sell it for 10 million dollars only. Your boss will be very happy. Make no mistakes please.
My preferred approach for doing this is to have a hand-rolled SDK generator that reads the request, response and error models out of the microservice project and emits the same in each language targeted by the SDK, along with a minimal stub that calls the API.
You then spend 15 minutes at most, customizing the stub if needed, if you need custom behaviours like streaming.
Yet another reason to use open source.
It's funny that Anthropic needs to spend millions acquiring a dev doc platform, can't they just vibe code something up with Mythos a few junior devs at Anthropic?
We have Dario claiming SWE development is obsolete and both OpenAI and Anthropic and big tech bros like Musk are still spending millions like this..