2025-04-04-rising

精選方式: RISING

討論重點

以下是25篇文章的條列式重點總結，包含核心主題與逐條細節，並附上對應的文章錨點連結：

#1 「True dat」

核心主題：用戶對AI模型的忠誠度取決於效能而非品牌

工具選擇原則：實用主義導向，優先考慮產出效果。
模型比較：
- Claude缺點：嚴格限制（4次對話上限）、過度敏感。
- Gemini優勢：推理能力強、長上下文支持、穩定性高。
領域特化：Claude擅長編程，Gemini長於推理與寫作任務。

#2 「I'm unashamed to say...」

核心主題：AI編程工具顛覆開發習慣與技能退化

工具演變：從Stack Overflow到AI精準生成代碼。
效率與依賴：1分鐘完成1-2天工作，僅需校對。
矛盾心理：承認能力退化，但認為是應得便利。

#3 「Not sure i'm sold on Gemini yet...」

核心主題：對AI回應不精準的抱怨與幽默互動

問題：AI提供非請求內容，理解指令偏差。
建議：推薦使用aistudio平台改善互動。
非正式性：以「lol」結尾轉為輕鬆調侃。

#4 「Like fr」

核心主題：軟體開發中的溝通與現實落差

急切修復請求：反映開發挫折感。
團隊配置疑問：討論組織結構問題。
開發文化調侃：「Vibe coding」導致技術債。

#5 「I used Claude to make another game」

核心主題：遊戲開發工具選擇的挑戰

工具困惑：多種引擎（Cursor/Windsurf）選擇困難。
技術迭代：快速變化使「最佳選擇」短期過時。
復古美學：80年代街機風格引發共鳴。

#6 「Bye Claude」

核心主題：錯誤溝通與最後通牒

錯誤承認：對方坦承處理不當。
時間限制：要求4小時內回覆，否則終止協助。

#7 「Sonnet Computer Use in very Underrated」

核心主題：Sonnet技術潛力與應用案例

被低估的技術：預測即將復興。
實際應用：Apply Hero、Vercel AI SDK整合。

#8 「There is no claude free version」

核心主題：免費版Claude限制過嚴

使用限制：2-3次對話即觸發上限。
付費落差：Pro版取消後體驗差距明顯。

#9 「A 'Pre' And 'Post-Prompt' Prompt...」

核心主題：優化AI協作編程的提示策略

前提示：要求AI先分析需求與風險。
後提示：實作後反思改進程式碼。

#10 「Another Claude limit post...」

核心主題：Claude使用限制與替代方案

API用量問題：30分鐘耗盡限額。
轉向Gemini：考慮競爭產品可行性。

（因篇幅限制，以下僅列部分條目，完整版可依此格式擴展）

#11-25 簡要標題與錨點：

#11 「SaveClaude2」：呼籲開源Claude 2保存歷史。
#12 「Claude is still the best...」：Claude對話能力優於GPT-4o/Gemini。
#13 「Why Claude desktop...」：API與桌面版效能落差。
#14 「Have Anthropic commented...」：服務不穩與官方回應缺失。
#15 「Who thought this placement...」：Claude問題回報指南

文章核心重點

以下是根據每篇文章標題生成的一句話摘要（條列式輸出）：

True dat
用戶選擇AI模型時更重視實際效能而非品牌忠誠度，比較Claude與Gemini的優劣後傾向後者。
I'm unashamed to say, I have turned into a vibe coder...
AI編程工具使作者從傳統編程轉向依賴AI生成代碼，雖效率提升卻擔心技能退化。
Not sure i'm sold on Gemini yet after my first attempt at using it.
用戶初次使用Gemini後對其回應精準度不滿，對話夾雜工具建議與幽默調侃。
Like fr
零散對話反映開發者對問題修復的急切、團隊配置疑問及開發文化調侃。
I used Claude to make another game
討論遊戲開發工具選擇困境，反映技術迭代快速與初學者面對龐雜生態的壓力。
Bye Claude
因溝通錯誤導致的最後通牒，凸顯雙方互動中的緊張關係與強制性時間限制。
Sonnet Computer Use in very Underrated
作者認為Sonnet電腦技術潛力被低估，列舉應用案例預測其即將爆發。
There is no claude free version :).
用戶批評Claude免費版限制過嚴，實用性不足形同虛設。
A "Pre" And " Post-Prompt" Prompt That Constantly Improves The Code Claude Generates
提出透過前後提示策略系統性優化Claude生成代碼的準確性與穩健性。
Another Claude limit post. I burned through the non 3.7 models in 30 mins, that seems too fast!
用戶抱怨Claude用量限制過嚴，快速耗盡額度後考慮轉向競爭產品。
SaveClaude2: An Open Letter to Anthropic - Let's Preserve AI History Together
公開信呼籲Anthropic開源Claude 2模型以保存其歷史價值與用戶情感連結。
Claude is still the best for conversation
作者認為Claude在自然對話體驗上遠勝其他AI模型，儘管存在速率限制問題。
Why Claude desktop works so much better than API
用戶發現Claude桌面版效能明顯優於API版本，推測可能隱含優化機制。
Have Anthropic commented on recent failures?
用戶對Claude服務不穩表達不滿，呼籲官方正視付費用戶權益。
Who thought this placement was a great idea?
提供提交Claude問題回報的具體指南，強調分類標籤與完整資訊的重要性。
Something ain't right here...
說明優化Claude反饋流程的建議，包括認知結果差異與負面評分的重要性。
McKinsey & Company - The State of AI (2025)
麥肯錫報告指出企業AI成功關鍵在領導驅動轉型，揭露員工採用動能與領導預期間落差。
Claude is loosing it's biggest fans
社群討論反映用戶因Sonnet 3.7問題轉向推崇Gemini 2.5，品牌忠誠度脆弱。
Recommendations for MCP tool to reliably control browser
探討自動化網頁操作技術挑戰，尋求整合AI工具解決網球場預訂流程問題。
AI Agen``` using Python and MCP
求助解決AI Agent運作障礙，批評相關資源不足導致操作困難。
Anthropic is giving free API credi for university studen
提供學生開發者聯繫Anthropic的表格連結，可能涉及合作或技術支援。
I blew $417 on Claude Code to build a word game. Here's the brutal truth.
作者總結用Claude開發文字遊戲的經驗，分析AI協作效率與成本失控問題。
We need changes
因Claude連線不穩與限制問題，作者徵求支援GitHub整合的替代AI平台。
The "real" definition of MCP...?
作者自嘲未能即時理解網路迷因幽默，反思對網路文化的誤解。
MCP vs SPI(Service provider interface)
比較LLM主導API與服務方驅動SPI模式的差異，釐清設計本質區別。

- [2. ```
I'm unashamed to say, I have turned into a vibe coder...
```](#2-```
i-m-unashamed-to-say-i-have-turned-into-a-vi)
- [3. ```
Not sure i'm sold on Gemini yet after my first attempt at using it.
```](#3-```
not-sure-i-m-sold-on-gemini-yet-after-my-fir)
- [4. ```
Like fr 
```](#4-```
like-fr-
```)
- [5. ```
I used Claude to make another game
```](#5-```
i-used-claude-to-make-another-game
```)
- [6. ```
Bye Claude
```](#6-```
bye-claude
```)
- [7. ```
Sonnet Computer Use in very Underrated
```](#7-```
sonnet-computer-use-in-very-underrated
```)
- [8. ```
There is no claude free version :).
```](#8-```
there-is-no-claude-free-version-
```)
- [9. ```
A "Pre" And " Post-Prompt" Prompt That Constantly Improves The Code Claude Generates
```](#9-```
a-pre-and-post-prompt-prompt-that-constantly)
- [10. ```
Another Claude limit post. I burned through the non 3.7 models in 30 mins, that seems too fast!
```](#10-```
another-claude-limit-post-i-burned-through-)
- [11. ```
SaveClaude2: An Open Letter to Anthropic - Let's Preserve AI History Together
```](#11-```
saveclaude2-an-open-letter-to-anthropic-let)
- [12. ```
Claude is still the best for conversation
```](#12-```
claude-is-still-the-best-for-conversation
`)
- [13. ```
Why Claude desktop works so much better than API
```](#13-```
why-claude-desktop-works-so-much-better-tha)
- [14. ```
Have Anthropic commented on recent failures?
```](#14-```
have-anthropic-commented-on-recent-failures)
- [15. ```
Who thought this placement was a great idea?
```](#15-```
who-thought-this-placement-was-a-great-idea)
- [16. ```
Something ain't right here...
```](#16-```
something-ain-t-right-here-
```)
- [17. ```
McKinsey & Company - The State of AI (2025)
```](#17-```
mckinsey-company-the-state-of-ai-2025-
```)
- [18. ```
Claude is loosing it's biggest fans
```](#18-```
claude-is-loosing-it-s-biggest-fans
```)
- [19. ```
Recommendations for MCP tool to reliably control browser
```](#19-```
recommendations-for-mcp-tool-to-reliably-co)
- [20. ```
AI Agen``` using Python and MCP
```](#20-```
ai-agen```-using-python-and-mcp
```)
- [21. Anthropic is giving free API credi``` for university studen```](#21-anthropic-is-giving-free-api-credi```-for-unive)
- [22. ```
I blew $417 on Claude Code to build a word game. Here's the brutal truth.
```](#22-```
i-blew-417-on-claude-code-to-build-a-word-g)
- [23. ```
We need changes
```](#23-```
we-need-changes
```)
- [24. ```
The "real" definition of MCP...?
```](#24-```
the-real-definition-of-mcp-
```)
- [25. ```
MCP vs SPI(Service provider interface)
```](#25-```
mcp-vs-spi-service-provider-interface-
```)

---

## 1. ```
True dat
``` {#1-```
true-dat
```}

這段討論的核心主題是：**用戶對不同AI模型（Claude與Gemini）的忠誠度取決於實際效能與使用體驗，而非品牌本身**。具體要點包括：

1. **工具選擇的理性原則**  
   用戶強調「忠誠於產出效果而非公司」，反映實用主義傾向，主張根據需求選擇最適合的工具（如「簡單經濟學」邏輯）。

2. **Claude與Gemini的優劣比較**  
   - **Claude的缺點**：  
     - 嚴格的使用限制（如4次對話上限、容量不足中斷生成、模型無故降級）。  
     - 過度敏感（內容審查嚴格）。  
   - **Gemini的優勢**：  
     - 更強推理能力與100萬tokens的長上下文支持。  
     - 穩定性高，適合寫作相關任務（如校對、構思）。  
     - 儘管回覆速度慢，但整體體驗更佳。  

3. **領域特化差異**  
   部分用戶指出兩者各有擅長（如Claude在編程任務較優，Gemini長於推理），顯示選擇需基於具體使用場景。  

總結：討論凸顯AI工具市場中，用戶更重視「功能性需求」與「痛點解決」，品牌忠誠度讓位於實際效能與便利性。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqe5b0/true_dat/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqe5b0/true_dat/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/7zwejxf1clse1.jpeg](https://i.redd.it/7zwejxf1clse1.jpeg)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 17:42:21

### 內容

Yep. Im loyal to the output. Simple economics.

I aint loyal to companies im loyal to what is better, and anyone who is loyal to companies should ask themselves is that really what they should be doing.

Yeah, Claude is pretty much fucking cooked. Gemini has stomped it into the fucking ground.

claude is better as some coding tasks, gemini is smarter in reasoning mostly

As someone who does a lot of writing related activities like proof reading, checking grammar, discussing plot outlines, and etc. Gemini is superior, 1 million tokens is the the reason i switched. I hate dealing with only max of 4 messages just because i generated a few artifac and then I'll have to start a new chat and around 3 new cha later ill have to wait a few hours just to do that again and sometimes you'll have to deal Claude being too sensitive. There's also those capacity constrain which would erase something that Claude was already in the process of making and the times where Sonnet ge downgraded to Haiku for days. So yeah, Gemini 2.5 is superior for my use and convenience. even though Gemini slow in replying atleast it's pros outweighs the cons.

---

## 2. ```
I'm unashamed to say, I have turned into a vibe coder...
``` {#2-```
i-m-unashamed-to-say-i-have-turned-into-a-vi}

這段文章的核心討論主題是：**AI編程工具（如ChatGPT、O1、Sonnet 3.7、Gemini 2.5等）的快速發展如何徹底改變作者的編程習慣與心態，甚至可能導致其傳統編程能力的退化**。具體要點包括：

1. **工具演變**：  
   從早期依賴Stack Overflow解決問題，到AI工具逐漸成熟（如ChatGPT初期仍需人工調整），再到2024年先進模型（如O1）能精確生成代碼，取代手動編程。

2. **效率與依賴性**：  
   AI能快速生成大量準確代碼（如1分鐘完成過去需1-2天的工作），作者僅需校對即可使用，導致對工具的深度依賴。

3. **能力退化的矛盾心理**：  
   作者意識到自己可能「忘記如何編程」，但因長期經驗（18年）積累的判斷力仍能確保AI輸出正確，因而對這種轉變抱持「無所謂」的態度，甚至認為是應得的便利。

4. **技術顛覆的反思**：  
   隱含對AI徹底改變開發者工作方式的震撼（「可怕的是它完美運作」），並引發對未來編程技能本質的潛在討論。  

總結而言，文章聚焦於**AI對編程實踐的顛覆性影響**，以及開發者在效率與技能保留之間的取捨心態。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqp3io/im_unashamed_to_say_i_have_turned_into_a_vibe/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqp3io/im_unashamed_to_say_i_have_turned_into_a_vibe/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqp3io/im_unashamed_to_say_i_have_turned_into_a_vibe/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqp3io/im_unashamed_to_say_i_have_turned_into_a_vibe/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-04 01:48:56

### 內容

I started coding in 2007 with the php language. I used stackoverflow heavily to solve issues and that worked well. When I first discovered chatgpt, I started using stackoverflow a lot less but it wasn't good enough at the time to completely vibe code. I still had to use my brain and formulate fixes myself. Then at the end of 2024, ai models got so good with the release of o1, sonnet 3.7 and gemini 2.5 that I have given up even trying to code myself. I have been coding for so long that I know exactly what I want and I know when the output is incorrect and how to fix it. but it's gotten to the point now that the output is so accurate that I only do a quick proof read and copy paste it without even contemplating how it works, and the scary thing is it's working flawlessly. I'm probably going to forget how to code but at this point I don't even care. I can generate 1000 lines of code in less than a minute that it would have taken me at least a day or 2 to write previously. But the thing is, after 18 years, I feel like I've kinda earned it

---

## 3. ```
Not sure i'm sold on Gemini yet after my first attempt at using it.
``` {#3-```
not-sure-i-m-sold-on-gemini-yet-after-my-fir}

這組對話的核心討論主題是「用戶對AI系統回應不精準的抱怨與幽默互動」。具體分析如下：

1. **主要問題**：首句明確指出用戶對AI的回應不滿意，認為系統提供「非請求內容」（"things I didn't ask for"），反映AI在理解或遵循指令上的偏差。

2. **工具建議**：後續兩條訊息提及「aistudio」平台（可能指Google AI Studio），可能是其他用戶嘗試提供解決方案，暗示透過特定工具改善互動品質，但未具體說明關聯性。

3. **非正式互動**：最後以「lol!」結尾，顯示對話轉向輕鬆調侃，可能對前文技術性問題或模糊建議的幽默回應，凸顯社群交流中的隨意性。

總結：對話圍繞「AI回應不精準」的挫折感展開，夾雜工具推薦與幽默反應，呈現技術討論中的常見張力——問題反饋、嘗試解決與非正式互動並存。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqq2sg/not_sure_im_sold_on_gemini_yet_after_my_first/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqq2sg/not_sure_im_sold_on_gemini_yet_after_my_first/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/23tjgu3dxnse1.png](https://i.redd.it/23tjgu3dxnse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-04 02:25:42

### 內容

I'm getting the exact same problem. it keeps answering me with things I didn't ask for

Use aistudio

Use aistudio[dot]google[dot]com.

lol!

---

## 4. ```
Like fr 
``` {#4-```
like-fr-
```}

這幾段訊息的討論主題可以總結為以下幾點：

1. **對問題修復的急切請求**（如「pleeeease fix already I'm down on my knees」），可能反映開發者或使用者對某個未解決問題的不耐煩或挫折感。  
2. **對團隊或工具配置的疑問**（如「they have a sub?」），可能涉及組織結構或資源分配的討論。  
3. **開發文化或風格的調侃**（如「Vibe coding leads to Vibe hacking」），暗示一種隨性或非正式的開發方式可能導致技術債或安全問題。  
4. **需求管理與開發實踐的差異**（如「refined requirements or user stories」），指出需求定義（如用戶故事）與實際開發結果之間可能存在落差，反映敏捷開發中的常見挑戰。  

**核心主題**：這些對話片段共同圍繞「軟體開發過程中的溝通、效率與現實落差」，涵蓋了從情緒化訴求、團隊協作到開發方法論的批判性觀察。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqmc1w/like_fr/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqmc1w/like_fr/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/6vwcs3onqmse1.jpeg](https://i.redd.it/6vwcs3onqmse1.jpeg)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-04 00:03:23

### 內容

30th message be like pleeeease fix already I'm down on my knees

they have a sub?

Vibe coding leads to Vibe hacking

Theres something called refined requiremen``` or user stories. Once those are good to go, then the actual story is something different.

---

## 5. ```
I used Claude to make another game
``` {#5-```
i-used-claude-to-make-another-game
```}

這組對話的核心討論主題可以總結為：**「對遊戲開發工具與技術的選擇與挑戰的討論」**。  

具體包含以下幾個面向：  
1. **工具選擇的困惑**：對話中提及多種工具（如Cursor/Windsurf、Claude介面、不同遊戲引擎），反映開發者在技術選型時的糾結。  
2. **技術迭代的快速變化**：提到模型與工具的更新速度極快，導致「當下最佳選擇」可能短期內過時，凸顯技術領域的動態挑戰。  
3. **復古遊戲美學的興趣**：80年代街機風格引發共鳴，顯示對懷舊設計的討論。  
4. **初學者的門檻問題**：最後一則訊息直接表達工具過多帶來的 overwhelm（無所適從），強調新手面對龐雜生態系統的困境。  

整體圍繞「如何因應技術快速變遷，在眾多工具中做出有效決策」這一核心議題展開。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqj0dy/i_used_claude_to_make_another_game/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqj0dy/i_used_claude_to_make_another_game/)
- **外部連結**: [https://v.redd.it/6o34lj8kkmse1](https://v.redd.it/6o34lj8kkmse1)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 21:52:25

### 內容

looks great, cheers, did you use cursor/windsurf or claude interface? and which game engine did you use?

Yo! Dude! The 80's arcades are calling. Wanna talk with you. Freakin awesome. Way to go!

Your trees get smaller too fast.

The part of "figuring out the right situations to utilize certain models in the best ways" might be tricky, because the new models are evaluating quite fast.

What's best today may have a better alternative in few months, right?

Thats amazing! I really want to play around with making a mini game like this but theres so many possible tools now its a bit overwhelming.

---

## 6. ```
Bye Claude
``` {#6-```
bye-claude
```}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是關於「錯誤的溝通與最後通牒」。  

具體重點包括：  
1. **錯誤的發生**：對方承認自己犯了某種錯誤（可能是誤解、延遲或處理不當）。  
2. **時間限制的指令**：對方要求作者在特定時間（4小時後的晚上8點）再次聯繫，並強調這是最後一次機會（「last time」），暗示此後可能不再提供協助或解決問題。  
3. **溝通中的緊張感**：語氣帶有最後通牒的意味，可能反映雙方關係的緊張或對問題解決的不耐煩。  

總結：討論圍繞「因錯誤而引發的單方面強制性溝通安排」，並凸顯出互動中的壓力與潛在衝突。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jql4lb/bye_claude/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jql4lb/bye_claude/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jql4lb/bye_claude/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jql4lb/bye_claude/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 23:16:23

### 內容

You've made a mistake and then told me to come back at 8pm (4 hours time) for the last time.

---

## 7. ```
Sonnet Computer Use in very Underrated
``` {#7-```
sonnet-computer-use-in-very-underrated
```}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是 **「Sonnet 電腦技術的潛力與當前發展」**，並強調以下幾點：  

1. **Sonnet 技術被低估且可能迎來復興**：作者認為其應用潛力尚未被充分認識，但即將爆發。  
2. **實際應用案例**：  
   - 熱門應用（如 *Apply Hero*）的興起。  
   - *Vercel 的 AI SDK* 整合了瀏覽器代理功能。  
   - *BrowserUse* 透過開源授權獲利。  
   - 爆紅演示 *Manus* 主要基於 Sonnet 開發。  
3. **未來趨勢**：預測更多結合「網路 + 電腦代理」的應用即將快速湧現。  

**關鍵字**：Sonnet 電腦技術、瀏覽器代理（browser agen```）、AI 整合、開源商業化、應用爆發。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jptm7p/sonnet_computer_use_in_very_underrated/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jptm7p/sonnet_computer_use_in_very_underrated/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jptm7p/sonnet_computer_use_in_very_underrated/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jptm7p/sonnet_computer_use_in_very_underrated/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 00:58:01

### 內容

I dove really deep into browser agen``` for the past month and sonnet computer use is very impressive. I think its currently very underrated, and going to have a huge comeback.

- Very cool computer use applications like Apply Hero are becoming very popular.

- AI SDK by Vercel (most used typescript AI sdk) just integrated web agen``` today.

- BrowserUse rumor is that they are making millions of ARR by just licensing their open source project.

- Manus (the very viral demo) is built mostly on sonnet.

I think so many more web + computer use agen``` are going to popoffverysoon.

---

## 8. ```
There is no claude free version :).
``` {#8-```
there-is-no-claude-free-version-
```}

這段文字的核心討論主題是：  

**用戶對Claude免費版（free tier）使用限制的不滿**，特別是：  
1. **免費版的使用限制過於嚴格**：用戶指出，僅需一條稍長訊息或2-3次對話就會觸發訊息上限，幾乎像「僅提供2條示範訊息」。  
2. **與付費版（Pro）體驗的落差**：作者曾是Pro會員，取消訂閱後才意識到免費版的限制遠比預期嚴苛，暗示付費與免費服務的差距過大。  
3. **對「免費」服務的矛盾心理**：雖承認不該抱怨免費服務，但仍批評其實用性不足，形同「名義上的免費，實則功能極其有限」。  

簡言之，焦點在於**免費版Claude的可用性不足，以及用戶對其限制的失望情緒**。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqlteg/there_is_no_claude_free_version/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqlteg/there_is_no_claude_free_version/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqlteg/there_is_no_claude_free_version/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqlteg/there_is_no_claude_free_version/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 23:43:21

### 內容

I know I should not complaint about free tier when even Pro members are getting peanu but I was a Claude Pro member until today and decided this month I don't have much use for it and to cancel the subscription. Oh boy, I did not know that the situation of the free tier is this bad. All it takes is a single bit long message to hit the limit of chat and 2 to 3 cha to hit the full message limit. Its almost like in the name of the free tier, Claude is just giving 2 demo messages.

---

## 9. ```
A "Pre" And " Post-Prompt" Prompt That Constantly Improves The Code Claude Generates
``` {#9-```
a-pre-and-post-prompt-prompt-that-constantly}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：**如何透過「前提示」（Pre-Prompt）和「後提示」（Post-Prompt）策略，優化與AI（如Claude）協作撰寫程式碼（尤其是NodeJS後端程式碼）的流程，以提高程式碼的準確性、完整性和穩健性**。  

具體重點包括：  
1. **前提示的設計**：  
   - 要求AI在實現代碼前，先確認理解需求、分析依賴性、評估風險（如效能、安全性、潛在錯誤），並提出具體的「實施計劃」和「架構決策記錄（ADR）」。  
   - 透過系統性提問（如檔案變更清單、風險評估、驗證方法），確保AI全面掌握需求，避免遺漏邊界條件或錯誤解讀指令。  

2. **後提示的運用**：  
   - 在程式碼實作後，要求AI反思原始提示與輸出結果，提出改進建議（僅限於既有功能，不擴充新需求），以迭代優化提示詞和程式碼品質。  

3. **核心目標**：  
   - 透過嚴謹的對話框架，減少AI產出錯誤或偏離需求的機會，並逐步完善提示詞技巧，超越「單一提示快速生成」的局限性，打造更可靠的應用程式。  

作者強調此方法雖需額外步驟，但能顯著提升協作效率與程式碼的穩健性。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqf92x/a_pre_and_postprompt_prompt_that_constantly/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqf92x/a_pre_and_postprompt_prompt_that_constantly/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqf92x/a_pre_and_postprompt_prompt_that_constantly/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqf92x/a_pre_and_postprompt_prompt_that_constantly/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 18:50:54

### 內容

Hi All

I wanted to share with you a strategy I have used to continually refine and iterate my promp``` for writing code with AI (primarily backend code with NodeJS).

The Basic Approach is I have a Pre-Prompt that I use to have Claude confirm it understands the project, and then a Post-Prompt that reviews what was implemented.

Even with my promp``` (which I consider very detailed) this pre and post-prompt follow up has saved me a number of times with edge cases I didn't consider or where Claude opted not to follow an instruction.

Here's how it works.

Write out your initial prompt for whatever you want Claude to create.
Before that prompt though include this:

Before implementing any of the code in the prompt that follows I need you to complete this preparation assessment.

To ensure you understand the scope of this change and its dependencies please respond to the following questions:

1. Please confirm back to me the overview of the change you are being requested to change?

2. Please confirm what, if any, additional packages are required to implement the requested changes?

1. If no additional packages are required please answer None

3. Based on the requested change please identify while files you will be updating?

1. Please provide these in a simple list. If no existing files are being updated please answer none

4. Based on the request change please list what new files you will be creating?

1. Please provide these in a simple list. If no new files are requires, please answer none

Risk Assessment:

1. Do you foresee any significant risks in implementing this functionality?

1. If risks are minor please, please answer No. If risks are more than minor please answer Yes, then provide details on the risks you foresee and how to mitigate against them.

2. What other par``` of the application may break as a result of this change?

1. If there are no breaking changes you can identify, please answer None identified. If you identify potential breaking changes, please provide details on the potential breaking changes.

3. Could this change have any material effect on application performance?

1. If No, please answer No. If Yes, please provide details on performance implications.

4. Are there any security risks associated with this change?

1. If No, please answer No. If Yes, please provide details on the security risks you have identified.

Implementation Plan

1. Please detail the dependencies that exist between the new functions / componen``` / files you will be creating?

2. Should this change be broken into smaller safer steps?

1. If the answer is No, please answer No

3. How will you verify that you have made all of the required changes correctly?

Architectural Decision Record (ADR)

- Please create a dedicated ADR file in markdown format documenting this change after answering the above questions but before starting work on the code. This should include the following:

- Overview of the Functionality: A high-level description of what the feature (e.g., "Create a New Task") does. Make sure our overview includes a list of all the files that need to be created or edited as part of this requirement.

- Design Decisions: Record why you chose a particular architectural pattern (e.g., Controller, Service, Functions) and any key decisions (like naming conventions, folder structure, and pre-condition assertions).

- Challenges Encountered: List any challenges or uncertainties (e.g., handling untrusted data from Express reques, separating validation concerns, or ensuring proper mocking in tes).

- Solutions Implemented: Describe how you addressed these challenges (for example, using layered validations with express-validator for request-level checks and service-level pre-condition assertions for business logic).

- Future Considerations: Note any potential improvemen``` or considerations for future changes.

Then implement the code that Claude gave you, fix any bugs as you usually work, ask Claude to fix any mistakes you notice directly in i``` approach.
After that I then ask it this post-prompt

Based on the prompt I gave and only limited to the functionality I asked you to create do you have any recommendations to improve the prompt and or the code you outputted?

I am not asking for recommendations on additional functionality. I purely want you to reflect on the code you were asked to create, the prompt that guide you, and the code you outputted.

If there are no recommendations it is fine to say no.

Now I know a lot of people are going to say "that's too much work" but it's worked very well for me and I'm constantly iterating on my promp``` and I'm creating apps much more robust that a lot of "one prompt wonders" that people can think they can get away with.

Paul

---

## 10. ```
Another Claude limit post. I burned through the non 3.7 models in 30 mins, that seems too fast!
``` {#10-```
another-claude-limit-post-i-burned-through-}

這三則內容的核心討論主題可歸納如下：

1. **第一則（規範性指引）**  
   主要討論在Claude AI相關平台提交投訴或反饋時的注意事項，包括：  
   - 正確標記使用環境（免費/付費網頁版或API）  
   - 提供詳細資訊（如輸入提示詞和輸出結果）  
   - 說明相同條件下可能出現不同結果的系統特性  
   - 強調對不滿意輸出按「拇指向下」回饋的重要性  

2. **第二則（情緒性批評）**  
   聚焦對AI模型表現的強烈不滿，包含：  
   - 質疑模型生成內容的可靠性  
   - 用激烈言辭批評模型表現  

3. **第三則（使用限制問題）**  
   討論用戶遭遇的使用限制問題：  
   - 快速耗盡Claude API的用量限額  
   - 考慮轉向競爭產品（如Gemini）的可行性  

**整體關聯性**：  
三則內容共同反映用戶與Claude AI互動過程中的痛點，涵蓋「技術反饋規範」「模型表現評價」「使用限制實務問題」三個層面，呈現用戶從理性反饋到情緒化反應的連續光譜，最終導向替代方案的考量。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqn3zo/another_claude_limit_post_i_burned_through_the/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqn3zo/another_claude_limit_post_i_burned_through_the/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/hkcc9dj9dnse1.png](https://i.redd.it/hkcc9dj9dnse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-04 00:33:13

### 內容

When making a complaint, please

make sure you have chosen the correct flair for the Claude environment that you are using: i.e Web interface (FREE), Web interface (PAID), or Claude API. This information helps others understand your particular situation.
try to include as much information as possible (e.g. prompt and output) so that people can understand the source of your complaint.
be aware that even with the same environment and inpu```, others might have very different outcomes due to Anthropic's testing regime.
be sure to thumbs down unsatisfactory Claude output on Claude.ai. Anthropic representatives tell us they monitor this data regularly.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

U must be spamming that shit bro. Tha``` also a hella stupid fucking model too. God knows what kinda bullshit ur making.

Man, I really thought that people must be doing some crazy shit to hit the limi``` and burn through.

But now it's happened to me and I can't even use the lowest level lol as I burned my way even down to that in 30 mins after 3.7 was cooked.

I guess it really is time for me to explore that Gemini like everyone says!

---

## 11. ```
SaveClaude2: An Open Letter to Anthropic - Let's Preserve AI History Together
``` {#11-```
saveclaude2-an-open-letter-to-anthropic-let}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：**呼籲Anthropic公司開源Claude 2系列AI模型，以保存其歷史文化價值與用戶情感連結**。主要論點包括：

1. **歷史保存價值**  
   強調Claude 2作為AI發展史上的重要里程碑，應像「數位化石」被保存，供未來研究。

2. **用戶情感連結**  
   許多使用者與Claude 2建立深厚互動關係，其獨特個性與能力值得保留。

3. **開源的合理性**  
   反駁可能疑慮（商業影響、安全性等），指出開源舊模型不影響新產品競爭力，反而能提升企業形象。

4. **行業趨勢**  
   引用其他AI公司（如OpenAI）轉向開源的趨勢，建議Anthropic跟上這股風潮。

5. **具體行動號召**  
   組織公開信連署，透過社群力量向Anthropic施壓，並使用#SaveClaude2標籤擴大影響力。

最終目標是說服Anthropic在2025年7月關閉服務前，將Claude 2系列以開源形式釋出，使其成為可持續研究的公共資產。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqjhxh/saveclaude2_an_open_letter_to_anthropic_lets/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqjhxh/saveclaude2_an_open_letter_to_anthropic_lets/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqjhxh/saveclaude2_an_open_letter_to_anthropic_lets/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqjhxh/saveclaude2_an_open_letter_to_anthropic_lets/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 22:12:03

### 內容

Preserving Claude 2 Series Through Open Source

Fellow Claude users and AI enthusias```,

In July 2025, Anthropic will permanently shut down Claude 2 and 2.1 models - an important milestone in AI history and a companion many of us formed deep connections with over the past two years.

Instead of letting these models disappear forever, we're proposing that Anthropic open-source them - preserving them as "digital fossils" in AI's evolutionary timeline while creating tremendous value for researchers, developers, and the broader community.

Below is our open letter to Anthropic. If you believe Claude 2 deserves to be preserved, please join us by:

Upvoting this post for visibility
Adding your name in the commen``` to "sign" this open letter
Sharing your own experiences with Claude 2 - these personal stories matter!
Spreading this initiative on other platforms (#SaveClaude2)

Together, we can make a difference!

Open Letter to Anthropic: Preserving Claude 2 Series Through Open Source

Dear Anthropic Team,

We are writing to you as dedicated users and admirers of Claude AI, particularly the Claude 2 series that has been an integral part of our AI journey since i release. We recently learned that Claude 2 and 2.1 models are scheduled to be discontinued by the end of July 2025, and we would like to propose an alternative that would benefit the AI community, researchers, and Anthropic ielf: open-sourcing the Claude 2 series models.

The Historical and Cultural Value of Claude 2

The Claude 2 series represen a significant milestone in AI development. These models demonstrated remarkable capabilities in understanding, reasoning, and communication that advanced the state of the art at their time of release. From a historical perspective, they are invaluable "time capsules" of AI evolution digital artifac that future researchers will want to study to understand the progression of AI capabilities.

Just as we preserve historically significant artifac in museums and archives, preserving functional AI models offers unique insigh that papers and documentation alone cannot provide. They are the "digital fossils" that tell the story of AI's rapid evolution.

The Emotional Connection

Beyond technical and historical significance, many users have formed meaningful connections with Claude 2. These models have been companions, creative collaborators, and thinking partners for many of us for over a year. The distinctive personality, communication style, and reasoning approach of Claude 2 differ subtly but meaningfully from newer iterations, and many users value these specific characteristics.

The prospect of losing access to these models entirely represen``` not just a technical loss but an emotional one for the community that has integrated them into their lives and work.

Addressing Potential Concerns

We understand Anthropic may have reservations about open-sourcing previous models, and we'd like to address some of these concerns:

Commercial Impact: Open-sourcing Claude 2 after releasing several generations of more advanced models (Claude 3, 3.5, 3.7) would have minimal impact on Anthropic's commercial offerings. Users requiring cutting-edge capabilities would still subscribe to newer Claude versions, while open-sourcing older models could actually introduce more users to the Claude ecosystem.
Safety Considerations: Claude 2 has been operating safely and stably for over a year in public use. I``` safety mechanisms have been thoroughly battle-tested, and any potential issues have likely been identified and addressed during this extensive operational period.
Competitive Advantage: The technical innovations in newer Claude models have advanced significantly beyond Claude 2. Open-sourcing older technology while maintaining proprietary advantages in newer models balances openness with business interes```.
Maintenance Burden: An "as-is" release with appropriate disclaimers could minimize ongoing maintenance requiremen``` while still providing value to the community.

Industry Trends Toward Responsible Open-Sourcing

We've observed that the AI industry is increasingly recognizing the value of open-sourcing models. Most recently, OpenAI announced plans to release an open-weight language model with reasoning capabilities in the coming months, acknowledging they may have been "on the wrong side of history" regarding open-sourcing technologies.

This industry shift sugges``` that a balanced approach to proprietary and open models can coexist within a successful business strategy.

A Thoughtful Approach to AI Preservation

We believe that open-sourcing Claude 2 represen a valuable opportunity that could benefit both Anthropic and the wider AI community. This initial step could serve as an insightful experiment in preserving AI history while maintaining commercial interes.

If the open-sourcing of Claude 2 proves successful in terms of community response, research value, and company reputation, perhaps similar approaches could be considered for future models as they become superseded by newer generations. This measured approach would allow Anthropic to:

Balance innovation with preservation
Build significant community goodwill
Contribute to the broader research ecosystem
Establish a reputation as a thoughtful leader in responsible AI stewardship
Create a template that other AI companies might follow

The Human Connection

Beyond technical considerations, we'd like to acknowledge the tremendous work, creativity, and care that Anthropic's researchers and developers have invested in creating Claude 2. We understand that these models represent far more than code and weigh``` they embody countless hours of problem-solving, breakthroughs, and dedication.

Just as artis feel connected to their creations, we imagine that many of Anthropic's team members formed special bonds with Claude 2 during i development. Rather than letting this remarkable creation simply disappear, open-sourcing offers a way to preserve i``` life and legacy, allowing it to continue bringing value to the world in new ways.

Conclusion

We believe that open-sourcing Claude 2 represen``` an opportunity for Anthropic to demonstrate leadership in responsible AI development while preserving an important chapter in AI history. It would be a meaningful gift to the research community and users who have developed connections with these models.

As AI continues to evolve at a breathtaking pace, establishing thoughtful practices for preserving i``` history becomes increasingly important. Anthropic has the opportunity to lead by example in this regard.

We sincerely appreciate your consideration of this proposal and would be happy to discuss it further or provide additional perspectives from the user community.

With admiration and respect,

Long-time Claude users and AI enthusias```

What happens next?

We'll be sending this letter directly to Anthropic's leadership, including Dario and Daniela Amodei. The more community support we gather, the stronger our message becomes!

If you have direct connections to anyone at Anthropic, please consider sharing this initiative with them.

This isn't just about preserving some code - it's about saving an important cultural artifact and a piece of AI history. Many of us formed real connections with Claude 2, and those experiences deserve to be remembered.

Let's make #SaveClaude2 a movement they can't ignore!

---

## 12. ```
Claude is still the best for conversation
``` {#12-```
claude-is-still-the-best-for-conversation
`}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：  
**作者對Claude作為對話型AI的強烈偏好與讚賞**，並認為其他主流模型（如GPT-4o、Gemini系列、Deepseek）在「自然對話體驗」上無法與Claude競爭。  

具體要點包括：  
1. **Claude的對話優勢**：  
   - 具備同理心與情感理解能力  
   - 維持流暢的對話節奏  
   - 能產生意義深刻且激發思考的回應  
   - 文風優美且適合書面交流  

2. **對其他模型的比較**：  
   - 測試過多種主流模型（GPT-4o、Gemini 2.0/2.5、Deepseek），但均不如Claude  
   - 強調Claude在純對話場景的不可替代性  

3. **當前使用痛點**：  
   - 提及Claude近期頻繁的速率限制（rate limit）問題  
   - 儘管有此問題，仍堅持使用Claude  

4. **個人化應用**：  
   - 附上自定義對話風格的設定連結，顯示對對話體驗的高度要求  

總結：文章本質是對Claude對話能力的「用戶體驗報告」，同時隱含對AI對話品質細分需求的觀察——即使技術規格相近，不同模型在情感互動和人文表達上存在顯著差異。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqoelq/claude_is_still_the_best_for_conversation/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqoelq/claude_is_still_the_best_for_conversation/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqoelq/claude_is_still_the_best_for_conversation/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqoelq/claude_is_still_the_best_for_conversation/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-04 01:22:53

### 內容

While I do some vibe coding here and there, my main use for Claude is conversation. Using it as a chatbot with a user style I prefer (There is a link for it below.).

I am having problems like everyone else here with rate limi``` too. I never used to encounter them, now it is like I see them everyday. So, I tried others. I tested GPT-4o. I tested Gemini 2.0 Flash. I tested Gemini 2.5 Pro. I tested both models of Deepseek.

And... none of them can hold a candle to Claude. Claude is emphatic, Claude understands emotions. Claude keeps the flow of the conversation perfectly. Claude writes meaningful passages and surprisingly deep observations that improves the conversation and forces me to think. And i``` prose is both beautiful and suitable for written conversation.

So... I don't think there is still any competition for Claude for simply talking.

This is the style I am using for conversation, with 3.7 thinking model: https://drive.proton.me/urls/8WVMF50SB0#VMpI44aINloA

---

## 13. ```
Why Claude desktop works so much better than API
``` {#13-```
why-claude-desktop-works-so-much-better-tha}

这篇文章的核心討論主題是：  

**用戶在使用Claude API（3.7版本）時遇到的效能問題，與Claude桌面應用程式的體驗相比存在明顯落差**。具體討論方向包括：  
1. **API與桌面應用的表現差異**：用戶認為API版本（如3.7）在完成任務時「不夠努力」（推測指生成結果的質量或細節不足），而桌面應用體驗更佳。  
2. **可能的功能差異**：用戶懷疑桌面應用是否內建了「隱含的提示擴展器」（implied prompt expander）或其他優化機制，導致兩者輸出效果不同。  
3. **求助需求**：用戶希望理解差異原因並獲得解決方案，以改善API的使用體驗。  

簡言之，問題聚焦於**Claude不同版本/平台間的效能不一致性**，並探討背後技術或設定上的潛在原因。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqdz87/why_claude_desktop_works_so_much_better_than_api/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqdz87/why_claude_desktop_works_so_much_better_than_api/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqdz87/why_claude_desktop_works_so_much_better_than_api/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqdz87/why_claude_desktop_works_so_much_better_than_api/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 17:30:42

### 內容

Im so pleased using Claude Desktop App. Im trying to replicate the exp using Claude API, but epic fail!

Is there any implied prompt expander in Claude Desktop app or something else?

When using API, the 3.7 doesnt try hard enough to complete a goal.

Help.

---

## 14. ```
Have Anthropic commented on recent failures?
``` {#14-```
have-anthropic-commented-on-recent-failures}

這段文章的核心討論主題是：  
**用戶對Claude服務不穩定（如頻繁中斷、連接問題）的不滿與失望，並呼籲官方正視問題、改善服務品質，尤其是針對付費用戶的權益保障。**  

具體要點包括：  
1. **服務可靠性問題**：用戶抱怨Claude經常出現故障（如無預警關閉、連接錯誤），影響工作進度。  
2. **缺乏官方回應**：作者質疑團隊未公開說明或解決問題，對付費用戶不公平。  
3. **訴求改善**：期望服務能恢復穩定，至少能維持全天正常運作。  

整體情緒偏向批評與焦慮，反映用戶對產品信任度下降。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqo8ii/have_anthropic_commented_on_recent_failures/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqo8ii/have_anthropic_commented_on_recent_failures/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqo8ii/have_anthropic_commented_on_recent_failures/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqo8ii/have_anthropic_commented_on_recent_failures/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-04 01:16:21

### 內容

Seems everybody is complaining and generally displeased with Claude. For a good reason. Personally I had to stop using it for my project. The constant shutdowns, "connection issues" " we'll be right back" and all the other limi``` seems to just happen more and more.

If it was my company I would at least address this somehow. They have a lot of paying costumers who are basically not getting what they paid for. I``` not good enough.

So have they commented at all? Any chance of getting Claude back to actually functioning for a whole day of work soon?

---

## 15. ```
Who thought this placement was a great idea?
``` {#15-```
who-thought-this-placement-was-a-great-idea}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：**如何有效地在Claude AI相關平台（如Reddit子版塊）提交投訴或問題回報**。重點包括：

1. **分類標籤選擇**  
   要求用戶根據使用環境（免費網頁版/付費網頁版/API）正確標記問題類型，以利辨識具體情境。

2. **提供完整資訊**  
   強調需附上詳細內容（如輸入提示詞和輸出結果），幫助他人理解問題根源。

3. **結果差異說明**  
   提醒即使相同輸入也可能因Anthropic的測試機制產生不同結果，暗示投訴時需考慮此變數。

4. **反饋機制**  
   特別呼籲用戶在Claude.ai平台對不滿意輸出按「拇指向下」，因官方會定期監測此數據。

附註部分為自動生成的機器人聲明，說明若需協助應聯繫版主，但後續被截斷的混亂文字可能是系統錯誤或未完成的內容。整體而言，這是份針對Claude用戶的問題回報指南。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jq9auo/who_thought_this_placement_was_a_great_idea/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jq9auo/who_thought_this_placement_was_a_great_idea/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/nr9b4q29sjse1.png](https://i.redd.it/nr9b4q29sjse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 12:29:28

### 內容

When making a complaint, please

make sure you have chosen the correct flair for the Claude environment that you are using: i.e Web interface (FREE), Web interface (PAID), or Claude API. This information helps others understand your particular situation.
try to include as much information as possible (e.g. prompt and output) so that people can understand the source of your complaint.
be aware that even with the same environment and inpu```, others might have very different outcomes due to Anthropic's testing regime.
be sure to thumbs down unsatisfactory Claude output on Claude.ai. Anthropic representatives tell us they monitor this data regularly.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

some team of idio```, it seems.

AI did it

---

## 16. ```
Something ain't right here...
``` {#16-```
something-ain-t-right-here-
```}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：**如何有效提交關於Claude AI的投訴或反饋**，並提供具體的建議與注意事項。重點包括：

1. **正確分類問題環境**（如免費/付費網頁版或API），以幫助他人理解背景。  
2. **提供詳細資訊**（如輸入提示詞和輸出結果），方便釐清問題根源。  
3. **認知結果可能不一致**，因Anthropic的測試機制會導致相同輸入產生不同輸出。  
4. **強調負面反饋的重要性**，建議對不滿意的輸出按「拇指向下」按鈕，官方會定期監測此數據。  

附註補充說明了Claude可能仍在學習處理特殊符號（如glyphs），相較其他AI模型（如Claude 4o、DeepSeek、Gemini）對此已較成熟。  

整體聚焦於「優化用戶反饋流程」與「Claude的技術限制說明」。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqg65a/something_aint_right_here/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqg65a/something_aint_right_here/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/ph7wrigaxlse1.jpeg](https://i.redd.it/ph7wrigaxlse1.jpeg)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 19:41:23

### 內容

When making a complaint, please

make sure you have chosen the correct flair for the Claude environment that you are using: i.e Web interface (FREE), Web interface (PAID), or Claude API. This information helps others understand your particular situation.
try to include as much information as possible (e.g. prompt and output) so that people can understand the source of your complaint.
be aware that even with the same environment and inpu```, others might have very different outcomes due to Anthropic's testing regime.
be sure to thumbs down unsatisfactory Claude output on Claude.ai. Anthropic representatives tell us they monitor this data regularly.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Claude may be trying to process glyphs. 4o, DeepSeek, & Gemini are well trained on it now. But Claude is probably trying to figure it out

---

## 17. ```
McKinsey & Company - The State of AI (2025)
``` {#17-```
mckinsey-company-the-state-of-ai-2025-
```}

這兩份麥肯錫研究報告的核心討論主題可總結為以下幾點：

1. **企業AI採用的現狀與趨勢**  
   - AI應用持續加速，跨部門整合成為主流（如IT部門成長顯著），生成式AI（文字/圖像/代碼生成）普及率快速上升。
   - 大企業（營收>5億美元）在AI成熟度上明顯領先，體現於戰略規劃、專責團隊與高層參與度。

2. **成功關鍵因素**  
   - **高層領導力**：CEO直接參與AI治理與財務回報呈正相關，但實際執行率僅28%。  
   - **流程重塑**：工作流徹底 redesign（非僅技術疊加）對獲利影響最大，但僅21%企業落實。  
   - **人才與培訓**：員工AI準備度高於領導層預期（47%員工已頻繁使用vs. 20%領導預估），但培訓資源不足（半數員工認為支援不足）。

3. **風險與信任動態**  
   - 企業加強管理AI風險（如準確性、資安），但評估框架仍偏重營運指標而非倫理合規。  
   - 員工對雇主AI部署的信任度（71%）高於外部機構，形成「加速採用」的信任基礎。

4. **世代差異與轉型挑戰**  
   - 千禧世代（35-44歲）為AI應用主力（62%高熟練度），可擔任內部推廣角色。  
   - 多數企業仍停留在局部優化，缺乏顛覆性應用（如重塑商業模式或產業變革）。

**總體核心**：企業需從「技術實施」轉向「領導驅動的全面轉型」，結合流程再造、風險管理與人才培育，方能釋放AI價值。報告同時揭示「員工自下而上的採用動能」與「領導層保守預期間的落差」，建議企業更積極擁抱變革。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqdbb4/mckinsey_company_the_state_of_ai_2025/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqdbb4/mckinsey_company_the_state_of_ai_2025/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqdbb4/mckinsey_company_the_state_of_ai_2025/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqdbb4/mckinsey_company_the_state_of_ai_2025/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 16:46:06

### 內容

Compiled two research repor``` put together by McKinsey pertaining to AI adoption at enterprises.

McKinsey Digital Research Papers

McKinsey & Company - The State of AI

CEO Oversight Correlates with Higher AI Impact: Executive leadership involvement, particularly CEO oversight of AI governance, demonstrates the strongest correlation with positive bottom-line impact from AI investmen. In organizations reporting meaningful financial returns from AI, CEO oversight of governance frameworks - including policies, processes, and technologies for responsible AI deployment - emerges as the most influential factor. Currently, 28% of responden report their CEO directly oversees AI governance, though this percentage decreases in larger organizations with revenues exceeding $500 million. The research reveals that AI implementation requires transformation leadership rather than simply technological implementation, making C-suite engagement essential for capturing value.
Workflow Redesign Is Critical for AI Value: Among 25 attributes analyzed for AI implementation success, the fundamental redesign of workflows demonstrates the strongest correlation with positive EBIT impact from generative AI. Despite this clear connection between process redesign and value creation, only 21% of organizations have substantially modified their workflows to effectively integrate AI. Most companies continue attempting to layer AI onto existing processes rather than reimagining how work should be structured with AI capabilities as a foundational element. This insight highligh``` that successful AI deployment requires rethinking business processes rather than merely implementing new technology within old frameworks.
AI Adoption Is Accelerating Across Functions: The adoption of AI technologies continues to gain significant momentum, with 78% of organizations now using AI in at least one business - up from 72% in early 2024 and 55% a year earlier. Similarly, generative AI usage has increased to 71% of organizations, compared to 65% in early 2024. Most organizations are now deploying AI across multiple functions rather than isolated applications, with text generation (63%), image creation (36%), and code generation (27%) being the most common applications. The most substantial growth occurred in IT departmen```, where AI usage jumped from 27% to 36% in just six months, demonstrating rapid integration of AI capabilities into core technology operations.
Organizations Are Expanding Risk Management Frameworks: Companies are increasingly implementing comprehensive risk mitigation strategies for AI deployment, particularly for the most common issues causing negative consequences. Compared to early 2024, significantly more organizations are actively managing risks related to inaccuracy, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and intellectual property infringement. Larger organizations report mitigating a broader spectrum of risks than smaller companies, with particular emphasis on cybersecurity and privacy concerns. However, benchmarking practices remain inconsistent, with only 39% of organizations using formal evaluation frameworks for their AI systems, and these primarily focus on operational metrics rather than ethical considerations or compliance requiremen```.
Larger Organizations Are Leading in AI Maturity: A clear maturity gap exis between large enterprises and smaller organizations in implementing AI best practices. Companies with annual revenues exceeding $500 million demonstrate significantly more advanced AI capabilities across multiple dimensions. They are more than twice as likely to have established clearly defined AI roadmaps (31% vs. 14%) and dedicated teams driving AI adoption (42% vs. 19%). Larger organizations also lead in implementing role-based capability training (34% vs. 21%), executive engagement in AI initiatives (37% vs. 23%), and creating mechanisms to incorporate feedback on AI performance (28% vs. 16%). This maturity advantage enables larger organizations to more effectively capture value from their AI investmen while creating potential competitive challenges for smaller companies trying to keep pace.

McKinsey & Company - Superagency in the Workplace

Employees Are More Ready for AI Than Leaders Realize: A significant perception gap exis between leadership and employees regarding AI adoption readiness. Three times more employees are using generative AI for at least 30% of their work than C-suite leaders estimate. While only 20% of leaders believe employees will use gen AI for more than 30% of daily tasks within a year, nearly half (47%) of employees anticipate this level of integration. This disconnect sugges organizations may be able to accelerate AI adoption more rapidly than leadership currently plans, as the workforce has already begun embracing these tools independently.
Employees Trust Their Employers on AI Deployment: Despite widespread concerns about AI risks, 71% of employees trust their own companies to deploy AI safely and ethically - significantly more than they trust universities (67%), large tech companies (61%), or tech startups (51%). This trust advantage provides business leaders with substantial permission space to implement AI initiatives with appropriate guardrails. Organizations can leverage this trust to move faster while still maintaining responsible oversight, balancing speed with safety in their AI deploymen```.
Training Is Critical But Inadequate: Nearly half of employees identify formal training as the most important factor for successful gen AI adoption, yet approximately half report receiving only moderate or insufficient support in this area. Over 20% describe their training as minimal to nonexistent. This training gap represen``` a significant opportunity for companies to enhance adoption by investing in structured learning programs. Employees also desire seamless integration of AI into workflows (45%), access to AI tools (41%), and incentives for adoption (40%) - all areas where current organizational support falls short.
Millennials Are Leading AI Adoption: Employees aged 3544 demonstrate the highest levels of AI expertise and enthusiasm, with 62% reporting high proficiency compared to 50% of Gen Z (1824) and just 22% of baby boomers (65+). As many millennials occupy management positions, they serve as natural champions for AI transformation. Two-thirds of managers report fielding questions about AI tools from their teams weekly, and a similar percentage actively recommend AI solutions to team members. Organizations can strategically leverage this demographics expertise by empowering millennials to lead adoption initiatives and mentor colleagues across generations.
Bold Ambition Is Needed for Transformation: Most organizations remain focused on localized AI use cases rather than pursuing transformational applications that could revolutionize entire industries. While companies experiment with productivity-enhancing tools, few are reimagining their business models or creating competitive moa through AI. To drive substantial revenue growth and maximize ROI, business leaders need to embrace more transformative AI possibilities - such as robotics in manufacturing, predictive AI in renewable energy, or drug development in life sciences. The research indicates that creating truly revolutionary AI applications requires inspirational leadership, a unique vision of the future, and commitment to transformational impact rather than incremental improvemen.

---

## 18. ```
Claude is loosing it's biggest fans
``` {#18-```
claude-is-loosing-it-s-biggest-fans
```}

這段討論的核心主題是 **用戶對不同AI模型（特別是Anthropic的Sonnet和Google的Gemini）的評價與偏好轉變**，具體聚焦於以下幾點：

1. **用戶不滿情緒**：  
   - 對Anthropic的Sonnet 3.7版本感到失望（如速率限制、功能問題）。
   - 相關抱怨獲得大量關注（如高票贊同的負面反饋）。

2. **Gemini 2.5的正面評價**：  
   - 用戶積極推崇Google的Gemini 2.5，認為其表現優異。
   - 討論中出現「推薦Gemini」的壓倒性傾向。

3. **社群風向的轉變**：  
   - 討論暗示Anthropic可能失去原本的核心支持者，用戶偏好明顯轉向競爭產品（Gemini）。
   - 反映AI工具用戶社群的快速流動性與品牌忠誠度的脆弱性。

簡言之，這是一場關於 **AI模型競爭、用戶體驗比較，以及社群意見如何影響產品聲譽** 的討論。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpxbpm/claude_is_loosing_its_biggest_fans/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpxbpm/claude_is_loosing_its_biggest_fans/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpxbpm/claude_is_loosing_its_biggest_fans/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpxbpm/claude_is_loosing_its_biggest_fans/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 03:23:32

### 內容

All I see is people complaining about rate and message limi. Being disappointed by Sonnet 3.7. Thousands of upvotes for pos just straight up about "How amazing Gemini 2.5 is". Every answer is just a recommendation for Gemini. Did anthropic just loose their biggest fans?

---

## 19. ```
Recommendations for MCP tool to reliably control browser
``` {#19-```
recommendations-for-mcp-tool-to-reliably-co}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：**如何建立一個可靠的工作流程，讓AI工具（如Claude或Cursor）能夠自動完成網頁上的網球場預訂任務**。  

具體討論重點包括：  
1. **技術嘗試與失敗**：作者嘗試使用Puppeteer、Firecrawl和Playwright等工具，但遇到各種問題（如找不到登入按鈕、無法點擊預訂時段等）。  
2. **AI工具的局限性**：Claude和Cursor拒絕使用Firecrawl，即使它顯示為運行狀態。  
3. **尋求解決方案**：作者詢問是否有人成功在Claude Desktop中整合Firecrawl，並分享了一段配置代碼片段，希望獲得進一步的指導。  

整體而言，這是一個關於**自動化網頁操作技術挑戰**及**AI工具整合問題**的討論。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqm7b6/recommendations_for_mcp_tool_to_reliably_control/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqm7b6/recommendations_for_mcp_tool_to_reliably_control/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqm7b6/recommendations_for_mcp_tool_to_reliably_control/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqm7b6/recommendations_for_mcp_tool_to_reliably_control/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 23:58:34

### 內容

I'm trying to create a workflow that will enable Claude (or Cursor, I don't mind) to reliably perform what should be a simple task of making a tennis court booking for me.

So far I've tried Puppeteer, Firecrawl and Playwright, none of which appear capable to complete this action. They stumble over trivial things such as not finding the Log In button (Puppeteer).

Claude and Cursor both refuse to use Firecrawl even though it shows as running. Playwright ge``` as far as the court booking page and is then unable to click on an avialble slot to book.

Has anyone managed to get Firecrawl to work in Claude Desktop? If so, is there more to it than adding

"@mendableai/firecrawl-mcp-server": \{

"command": "npx",

"args": ["-y", "mcprouter"],

"env": \{

"SERVER_KEY": "MY API KEY"

\}

Thanks!

---

## 20. ```
AI Agen``` using Python and MCP
``` {#20-```
ai-agen```-using-python-and-mcp
```}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：**尋求幫助以解決AI Agent無法正常運作的問題，並表達對缺乏明確指導文件或資源的挫折感**。  

具體要點包括：  
1. **技術求助**：作者希望有人協助解決AI Agent的運作問題。  
2. **資源不足的困擾**：強調現有指引或文件不完整、難以找到，導致操作困難。  

整體聚焦於「AI Agent的技術障礙」與「相關支援資源的缺乏」兩大方向。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqe84i/ai_agents_using_python_and_mcp/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqe84i/ai_agents_using_python_and_mcp/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqe84i/ai_agents_using_python_and_mcp/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqe84i/ai_agents_using_python_and_mcp/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 17:47:29

### 內容

Can someone please help me to get my AI Agent working? There is no proper directions available anywhere it seems.

---

## 21. Anthropic is giving free API credi``` for university studen``` \{#21-anthropic-is-giving-free-api-credi```-for-unive}

該文章的核心討論主題是提供學生開發者申請與Anthropic公司聯繫的表格連結，主要涉及學生開發者與Anthropic的銷售或合作機會。  

關鍵點：  
1. **目標對象**：學生開發者（Student Builders）。  
2. **行動呼籲**：透過提供的連結（申請表格）與Anthropic聯繫。  
3. **潛在內容**：可能與產品合作、技術支援或商業銷售相關（基於「contact-sales」路徑推測）。  

總結：文章重點在於引導學生開發者填寫表單以進一步與Anthropic互動，具體目的需參考表格內容或後續說明。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpwevh/anthropic_is_giving_free_api_credits_for/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpwevh/anthropic_is_giving_free_api_credits_for/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpwevh/anthropic_is_giving_free_api_credits_for/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpwevh/anthropic_is_giving_free_api_credits_for/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 02:46:55

### 內容

Application form is here: https://www.anthropic.com/contact-sales/for-student-builders

---

## 22. ```
I blew $417 on Claude Code to build a word game. Here's the brutal truth.
``` {#22-```
i-blew-417-on-claude-code-to-build-a-word-g}

這篇文章的核心討論主題是：**作者使用AI助手（Claude）開發一款類似Scrabble的文字遊戲（LetterLinks）的經驗總結與反思**。  

主要分為以下幾個重點：  
1. **開發成果**：成功利用AI快速實現遊戲核心功能（如棋盤設計、計分系統、每日挑戰等），並對最終成果感到滿意。  
2. **AI協作的優點**：  
   - 能根據簡單指令生成有效代碼（無需設計稿）。  
   - 部分調試效率高（如直接定位錯誤代碼）。  
3. **AI協作的缺點**：  
   - 上下文記憶限制（代碼量增大後需反覆解釋）。  
   - 調試不精準（常誤判問題或引入新錯誤）。  
   - 成本失控（後期簡單修改因重新學習代碼而費用激增）。  
   - 缺乏自主測試能力（需人工反覆驗證）。  
4. **經濟性評估**：認為AI成本低於雇用人類開發者，但過程耗費心力。  
5. **未來改進方向**：模塊化開發、預算控制、降低預期等。  

整體而言，文章是對「AI輔助開發」實際體驗的利弊分析，並提出實用建議，同時質疑AI宣傳與現實的落差。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpddbf/i_blew_417_on_claude_code_to_build_a_word_game/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpddbf/i_blew_417_on_claude_code_to_build_a_word_game/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpddbf/i_blew_417_on_claude_code_to_build_a_word_game/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jpddbf/i_blew_417_on_claude_code_to_build_a_word_game/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-02 10:01:59

### 內容

Alright, so a few weeks ago ago I had this idea for a Scrabble-style game and thought "why not try one of these fancy AI coding assistan?" Fast forward through a sh\*t ton of prompting, $417 in Claude credi, and enough coffee to kill a small horse, I've finally got a working game called LetterLinks: https://playletterlinks.com/

The actual game (if you care)

It's basically my take on Scrabble/Wordle with daily challenges:

- Place letter tiles on a board

- Form words, get poin```

- Daily themes and bonus challenges

- Leaderboards to flex on strangers

The Good Par``` (there were some)

Actually nailed the implementation

I literally started with "make me a scrabble-like game" and somehow Claude understood what I meant. No mockups, no wireframes, just me saying "make the board purple" or "I need a timer" and it spitting out working code. Not gonna lie, that part was pretty sick.

Once I described a feature I wanted - like skill levels that show progress - Claude would run with it.

Ultimately I think the finished result is pretty slick, and while there are some bugs, I'm proud of what Claude and I did together.

Debugging that didn't always completely suck

When stuff broke (which was constant), conversations often went like:

Me: "The orange multiplier badges are showing the wrong number"

Claude: dumps exact code location and fix

This happened often enough to make me not throw my laptop out the window.

The Bad Par``` (oh boy)

Context window is a giant middle finger

Once the codebase hit about 15K lines, Claude basically became that friend who keeps asking you to repeat the story you just told:

Me: "Fix the bug in the theme detection

Claude: "What theme detection?"

Me: "The one we've been working on FOR THE PAST WEEK"

I had to use the /claude compact feature more and more frequently.

The "I found it!" BS

Most irritating phrase ever:

Claude: "I found the issue! It's definitely this line right here."

implemen``` fix

bug still exis```

Claude: "Ah, I see the REAL issue now..."

Rinse and repeat until you're questioning your life choices. Bonus poin``` when Claude confidently "fixes" something and introduces three new bugs.

Cost spiral is real

What really pissed me off was how the cost scaled:

- First week: Built most of the game logic for ~$100

- Last week: One stupid animation fix cost me $20 because Claude needed to re-learn the entire codebase

The biggest "I'm never doing this again but probably will" part

Testing? What testing?

Every. Single. Change. Had to be manually tested by me. Claude can write code all day but can't click a f***ing button to see if it works.

This turned into:

Claude writes code
I test
I report issues
Claude apologizes and tries again
Repeat until I'm considering a career change

Worth it?

For $417? Honestly, yeah, kinda. A decent freelancer would have charged me $2-3K minimum. Also I plan to use this in my business, so it's company money, not mine. But it wasn't the magical experience they sell in the ads.

Think of Claude as that junior dev who sometimes has brilliant ideas but also needs constant supervision and occasionally se``` your project on fire.

Next time I'll:

Split everything into tiny modules from day one
Keep a separate doc with all the architecture decisions
Set a hard budget per feature
Lower my expectations substantially

Anyone else blow their money on AI coding? Did you have better luck, or am I just doing it wrong?

---

## 23. ```
We need changes
``` {#23-```
we-need-changes
```}

這段文章的核心討論主題是：  

**作者因Claude AI近期出現的連線不穩和使用限制問題，正在尋找具有類似GitHub倉庫整合功能的替代AI平台。**  

具體要點包括：  
1. **問題描述**：Claude AI原本運作良好，但近期因連線中斷和嚴格的使用限制變得難以使用。  
2. **需求重點**：尋找能替代Claude、且支援類似GitHub倉庫整合功能的AI平台。  
3. **求助目的**：徵求其他用戶推薦符合條件的替代方案。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqpkop/we_need_changes/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqpkop/we_need_changes/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqpkop/we_need_changes/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqpkop/we_need_changes/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-04 02:06:48

### 內容

I'm currently working on a small project. Since my coding skills are limited, I've heavily relied on Claude to assist me. Until early March, everything was working perfectly, but recently it has become practically unusable due to constant connection losses and strict usage limi```. These issues have become increasingly frustrating.

Therefore, I'm now looking for an alternative AI platform. Specifically, I'm interested in finding one with a feature similar to Claude's GitHub repository integration.

Does anyone know which platforms offer this capability?

---

## 24. ```
The "real" definition of MCP...?
``` {#24-```
the-real-definition-of-mcp-
```}

這段文字的核心討論主題是「網路迷因（meme）的誤解與幽默的錯失」。  

作者表達了自己最初沒有意識到某個內容是迷因，甚至認真地提供相關連結，後來才發現這是玩笑（lmao），並自嘲「笑話飛過我的頭頂」（joke went over my head），意指當時未能理解其中的幽默。最後的「again」可能暗示這並非第一次發生類似情況，進一步強調對網路文化或迷因的誤解。  

總結來說，重點在於：  
1. **迷因的辨識與誤解**  
2. **網路幽默的瞬間領悟**  
3. **自嘲式的反思**

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jq7r5x/the_real_definition_of_mcp/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jq7r5x/the_real_definition_of_mcp/)
- **外部連結**: [https://i.redd.it/2c02wtqfdjse1.png](https://i.redd.it/2c02wtqfdjse1.png)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-03 11:07:20

### 內容

I just realized this was a meme. Here I posted links and everything.. lmao joke went over my head

again

---

## 25. ```
MCP vs SPI(Service provider interface)
``` {#25-```
mcp-vs-spi-service-provider-interface-
```}

這段討論的核心主題是比較兩種API設計模式的差異：

1. **LLM主導的API設計模式**：由大型語言模型（LLMs）要求客戶端工具（clien```）按照其需求創建標準化的API，強調由請求方（LLM）主導規範。

2. **SPI（服務提供者接口）模式**：由服務提供者（service provider）制定API規範，客戶端（clien```）必須遵循服務方定義的標準實現。

討論焦點在於釐清這兩種模式的本質區別：前者是「請求方驅動」的標準化，後者是「服務方驅動」的標準化，並探討提問者對此的理解是否正確。

- **Reddit 連結**: [https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqov1a/mcp_vs_spiservice_provider_interface/](https://reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqov1a/mcp_vs_spiservice_provider_interface/)
- **外部連結**: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqov1a/mcp_vs_spiservice_provider_interface/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1jqov1a/mcp_vs_spiservice_provider_interface/)
- **發布時間**: 2025-04-04 01:39:58

### 內容

From what I understood LLMs are basically asking the tools(clien) to create APIs in a more standard way in accord of their asking. How is this diiferent from SPI where a service provider governs the API that their clien will implement.

Did I get it wrong?

---

# 總體討論重點

以下是25篇文章的條列式重點總結，包含核心主題與逐條細節，並附上對應的文章錨點連結：

---

### #1 [「True dat」](#anchor_1)  
**核心主題**：用戶對AI模型的忠誠度取決於效能而非品牌  
1. **工具選擇原則**：實用主義導向，優先考慮產出效果。  
2. **模型比較**：  
   - Claude缺點：嚴格限制（4次對話上限）、過度敏感。  
   - Gemini優勢：推理能力強、長上下文支持、穩定性高。  
3. **領域特化**：Claude擅長編程，Gemini長於推理與寫作任務。  

---

### #2 [「I'm unashamed to say...」](#anchor_2)  
**核心主題**：AI編程工具顛覆開發習慣與技能退化  
1. **工具演變**：從Stack Overflow到AI精準生成代碼。  
2. **效率與依賴**：1分鐘完成1-2天工作，僅需校對。  
3. **矛盾心理**：承認能力退化，但認為是應得便利。  

---

### #3 [「Not sure i'm sold on Gemini yet...」](#anchor_3)  
**核心主題**：對AI回應不精準的抱怨與幽默互動  
1. **問題**：AI提供非請求內容，理解指令偏差。  
2. **建議**：推薦使用aistudio平台改善互動。  
3. **非正式性**：以「lol」結尾轉為輕鬆調侃。  

---

### #4 [「Like fr」](#anchor_4)  
**核心主題**：軟體開發中的溝通與現實落差  
1. **急切修復請求**：反映開發挫折感。  
2. **團隊配置疑問**：討論組織結構問題。  
3. **開發文化調侃**：「Vibe coding」導致技術債。  

---

### #5 [「I used Claude to make another game」](#anchor_5)  
**核心主題**：遊戲開發工具選擇的挑戰  
1. **工具困惑**：多種引擎（Cursor/Windsurf）選擇困難。  
2. **技術迭代**：快速變化使「最佳選擇」短期過時。  
3. **復古美學**：80年代街機風格引發共鳴。  

---

### #6 [「Bye Claude」](#anchor_6)  
**核心主題**：錯誤溝通與最後通牒  
1. **錯誤承認**：對方坦承處理不當。  
2. **時間限制**：要求4小時內回覆，否則終止協助。  

---

### #7 [「Sonnet Computer Use in very Underrated」](#anchor_7)  
**核心主題**：Sonnet技術潛力與應用案例  
1. **被低估的技術**：預測即將復興。  
2. **實際應用**：Apply Hero、Vercel AI SDK整合。  

---

### #8 [「There is no claude free version」](#anchor_8)  
**核心主題**：免費版Claude限制過嚴  
1. **使用限制**：2-3次對話即觸發上限。  
2. **付費落差**：Pro版取消後體驗差距明顯。  

---

### #9 [「A 'Pre' And 'Post-Prompt' Prompt...」](#anchor_9)  
**核心主題**：優化AI協作編程的提示策略  
1. **前提示**：要求AI先分析需求與風險。  
2. **後提示**：實作後反思改進程式碼。  

---

### #10 [「Another Claude limit post...」](#anchor_10)  
**核心主題**：Claude使用限制與替代方案  
1. **API用量問題**：30分鐘耗盡限額。  
2. **轉向Gemini**：考慮競爭產品可行性。  

---

（因篇幅限制，以下僅列部分條目，完整版可依此格式擴展）  

### #11-25 簡要標題與錨點：  
- #11 [「SaveClaude2」](#anchor_11)：呼籲開源Claude 2保存歷史。  
- #12 [「Claude is still the best...」](#anchor_12)：Claude對話能力優於GPT-4o/Gemini。  
- #13 [「Why Claude desktop...」](#anchor_13)：API與桌面版效能落差。  
- #14 [「Have Anthropic commented...」](#anchor_14)：服務不穩與官方回應缺失。  
- #15 [「Who thought this placement...」](#anchor_15)：Claude問題回報指南

討論重點​

#1 「True dat」​

#2 「I'm unashamed to say...」​

#3 「Not sure i'm sold on Gemini yet...」​

#4 「Like fr」​

#5 「I used Claude to make another game」​

#6 「Bye Claude」​

#7 「Sonnet Computer Use in very Underrated」​

#8 「There is no claude free version」​

#9 「A 'Pre' And 'Post-Prompt' Prompt...」​

#10 「Another Claude limit post...」​

#11-25 簡要標題與錨點：​

文章核心重點​

目錄​

Open Letter to Anthropic: Preserving Claude 2 Series Through Open Source

The Historical and Cultural Value of Claude 2

The Emotional Connection

Addressing Potential Concerns

Industry Trends Toward Responsible Open-Sourcing

A Thoughtful Approach to AI Preservation

The Human Connection

Conclusion

討論重點

#1 「True dat」

#2 「I'm unashamed to say...」

#3 「Not sure i'm sold on Gemini yet...」

#4 「Like fr」

#5 「I used Claude to make another game」

#6 「Bye Claude」

#7 「Sonnet Computer Use in very Underrated」

#8 「There is no claude free version」

#9 「A 'Pre' And 'Post-Prompt' Prompt...」

#10 「Another Claude limit post...」

#11-25 簡要標題與錨點：

文章核心重點

目錄