The snapshot/restore detail is the most interesting part to me. If artifacts really suspend to storage after inactivity and restore on next access, that's the same bet Fly.io made with Firecracker machines, and it mostly worked once restore times got under a few hundred ms. I'd love to see the author measure actual restore latency across artifact sizes, because that number decides whether this pattern can replace always-on preview environments. There's also a cost angle worth digging into: per-session ephemeral VMs are cheap to suspend, but storage and restore I/O for big node_modules trees add up fast at scale.
One thing that I didn't understand from this article was how you use this deployment platform.
Can you tell Claude code for web to build and deploy a web app using it? If so, does that end up with a public URL somewhere? Does that deployment continue working after your Claude code for web session ends?
After some inactivity it goes into some dormant mode. Where it will only consume some storage. The next time someone tries to access this artifact it just restores a snapshot from last working state.
I guess the public url part is working similar to how OpenAI and their Sites are. E.g: their personally only available to you, until you change the sharing options.
It's perhaps the most pernicious Claudism. Or just the one that gets my goat the most. Saying what something isn't, usually twice, before saying what it is. What a fucking waste of words.
That's the most annoying one, and the two negated things more often than not end up being something no one would have ever considered in the first place.
I'm not defending claudeslop, but TBF, anaphora and its lesser-known sibling: epistrophe far predate the English language, let alone something new like LLMs.
"I'm not defending claudeslop, but <defends slop>". People obviously know this. The problem is that using a dramatic rhetorical flourish every third sentence for completely un-dramatic things is fucking tiring. And so are the people defending this shit. "Oh, humans use em-dashes too, so actually there's literally no difference between a human using one or two and Claude using 400 em-dashes in one article". A human using things correctly and a language model using them incorrectly are not the same fucking thing.
The snapshot/restore detail is the most interesting part to me. If artifacts really suspend to storage after inactivity and restore on next access, that's the same bet Fly.io made with Firecracker machines, and it mostly worked once restore times got under a few hundred ms. I'd love to see the author measure actual restore latency across artifact sizes, because that number decides whether this pattern can replace always-on preview environments. There's also a cost angle worth digging into: per-session ephemeral VMs are cheap to suspend, but storage and restore I/O for big node_modules trees add up fast at scale.
One thing that I didn't understand from this article was how you use this deployment platform.
Can you tell Claude code for web to build and deploy a web app using it? If so, does that end up with a public URL somewhere? Does that deployment continue working after your Claude code for web session ends?
The way I interpret this is:
After some inactivity it goes into some dormant mode. Where it will only consume some storage. The next time someone tries to access this artifact it just restores a snapshot from last working state.
I guess the public url part is working similar to how OpenAI and their Sites are. E.g: their personally only available to you, until you change the sharing options.
Actual title: ' Anthropic's Hidden Vercel Competitor "Antspace"'
It's for Claude Code, not Claude web. And it's been posted here 3 times already.
"No systemd. No sshd. No cron. No logging daemon."
You can delete that sentence. Why would someone assume sshd or cron in an environment like this?
Omit needless words.
It's perhaps the most pernicious Claudism. Or just the one that gets my goat the most. Saying what something isn't, usually twice, before saying what it is. What a fucking waste of words.
That's the most annoying one, and the two negated things more often than not end up being something no one would have ever considered in the first place.
I'm not defending claudeslop, but TBF, anaphora and its lesser-known sibling: epistrophe far predate the English language, let alone something new like LLMs.
The issue is the frequently repeated, formulaic use.
"I'm not defending claudeslop, but <defends slop>". People obviously know this. The problem is that using a dramatic rhetorical flourish every third sentence for completely un-dramatic things is fucking tiring. And so are the people defending this shit. "Oh, humans use em-dashes too, so actually there's literally no difference between a human using one or two and Claude using 400 em-dashes in one article". A human using things correctly and a language model using them incorrectly are not the same fucking thing.
Got it. No bullshit, no ceremony: just straight to the point.
I don’t get no respect. I don’t get no respect at all.
I say to the guy, “That looks load-bearing.”
He looks at me like I just insulted his mother. “What the hell does that even mean?”
This is the same guy who asked me to rebuild Twitter. No bugs. By Friday.
Reasoning trace: > The user seems to be frustrated with my stylistic choices for prose...
The article, while interesting, is clearly Claudeslop.
It's "load bearing".
“It is difficult to get [an AI] to [omit words, which are counted as tokens], when [it’s company’s] paycheck depends on [it] not [omitting words].”