In the US, usually you do a summer research program if you want to be a PhD student, so you can get a taste of research.
At most universities as well, if you decide the PhD isn't for you, there is always the option of leaving with a Master's. Because you get free tuition and a stipend, you also come out ahead of if you had gone straight for the MS (which you generally would pay for).
Lots of these came about at the time of GDPR by companies saying "Fine! This is what our website would look like if we complied with your stupid communist privacy law!" and us saying "don't threaten me with a good time!"
"Good" or "bad" writing cannot be decided in vacuum: it is decided by the culture examining it.
One example strongly tied to culture is cliched writing.
Things become cliche as they are get overused; no amount of cleverness in the cliche itself can overcome this. Claude's writing has rapidly become cliche because it uses the same pool of stock phrases and words. People pick up on this and have the same reaction as they do to any other cliche piece.
Let's take two works generally seen as good: if Lord of the Rings or Foundation released today, they would probably be panned as cliche because they created those tropes in the first place, which future authors copied or built upon. So yes, most would not think this is poorly written 20 years ago because this style didn't exist yet and it wasn't cliche.
Claude vibe-writing isn't "bad" because it is grammatically or structurally bad. It's bad because it's overused and signals to the reader - whether intentional or not - certain things about how much the prompter values the written piece.
It’s definitely structurally bad. If you run normal Claude output against various readability metrics they generally come out terrible. I had one pin a particularly bad piece of Claude output at needing 24 years of schooling.
For real, the "Claudish" has become so painful to read that it just takes me out of whatever task I was working on.
When prompted to use simple English without jargon, it's still filled with load bearing honest caveats in every footgun seam it talks about — what I should have led with. <Insert whatever other Claude cliche you prefer>
And I'm not the only one to notice this. Next time it's up for renewal, my team is abandoning it for GH Copilot in order to use literally any other frontier model.
That claim about load bearing is doing a lot of work there!
I'm curious to know how "Claudish" emerged during the training process. Why each AI has a particular voice if much of the training material is the same across AIs?
They train Claude on its own output and conversations with users, so tics like this are going to get amplified by virtue of being more common in the training set.
That, and my conspiracy hat says it's a way of watermarking the output.
Yes, Claude speaks Claudish but at the end of the day I care about the Ruby, Python, JS it writes. It still does a good job at it even if maybe I prefer the way DeepSeek talks. I did not use other models in an agentic harness.
The code is fine, yes. But now that I am dabbling in spec-driven development (unsure whether I like it) I have to read a lot of prose and I simply cannot get myself to read a page of claudisms. It is that painful.
The odd phrases are one thing, what numbs my brain is how everything is evenly bombastic and lacks any sense of rhythm. Technical documents should not read like catchphrases strung together.
OP wants his property to behave in a specific way, clearly knowing the risks.
I'm not seeing how a hypothetical bad review about a $200B company is at all relevant here. The manufacturer's reputation is not in any way OP's problem.
If you own the hardware, it is yours to abuse, break, and do all manner of things that would make the engineers who designed it cringe: you do not owe any allegiance to them.
This is such a cool idea, I can't believe it hasn't been done before!
> It currently supports around 1.4k problems and multiple languages, including Python, C++, Rust, Java, Go, TypeScript, Swift, and others.
It would be interesting to have a variant where you get the input data through stdin or a file on disk, and verify by writing to stdout. That way you could bring your own language
What's the intended purpose? It seems to be protecting against a scenario where the package is not installed but the CLI is somehow running...
...But that seems like a very odd thing to be concerned about. Plus, unless I'm missing something, the program will crash with an an ImportError before that block can ever run.
I'm assuming it's vibe coded, but it's a code smell I've noticed is specific to vibe coded projects.
AIs tend to have a debilitating phobia of any kind of exception. Claude especially will throw try/except and weird coersion everywhere in the code.
This bites you because it hides legitimate errors, even when the program is in such an unrecoverable state that it doesn't make logical sense to continue. It becomes impossible to debug, and requires the test suite to be absolutely perfect because you end up throwing away the only way for the language to warn you that something went wrong.
So while yes, it's relatively minor, like many code smells it is indicative that other things may be wrong.
Are other things wrong? I'd be wary to shame people's work without doing legwork to getting evidence to support your claim, otherwise you risk passing as someone just seeking attention and upvotes, riding on the tides of HN anti-AI sentiment. Which is valid for vote farming just to be clear, I'd just respect you less if this was the case.
Bro. I didn't had money fo claude code to review my codebase so i build this. And you are saying that i use claude code or anyother tools fot this. NOT GONNA LIE. I FORMATTED THE CODE FROM AI TO BE BREAKPROOF SO IN SOME CASES IT MAY LOOK AI GENERATED BUT ITS MOSTLY MY CODE WITH SOME AI TWEAKS.NOTHING MORE.
That's alright. But if I could give you a piece of unsolicited advice, treat your pals nice and the criticizers better, they are the hearts you need to change :)
"Damn, I'm being asked to put a cookie into this site that will maybe result in some guy seeing an ad about a toothpaste he might buy at some point in the future.
I'm going to risk months of unemployment and explain to my family why this is more important than eating when I get home. The internet is serious business, they'll understand."
-- the hypothetical webdev in that scenario, I guess?
If you can get replaced over something so minor, it means there's dozens of capable bootlickers lined up and ready to do it as soon as you're gone, so yes, there is a webdev problem.
At most universities as well, if you decide the PhD isn't for you, there is always the option of leaving with a Master's. Because you get free tuition and a stipend, you also come out ahead of if you had gone straight for the MS (which you generally would pay for).
reply