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!)
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.
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.
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.
>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.
> 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.
>
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.
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.
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.
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
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 transition@stainless.com. I check with the team if they can update the article with a mention
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.
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.
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.
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
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 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.
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 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
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.”
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...
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.
Reach out to mehdi@apimatic.io and I'll help you migrate.
PS: sorry for the shameless plug but sdks and APIs are my life and blood :-)
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.
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 :)
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.
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
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.”
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?
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
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
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.
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..
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 the niches there are riches and boring businesses build wealth. Congrats!
I can't even figure out what Stainless does (did)
Nothing (AI slop to create an unnecessary product, funded by A16Z).
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.
As a mostly non-programmer it got me a lot done.
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.
...And then they train their next generation models with these elite engineers' skills.
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.
But Anthropic is adding employees
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.
I feel like using $1.3M/year is a wild outlier. A $200/month Max sub is a pretty cheap way to get quite a lot of benefit.
His usage is actually 12x that ...
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.
For those who, like me, had to do a double take on that number: https://www.businessinsider.com/openclaw-peter-steinberger-a...
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
They most certainly are. This is Jevons paradox.
>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.
> that's already a huge saving to any company's bottom line
Possibly not if they are paying the full cost of inference
> Who claimed that?
Dario Amodei
The top trading firms had top-end recruiting figured out for ages, without jumping through all these hoops.
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
Trading firms are surely not hiring for the broad founder-like skill set Anthropic is. Trading firms want narrow extreme technical brilliance.
> founder-like skill set
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.
> 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.
> I did use the word "software engineer" there
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.
'Engineer' is also a legally protected title in Canada, so 'developer' is the common term.
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?
If so, is this ever enforced?
> 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.
Yes, hence the term software engineer which has programming as just one part of the job.
It isn't a good test for that either.
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.
OK, let's go to the source then and ask Claude:
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.
The world’s best software engineers aren’t optimising for comp — they’re optimising to be the world’s best software engineers
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.
Wouldn't that be a misuse of data and likely illegal?
If Anthropic can rummage through your data and workflows to deem you worthy of their grace, then that is seriously wrong.
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.
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
> 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.
For better or worse, it's an acquihire.
"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."
not anymore lol
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.
Usually because they need the technology the vendor is selling.
But buyers try to insert this language into partner/ biz dev contracts all the time.
Much less common for sales.
100%.
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.
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.
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.
> Why TF haven't enterprise made it more painful for these events?
Hadn't heard of Stainless before today. Did it have enterprise customers?
Yes, Anthropic, OpenAI, and Cloudflare, among others.
"rely" is overly strong in these cases usually (more like "make use of")
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
It would be weird if Anthropic were genuinely using it as they say they have been for years but everyone else was a fake customer.
That is WILD to put those statements together in the same article.
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.
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.
Well, my org decided to pay for Monday.com, and still does, even though no one uses it. We also pay for Asana, and the wonks use that instead.
I suspect a lot of larger orgs just have site-wide subscriptions with volume discounts that they don’t need.
I've raised venture from a lot of the big firms (and a lot of small firms) and have never had any of them attempt to force me to use anything.
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.
This is usually founder-led not investor led
+1
Stainless was a fantastic product; every product/service has to start from somewhere
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.
They didn’t. The first is from the Stainless blog post, the second is from Anthropic’s.
FYI the above quote is (sadly) real and is from Stainless's blog post: https://www.stainless.com/blog/stainless-is-joining-anthropi...
A Stainless steal? ;)
Wow, OpenAI is a stainless customer right?
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.
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.
Via https://www.stainless.com/blog/stainless-is-joining-anthropi... that's exactly what seems to have happened:
> 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.
Looks like contracts (enterprise, even!) matter again
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
Is this public? I'm interested in trying it.
I don't have an account but my colleauges do as my company uses the platform.
By self-service, do you mean that the SDK generators are now source-available so they can be run by end users locally?
Yes, that’s right.
That would be great to lead with since it's not present in any of the blog post communication anywhere.
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.
No, the generator itself is being made source-available for previous customers
Huh! I see stlc option is added now mentioning "eligible customers", which is great news. I'm curious if we would also get GitHub action?
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 transition@stainless.com. I check with the team if they can update the article with a mention
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.
It's not about Stainless, it's about Anthropic.
Now Uber is profitable what stops a taxi from just competing again, forcing Uber to have to be unprofitable again?
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.
I’ve tried taxis like 4 times in the past 5 years or so. I regretted it 3 out 4 of those times.
Maybe I’ll try again in a few years.
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.
and this is why i use pi.dev and hotswap models and have no reliance on a single provider
Actually that wasn’t the plan, no
The moment a group accepts VC money, this becomes the plan
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.
I was at stainless since the very beginning, I can tell you it wasn’t the plan
Yeah, but they now have new owner who might be having different plan.
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 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.But I think that doesn't matter.
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).
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.
HN cracks me up sometimes. Anthropic is anti-social? Stainless devs don't want their pre IPO equity to do well? Okay.
I very much doubt you would apply your expectation of altruism to yourself!
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.
The plan can change with the right amount of money. Just ask OpenAI.
the plan isn't really up to the recipient of VC money lol
You forgot this: "trust me bro".
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?
I can just rename the CLAUDE.md files to AGENTS.md when I would like to. They're all just sitting there on my system.
That was always going to be the end point.
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.
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 use claude code and pi.dev side by side most days and i'm mostly choosing pi for most work in last couple of weeks.
True. But this sounds: "I feel like Mondays are coming after Sundays...".
I think that's the normal path for new markets as they consolidate...
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.
No, Anthropic spends a lot of effort to keep you from churning through those tokens with any binary other than their own.
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.
Claude subscription is restricted to Claude Code harness
Really walled garden is the only direction that makes sense--models will slowly become commodities
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
Have you considered open sourcing the SDK generator as part of the shutdown of stainless services?
You guys should be proud - it was a great service!
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.
Stainless blog post: https://www.stainless.com/blog/stainless-is-joining-anthropi...
I can't find the word "journey" — I'm disappointed.
<joke>“Journey” was probably removed as a non-load-bearing buzzword during the acquisition due diligence.</joke>
Don't stop believin'!
Same here. I was expecting "our incredible journey".
darn! anything else i missed?
Well nowadays also there are no "force for good", "joining forces", "democratization" and so on. Times have truly changed.
We have a stack similar to stainless internally at Stream. Might open source it if there's demand.
As a Stainless customer, this is frustrating!
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.
Might I recommend trying APIMatic out: https://migrate-from-stainless.apimatic.io/
X: What are you folks doing?
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..
Here is a powerful OSS extensible alternative from Microsoft. It’s what generates all azure SDKs, docs, CLIs now, and it’s really good.
https://typespec.io/
TypeSpec is awesome!!
(disclaimer: founder of Stainless and also friends with creator of TypeSpec)
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.
- signs a deal with Elon!
- now this!
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.
Does it matter? What of their claims were false? You should undo the claims, not attack the account.
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.
> threatens every use of cc in oss community.
well that ones obviously patently false
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.
> Does it matter?
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.
Bullshit spreads around the word before the truth can even get its shoes on. So on and so forth.
Naive credentialism is obviously bad, but reputation does matter.
> 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)
IDK if I'd call it "better."
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...
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
Codex and Claude don't have meaningfully different rate limits since Claude doubled theirs.
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.
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 talk specifics. Codex limits are very generous and developers care greatly about access to affordable compute.
That's like rewinding to 2015 and saying "Uber prices [versus Lyft] are very fair and riders care greatly about access to affordable transportation"
I'm living the day. Whatever happens next is unpredictable. But Codex surely is the best value today.
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.
Ever since limits were doubled I never really ran into them on Claude code, but I get where you're coming from.
Personally if I don't need a frontier model I use a local LLM. Or one of the Chinese ones through OpenRouter.
I care about the compute I can access today.
Totally understandable, but then you forgo your right to complain about enshittification tomorrow!
This entire forum is Anthropic or OpenAI shills.
How is this acquisition relevant to OpenAI or anything else you said?
All main OpenAI SDK libraries are made with stainless[0][1].
[0]: https://github.com/openai/openai-python
[1]: https://github.com/openai/openai-node
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).
Had to turn off adblock to delete my sessions (firefox, ublock) Seems to be daisy chained through their telemetry service. Kinda bizarre.
There's no bug in any Claude products. After all, it's entirely coded by Claude Code.
You know that’s probably just a Db flag right? They will persist your data unless it’s zdr
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".
All main OpenAI SDK libraries are made with stainless[0][1].
[0]: https://github.com/openai/openai-python
[1]: https://github.com/openai/openai-node
> dow
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.
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'.
The mistyped DoD, because there is no Department of War.
> signs a deal with Elon!
Expect grok to improve dramatically as Musk reverse-engineers the Anthropic services running on his hardware.
Curious - are you affiliated with OpenAI?
They didn't sue OpenClaw; they sent a C&D over the name. That's how trademark law works. If they didn't defend their name then anyone can use it.
if this is petty, then i'd love to know where openai employees having claude derangement syndrome sits on the petty scale
I can live with those but not their token cost.
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.
It's really insulting to the Stainless team to dismiss this acquisition as some sort of chess move against OpenAI. Give me a break.
Oai deserves everything bad that happens to them.
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.
Because Altman is an objectively bad person, mostly.
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.
They support the military industrial complex.
They support Trump.
Where did they acknowledge publicly mythos was fear mongered? Grok returned no evidence.
Maybe you should ask Grok to explain what GP said
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 worked with Alex (founder of stainless) at Stripe and he's awesome. Happy for him and well deserved. Congrats Alex! :)
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.
There are a tremendous number of Xtripes at both Anthropic and OpenAI.
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
Aww, well this thread is a nice surprise :) thanks for the kind words!
I worked with him at Hired. Great dude!
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?
It’s the fourth tenet of the Cook Doctrine:
“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.”
OpenAI uses stainless for at least some of their SDKs.
I guess they'll be able to vibecode a replacement pretty quickly
I hope they make it open source!
from the very beginning. i remember going through their code and seeing stainless all over the comments. great marketing.
Third sentence in the article:
> 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.
OpenAI is not Anthropic, the original comment is valid.
Anthropic have bought out a tool their competitor used too, they even have an OpenAI case study still on the Stainless website.
> Anthropic
GP:
> OpenAI
??
Astral, bun, Stainless, Cursor... and more..
Seems like developer tools/tooling are a hot commodity to the current big AI companies?
Does anyone have a good guess as to the strategic reasoning behind this?
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?
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...
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.
Reach out to mehdi@apimatic.io and I'll help you migrate.
PS: sorry for the shameless plug but sdks and APIs are my life and blood :-)
Helpful link: https://migrate-from-stainless.apimatic.io/
Wait Stainless is not a Rust company???
Worry not, it's just Monday.
How could it possibly be?
Utterly shameless plug, but recently at WorkOS I open sourced our OpenAPI spec to SDK pipeline: https://workos.com/blog/handwritten-sdks-are-dead
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.
[1] https://buildwithfern.com/
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?
Mmmh
> Did they just want to hire some extra skilled engineers?
This. Probably to work on Anthropic's SDKs and tooling.
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.
> 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 almost sounds like you want Lina Khan back :-D
[EDIT: I'm an idiot, sorry, completely misread your comment. I agree on all counts]
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 :)
AI companies are the new tech companies
in what sense did Anthropic “kill” Bun?
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 :)
It's the developers of Carmageddon.
Stainless and Stainless Games seem to be 2 unrelated companies.
if u can't replace the tools, then acquire the tool makers & shut down the tools.
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.
Hmm.
Interestingly, Anthropic uses Mintlify for their docs. Not Stainless. Obviously, the focus is on SDK generation, but still strange.
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
I've started to really dislike how anthropic is operating, not very human first or friendly
aside from that, this is literally just an openapi to sdk generator, not like openai can't just generate one
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.
Oh definitely - the talent at Stainless is incredible. Not trying to take away from that at all.
> This has to be somewhat anti-competitive.
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.”
Anthropic, it would be nice to actually put a link to the website.
Can't wait for everything to go bum, and finally get to use only what is relevant.
Rust rewrite coming up in a week
OpenAI use(d|s) Stainless too right?
What's the best remaining alternative?
Are they buying these for the tech, the people or to prevent supply chain hacks?
Acquihire, with a side of shutting down a vendor that OpenAI prominently uses
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?
Whats the connection that got them the early in with anthropic?
A useful product that developers who want some easy SDKs across a bunch of languages use?
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
Brian Krausz
I'm guessing it'll be something around spinning up MCPs easily as an evolution of their product. Just right place, right time
I am going to assume that anything Anthropic acquires is going to be eventually used against you.
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
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.
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.
Now if only we had a service that could generate OpenAPI specs automatically...
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
You can't rely on commercial offerings anymore. They vanish with increasing frequency.
Yet another reason to use open source.
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.
looks like just an excuse to spend capital
Wow
congrats stainless team!
Stainless has 93 people: https://www.linkedin.com/company/stainless-api/people/
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..
This feels like the Apple playbook, but for software tooling--they are becoming vertically integrated.
Hi
This makes sense, since their business model is built on Steeling everyone's data and feeding it to a monster.