Anthropic tightens usage limits for Claude Code without telling users

Post by klik99 » Fri, Jul 18, 2025, 2:44 PM UTC

pembrook wrote: post #87

klik99 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those aren’t good comparisons. Uber operated at a loss to destroy competition and raised prices after they did that. Amazon (the retailer) did the same and leveraged their position to enter new more lucrative markets. Dunno about Spotify, but Tesla and palantir both secured lucrative contracts and subsidies. Anthropic is against companies with deeper pockets and can’t spend to destroy competition, their current busin…

They are good comparisons. All startups go against incumbents/competitors with deeper pockets. Re: Anthropic specifically, I tend to agree, hence why I'm saying the deeper pockets (eg. Google, Amazon, etc) are perfectly positioned to win here. However, big companies have a way of consistently missing the future due to internal incentive issues. Google is deathly afraid of cannibalizing their existing businesses. Plus…

Post by sneilan1 » Fri, Jul 18, 2025, 3:38 PM UTC

moomoo11 wrote: post #174

sneilan1 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I focus more on reading code & prompting claude to write code for me at a high level. I also experiment a lot. I don't write code anymore by hand except in very rare cases. I ask claude for questions about the code to build understanding. I have it produce documentation, which is then consumed into other prompts. Often, claude code will need several minutes on a task so I start another task. My coding throughput on a…

Do you use it to make any actual products that makes money?

Post by bjclark » Fri, Jul 18, 2025, 3:41 PM UTC

latexr wrote: post #224

brokencode wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s only a hard dependency if you don’t know and never learn how to program. For developers who read and understand the code being generated, the tool could go away and it would only slow you down, not block progress. And even if you don’t, it really isn’t a hard dependency on a particular tool. There are multiple competing tools and models to choose from, so if you can’t make progress with one, switch to another. T…

> For developers who read and understand the code being generated, the tool could go away and it would only slow you down Recent research suggests it would in fact speed you up. https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...

Post by ChadMoran » Fri, Jul 18, 2025, 5:45 PM UTC

edg5000 wrote: post #175

ChadMoran wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aren't hitting the limits you aren't writing great prompts. I can write a prompt and have it go off and work for about an hour and hit the limit. You can have it launch sub-agents, parallelize work and autonomously operate for long periods of time. Think beyond just saying "do this one thing".

I've used CC a lot and to great effect, but it never runs more than 10 mins (Opus). Completely independent for 60 min, sounds impressive. Can you share some insights on this? Really curious; I can also share recents prompts of mine.

Post by sothatsit » Fri, Jul 18, 2025, 10:13 PM UTC

j-conn wrote: post #246

sothatsit wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell you how I hit it: Opus and long workflows. I have two big workflows: plan and implement. Plan follows a detailed workflow to research an idea and produce a planning document for how to implement it. This routinely takes $10-30 in API credits to run in the background. I will then review this 200-600 line document and fix up any mistakes or remove unnecessary details. Then implement is usually cheaper, and i…

Mind sharing your detailed planning workflow and/or how you came up with it? Is it basically a detailed prompt asking it to produce a PRD? I often find my plans for the code changing as I get into implementation. I wonder if giving the model explicit permission to change the plan would work or cause it to go off the rails for big chunks of work like this.