61–70 of 418 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Terms or Service
Cleary they need to get AI which has not accepted those to rewrite it. That is the easy and fast solution these days. Or at most find a person who has not accepted tos do that.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The people mad about this feel they are entitled to the heavily subsidized usage in any context they want, not in the context explicitly allowed by the subsidizer. It's kind of like a new restaurant started handing out coupons for "90% off", wanting to attract diners to the restaurant, customers started coming in and ordering bulk meals then immediately packaging them in tup…
This argument has been decapitated countless times already on HN. Anthropic already enforce usage limits for everyone . If those limits are higher than what they want users to actually consume, that's Anthropic's problem. This move is anti-competitive and Anthropic knows it. They're hurriedly trying to lock the gates and lay landmines behind everyone after a massive surge of new subscribers so that they're stuck usin…
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The people mad about this feel they are entitled to the heavily subsidized usage in any context they want, not in the context explicitly allowed by the subsidizer. It's kind of like a new restaurant started handing out coupons for "90% off", wanting to attract diners to the restaurant, customers started coming in and ordering bulk meals then immediately packaging them in tup…
This argument has been decapitated countless times already on HN. Anthropic already enforce usage limits for everyone . If those limits are higher than what they want users to actually consume, that's Anthropic's problem. This move is anti-competitive and Anthropic knows it. They're hurriedly trying to lock the gates and lay landmines behind everyone after a massive surge of new subscribers so that they're stuck usin…
"Legal action" means you filed a lawsuit. This looks more like someone sent a list of requested changes, backed up by an implicit or explicit threat of legal action.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not my impression, could you explain what you're talking about?
Ever since the shutdown of the side-load they've been pretty vocally anti-anthropic on twitter. Paranoid that anthropic is going to torpedo them via some backdoor now that they own bun, insinuating that anthropic shut down the auth from a position of weakness since OpenCode is a superior product, etc. The thing is OpenCode IS a great product, I'm not sure it's "superior", but unfortunately the way things are evolving…
Can anyone explain what’s going on here? Using API is illegal? that can’t possibly be since we now know API is not even copyrighted (which personally I disagree with bit whatever)… so what is going on here?
I believe Anthropic is trying to block the use of their Claude code subscription by third party applications like OpenCode. I think they’re okay with someone using their API with anything, including OpenCode. Please someone correct me if I’m wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not my impression, could you explain what you're talking about?
Ever since the shutdown of the side-load they've been pretty vocally anti-anthropic on twitter. Paranoid that anthropic is going to torpedo them via some backdoor now that they own bun, insinuating that anthropic shut down the auth from a position of weakness since OpenCode is a superior product, etc. The thing is OpenCode IS a great product, I'm not sure it's "superior", but unfortunately the way things are evolving…
This and threatening OpenClaw (now at OpenAI), Anthropic really on a roll making friends in Open Source. Previously discussed I think: Anthropic Explicitly Blocking OpenCode (173 points, 157 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46625918
That's really all there is to it. It has nothing to do with open or closed source.
It's not clear what exactly the "legal action" is based on this github link. My pure speculation is Anthropic's lawyers have come up with a liability story boiling down to OpenCode helping end users violate the Anthropic ToS (i.e. tortious interference with contract).
A vaguely threatening letter is usually all it takes
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not my impression, could you explain what you're talking about?
Ever since the shutdown of the side-load they've been pretty vocally anti-anthropic on twitter. Paranoid that anthropic is going to torpedo them via some backdoor now that they own bun, insinuating that anthropic shut down the auth from a position of weakness since OpenCode is a superior product, etc. The thing is OpenCode IS a great product, I'm not sure it's "superior", but unfortunately the way things are evolving…
Like with lawyers or something?