Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 928 posts

Re: Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

#121

Post by sunsunsunsun »

freedomben wrote: post #52
firloop wrote: post #47

This is slightly different from what OpenCode was banned from doing; they were a separate harness grabbing a user’s Claude Code session and pretending to be Claude Code. OpenClaw was still using Claude Code as the harness (via claude -p)[0]. I understand why Anthropic is doing this (and they’ve made it clear that building products around claude -p is disallowed) but I fear Conductor will be next. [0]: See “Option B:…

Ah thank you, this is very helpful distinction to know. When they shut down open code, I thought it was a lame move and was critical of them, but I could understand at least where they're coming from. With this though, it's ridiculous. Claude core tools are still being used in this case. Shelling out to it to use it there's no different than a normal user would do themselves. If this continues, I'll be taking my $200…

Im still using opencode with claude pro so im confused.

Re: Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

#123

Post by entropoem »

Anthropic and OpenAI are the clearest examples of why, in an organization of specialists, the experts themselves should not be the CEO or the final decision-maker once the company’s challenges extend beyond just the product.

Just look at how Sam Altman has led OpenAI step by step to dominate—and choke out—Anthropic, a company founded by the group of engineers who were once part of the turmoil at OpenAI.

Anthorpic's product thinking is terrible even though it is technically very good.

Re: Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

#124

Post by sethherr »

firloop wrote: post #47

This is slightly different from what OpenCode was banned from doing; they were a separate harness grabbing a user’s Claude Code session and pretending to be Claude Code. OpenClaw was still using Claude Code as the harness (via claude -p)[0]. I understand why Anthropic is doing this (and they’ve made it clear that building products around claude -p is disallowed) but I fear Conductor will be next. [0]: See “Option B:…

I’m also terrified of this.

When this happens I will have to look at other providers and downgrade my subscription. Conductor is just too powerful to give up. It’s the whole reason why I’m on a max plan.

Re: Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

#125

Post by datahack »

Ok. Someone explain to me why they would f themselves this hard with software engineers when they are absolutely winning. This just seems like a bad move.

Is it infrastructure? Are they unable to control costs?

Everyone else is spending like money is water to try to get adoption. Claude has it and is dialing back utility so that its most passionate users will probably leave.

I don’t understand this move.

Re: Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

#127

Post by nojito »

arewethereyeta wrote: post #70

Marketing geniuses. They had 2 options here: 1. Make a better product/alternative to Openclaw and start eating their userbase. They hold the advantage because the ones "using their servers too much" are already their clients so they could reach out and keep trying to convert. Openclaw literally brought them customers at the door. 2. Do everyone royally and get them off their platform - with a strong feeling of dislik…

>Make a better product/alternative to Openclaw and start eating their userbase.

There's a good chance they do not have the infrastructure to do that.

Re: Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

#128

Post by mil22 »

techgnosis wrote: post #106
asgraham wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you arguing that eventually a competitor will emerge that does support OpenClaw with a subscription model? Wouldn’t that just be more expensive for the exact same reason Anthropic is banning it?

Doesn't OpenAI allow this today?

It's a good way to win market share and build goodwill, but one has to wonder whether this class of usage is marginally profitable for them (or anyone) and how sustainable their lenient policies will be for them long term.

Re: Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

#129

Post by danpalmer »

g-mork wrote: post #77

My answer to this is simply rolling back to the pro plan for interactive usage in the coming month, and forcefully cutting myself over to one of the alternative Chinese models to just get over the hump and normalise API pricing at a sensible rate with sensible semantics. Dealing with Claude going into stupid mode 15 times a day, constant HTTP errors, etc. just isn't really worth it for all it does. I can't see myself…

Please don't use grossly offensive terms in this forum. That sort of language is not welcome here.

Re: Tell HN: Anthropic no longer allowing Claude Code subscriptions to use OpenClaw

#130

Post by tekacs »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #120
tekacs wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, give me a break. I know the law around this incredibly well. Reasonable people can disagree about whether the law is appropriate. The whole point of laws is that they should match intent – and as for '20%': "tell me you don't understand how a small quantitative gap can result in a step change in capability."

> Oh, give me a break. I know the law around this incredibly well. Then don’t make BS up like implying Anthropic is a monopolist for the crime of competence. > tell me you don't understand how a small quantitative gap can result in a step change in capability The law does not give a darn about this. Being a good competitive option does not make you a league of your own. If I invent a new flavor of shake, the Emerald…

You do realize that I called out in my post they are absolutely not a monopoly by the law, right? I know all-too-well what the definition is.

We have a similar situation in mobile where Apple may not be considered a monopoly, but people have walked around for a decade with a supercomputer in their pocket that is wildly underused.

Things have gotten faster; things are different than they were decades ago when a lot of this was devised.

The reality of the matter is that some of us just want to see innovation actually happen apace, and not see 5, 10, or 30 years of slowdown while we litigate whether or not such a company is holding all the cards, while everyone is collectively waiting at the spigot for a company to get its shit together because we're not allowed to fix the situation.

For what it's worth, I'm hopeful that the other model providers will catch up and put us in a situation where this conversation is irrelevant.

What I'm afraid of is a situation where we see continued divergence, and we end up with another Apple situation.

Post reply on HN