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

901–910 of 928 posts

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

#901

Post by merlindru »

josh_p wrote: post #841
merlindru wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i tried out gpt 5.4 xhigh and it did meaningfully worse with the same prompt as opus 4.6. like, obvious mistakes

I've been pretty satisfied using oh-my-openagent (omo) on opencode with both opus-4.6 and gpt-5.4 lately. The author of omo suggests different prompting strategies for different models and goes into some detail here. https://github.com/code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent/blob/dev/doc... For each agent they define, they change the prompt depending on which model is being used to fit it. I wonder how much of the "x did worse…

i think it may matter a good bit. i definitely have to write in different styles with different models (and catch myself doing so unintentionally) now that you mention it...

definitely not bologna, at least anecdotally :)

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

#902

Post by merlindru »

kasey_junk wrote: post #697
merlindru wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i tried out gpt 5.4 xhigh and it did meaningfully worse with the same prompt as opus 4.6. like, obvious mistakes

Fwiw I run this eval every week on a set of known prompts and I believe the in group differences are bigger than out group. That is I get more variance between opus 4.6 and itself than I do between the sota models. I don’t have the budget for statistical relevance but I’m convinced people claiming broad differences are just vibing, or there are times when agent features make a big difference.

it may be the agent features in my case. now that i think about it, i also forgot that my CLAUDE.md is different from my AGENTS.md

either way, all that one can really rely on is the benchmarks, and those are easily cheated/overfitted to.

i think it's all very hard to quantify, so take my previous comment with a massive rock of salt

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

#903

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

cbg0 wrote: post #897
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think people realize how irrational that argument is (that SOTA is better, so you have to use SOTA). Open weights will always trail SOTA. Forever. So let's say they continue to get better every year. In 100 years, the open weight model will be 100x better than today. But the SOTA model will be 101x better . And still, people will make this argument that you should pay a premium for SOTA. Despite the open weig…

I doubt there's any FOMO to it from people using it for professional coding for example, you just want to have access to the best model as long as the value proposition is there. If I spend less time reviewing the work done because it's great in the first pass, that's always a win. Unless you're an enthusiast and have the hardware to power larger models, $20 a month provides tremendous value.

Most of the people paying for the subscriptions have no idea how much, if any, difference the SOTA model is from non-SOTA. They don't even know if they're actually using the max capacity of their subscription, until they run over it. When they do run over it, was it because they were doing tons of AI work? Or was it because they were using expensive models? None of these people are checking any of these things. They're just afraid if they don't buy the best, they will be missing out. aka, FOMO.

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

#904

Post by Syntaf »

saulpw wrote: post #892
ikari_pl wrote: post #888

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do. I work with 3-5 parallel sessions most of the time. Some of the projects are related, some are not, some sessions are just managing and tuning my system configuration, whatever it means at a given time. It doesn't feel weird to me.

3-5 parallel sessions for 8 hours a workday, fine. 5x8x20 = 800. How do we get to thousands?!

In my OP I mention this is aggregated across both work + personal, so the comparison of just 8 hour workdays 5 days a week isn't accurate.

Running some `/stats` on my work computer shows for the last 30 days:

* Sessions: 341

* Active days: 21/30

* Longest session: 3d 20h 33m (Some large scale refactoring of types)

So I'm running a little over 10 sessions a day, each session varies from something like 1-2 hours to sometimes multiple days if it's a larger project. Running `/clear` actually doesn't start a new session fwiw, it will maintain the session but clear context, which explains why I can have a 3 day long session but I'm not actually using a single context window.

On the personal side I have activity in 30/30 of the last days (:yay); I've been learning game dev recently and use Claude a lot for helping digest documentation and learn about certain concepts as I try to build them in Unity. One of my more interesting use-cases is I have three skills I use during play tests:

* QA-Feedback: Takes random thoughts / feedback from me and writes to feedback markdown files

* Spec-Feedback: Loops every minute to grab a feedback item and spec out the intention / open questions

* Impl-Feedback: Loops every minute to grab a spec, clarify open questions with the user (me) first, then create an implementation plan

So I might have a friend play my game and I'll generate 20-30 items of feedback as I watch them play the game, things like minor bugs or mechanics in general. Over the course of the day my Claude will spec and plan out the feedback for me. I have remote sessions always on so I can use my phone to check in on the implementor job and answer open ended questions as they come up.

By the following day I'll usually have a bunch of plans ready for Claude to work on. I'll send agents off to do the simple ones throughout the day (bugs) and work with Claude on the bigger items.

Sorry for the long winded explanation but trying to convey the level of usage I have w/ Claude code. I do admit "thousands" is hyperbolic, as I'm probably only nearing 2k session hours in the most extreme months but I would say I on average use Claude every day to some capacity, often times both during work and after work (for my hobbies).

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

#905

Post by saulpw »

Syntaf wrote: post #904
saulpw wrote: post #892

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3-5 parallel sessions for 8 hours a workday, fine. 5x8x20 = 800. How do we get to thousands?!

In my OP I mention this is aggregated across both work + personal, so the comparison of just 8 hour workdays 5 days a week isn't accurate. Running some `/stats` on my work computer shows for the last 30 days: * Sessions: 341 * Active days: 21/30 * Longest session: 3d 20h 33m (Some large scale refactoring of types) So I'm running a little over 10 sessions a day, each session varies from something like 1-2 hours to som…

Great, thank you for the detailed response! The biggest difference in our use is your "loops every minute", which I've not been willing to try yet (even with me at the helm, Claude might try to make a fairly straightforward bugfix in a cracked-out way and I have to steer it in the right direction).

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

#907

Post by Syntaf »

saulpw wrote: post #905
Syntaf wrote: post #904

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my OP I mention this is aggregated across both work + personal, so the comparison of just 8 hour workdays 5 days a week isn't accurate. Running some `/stats` on my work computer shows for the last 30 days: * Sessions: 341 * Active days: 21/30 * Longest session: 3d 20h 33m (Some large scale refactoring of types) So I'm running a little over 10 sessions a day, each session varies from something like 1-2 hours to som…

Great, thank you for the detailed response! The biggest difference in our use is your "loops every minute", which I've not been willing to try yet (even with me at the helm, Claude might try to make a fairly straightforward bugfix in a cracked-out way and I have to steer it in the right direction).

Np!

I also love using `/loop` at work on combination with a PR maintenance skill, helps me push up changes initially and have a session automatically monitor + fixup a branch to get it passing before I review it myself and then later send off for a human review.

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

#908

Post by hombre_fatal »

goosejuice wrote: post #392
hombre_fatal wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defining earnest (placeholder word btw) is the hard part of the trade-off, though. When your least automated, most interactive users are competing for capacity with fully-automated tools, let's say, you're forced to define some sort of periphery between these groups. OpenClaw is a self-directed, automated loop that sits on a server. It's wowing its owner by shitposting on moltbook and doing any number of crazy storie…

Claude code has /loop. Claude app has scheduled tasks. The leaked source has a proactive mode. I'm sorry but this framing just doesnt make sense.

I think's an example in my favor, though.

/loop is for polling things in a foreground Claude Code session. Their own examples include polling a build that takes a long time.

OpenClaw is much, much more than that.

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

#910

Post by sroussey »

jmalicki wrote: post #758
sroussey wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone want to take their subsidies from the consumer subs and use them to avoid paying the real costs. Even the API pricing is subsidized by investors. When that stop, pricing will escalate.

Is API pricing subsidized on a unit basis? Most estimates I've seen have shown that API usage seems to be at least unit profitable (paying for infra and electricity, not R&D)

I believe it was 2 years ago. But costs have risen a lot in the last couple of years but prices have decreased with competition.
Post reply on HN