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

I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

nickyreinert.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 604 posts

Re: I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

#91

Post by fluidcruft »

Retr0id wrote: post #88
rectang wrote: post #47

I feel like I'm using Claude Opus pretty effectively and I'm honestly not running up against limits in my mid-tier subscriptions. My workflow is more "copilot" than "autopilot", in that I craft prompts for contained tasks and review nearly everything, so it's pretty light compared to people doing vibe coding. The market-leading technology is pretty close to "good enough" for how I'm using it. I look forward to the da…

I also use it this way and I'm overall pretty happy with it, but it feels like they really want us to use it in "autopilot" mode. It's like they have two conflicting priorities of "make people use more tokens so we can bill them more" and "people are using more tokens than expected, our pricing structure is no longer sustainable" (but I guess they're not really conflicting, if the "solution" involves upgrading to a h…

I feel like they are making it harder to use it this way. Encouraging autonomous is one thing, but it really feels more like they are handicapping engaged use. I suspect it reflects their own development practices and needs.

Re: I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

#92

Post by [deleted] »

drunken_thor wrote: post #20

AI services are only minorly incentivized to reduce token usage. They want high token usage, it makes you pay more. They are going to continually test where the limit is, what is the max token usage before you get angry. All AI companies will continue to trade places for token use and cost as cost increases. We are in tepid water pretending it is a bath pretending we aren’t about to be boiled frogs.

[deleted]

Re: I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

#93

Post by tfrancisl »

syhol wrote: post #33
zkmon wrote: post #21

Yesterday was a realization point for me. I gave a simple extraction task to Claude code with a local LLM and it "whirred" and "purred" for 10 minutes. Then I submitted the same data and prompt directly to model via llama_cpp chat UI and the model single-shotted it in under a minute. So obviously something wrong with coding agent or the way it is talking to LLM. Now I'm looking for an extremely simple open-source cod…

https://pi.dev/ seems popular, whats not open source about opencode? The repo has an MIT License.

Some people believe only copyleft licenses are open source. They're right on principle, wrong in (legal) practice.

Re: I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

#94

Post by mrinterweb »

My recent frustration with Claude has been it feels like I'm waiting on responses more. I don't have historical latency to compare this with, but I feel like it has been getting slower. I may be wrong, and maybe its just spending more time thinking than it used to. My guess is Anthropic is having capacity issues. I hope I'm wrong because I don't want to switch.

Re: I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

#95

Post by nozzlegear »

GaryBluto wrote: post #25
janwillemb wrote: post #19

This is what worries me. People become dependent on these GenAI products that are proprietary, not transparant, and need a subscription. People build on it like it is a solid foundation. But all of a sudden the owner just pulls the foundation from under your building.

Luckily local AI is becoming more feasible every day.

I've been using local AI via LM Studio ever since I canceled my Claude subscription. It's obviously slower than Claude on my M1 Studio[†], but like someone else said, I use AI more like a copilot than an autopilot. I'm pretty enthused that I can give it a small task and let it churn through it for a few minutes, while I work on something alongside – all for free with no goddamned arbitrary limits.

[†] The latest Qwen 3.6 whatever has been a noticeable improvement, and I'm not even at the point where I tweak settings like sampling, temperature, etc. No idea what that stuff does, I just use the staff picks in LM Studio and customize the system prompts.

Re: I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

#96

Post by tfrancisl »

nickdothutton wrote: post #83

Switched to local models after quality dropped off a cliff and token consumption seemed to double. Having some success with Qwen+Crush and have been more productive.

Would love some more info on how you got any local model working with Crush. Love charmbracelet but the docs are all over the place on linking into arbitrary APIs.

Re: I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

#98

Post by vintagedave »

They won't even reset usage for me: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47892445

And by crikey do I empathise with the poor support in this article. Nothing has soured me on Anthropic more than their attitude.

Great AI engineers. Questionable command line engineers (but highly successful.) Downright awful to their customers.

Re: I cancelled Claude: Token issues, declining quality, and poor support

#100

Post by freedomben »

fluidcruft wrote: post #91
Retr0id wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also use it this way and I'm overall pretty happy with it, but it feels like they really want us to use it in "autopilot" mode. It's like they have two conflicting priorities of "make people use more tokens so we can bill them more" and "people are using more tokens than expected, our pricing structure is no longer sustainable" (but I guess they're not really conflicting, if the "solution" involves upgrading to a h…

I feel like they are making it harder to use it this way. Encouraging autonomous is one thing, but it really feels more like they are handicapping engaged use. I suspect it reflects their own development practices and needs.

This is something I've thought of as well. The way the caps are implemented, it really disincentivizes engaged use. The 5-hour window especially is very awkward and disruptive. The net result is that I have to somewhat plan my day around when the 5-hour window will affect it. That by itself is a powerful disincentive from using Claude. It has also caused me to use different tools for things I previously would have used Claude for. For example, detailed plans I use codex now rather than Claude, because I hit the limit way too fast when doing documentation work. It certainly doesn't hurt that codex seems to be better at it, but I wouldn't even have a codex subscription if it wasn't for claude's usage limits
Post reply on HN