Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
11–20 of 760 posts
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#12I really want to stick with A\ given everything known about Altman, but man are they speedrunning the "how to destroy your reputation" guidebook.
Ha. Yes. "Speedrunning enshittification" is the phrase that's been in my head.
The flat-rate plans were the top of the slippery slope to enshittification, really. If everyone were on metered billing there'd be no reason for all these opaque and sneaky attempts to limit usage. People would pay for what they get and get what they pay for.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#13Ok I am usually defending Anthropic, but it seems like this OpenClaw and Hermes ban was implemented incredibly poorly; it looks like a simple regex. Didn’t they think about “we need to make sure Claude Code is never banned” ? Could have been as easy as including some Claude Code specific prompting traits (tools, system prompt, whatever) in there and automatically whitelisting it. Is it foolproof? No. Will it avoid ba…
Why would you defend Anthropic at this point after all their antics and their behaviour over the past 6 months?
They do not care about us.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#14I don't understand how, having access to Mythos and unlimited use, their solution to open harnesses is lazy string regex-style matching.
I saw a talk by Boris where he said, basically that Claude codes itself now. They have it automatically writing features and reviewing PRs, apparently. I suspect that much of the code has never been seen by human eyes within Anthropic.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#15I really want to stick with A\ given everything known about Altman, but man are they speedrunning the "how to destroy your reputation" guidebook.
They have better PR than OpenAI but they are not a more ethical company. They do a bunch of shady stuff and are just as much involved in military applications. Cal Newport’s recent podcast had a good discussion about this: https://youtu.be/BRr3pAPsQAk?si=jaRJYJ_XQE7VpxPN
Pet peeve of mine is people saying "hey this thing is totally shady/false, I've got proof right here links to hour long podcast>".
It happens surprisingly often.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#16do they literally just have a regex match for all of their competitor harnesses?
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#17Things like these (Google also banned me from Antigravity for briefly using an agent) and the massive quality swings made me cancel all 3 subs last week and resort to my local Qwen 3.6 only. Open models are already great and only getting better, and I really enjoy the privacy and consistency of a model I run myself.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#18That’s incredibly frustrating. I’ve got a NixOS Qemu VM I use to run openclaw in. I had Claude help me set it up, and it runs local models on my own machine in a config based sandbox. Why should Claude block or charge extra to work on that? Why should Claude care if I have instructions for Hermes or OpenClaw in my project repos? This fingerprinting is incredibly sloppy for how much access to a machine Claude code has…
If it's just to set up a VM, how much would you even need to use? A couple of cents?
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#19But Peter Steinberger said that openclaw was “fully supported” with a subscription through claude -p.
Do these refusals still happen if you’re using an API key instead?
So I suppose Anthropic lied to him?
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#20It sounds like Anthropic is dangerously low on compute availability if they’re prioritizing these refusals as their OKRs.
I think it's obvious that they are critically lacking in compute capacity especially since OpenAI has committed billions to locking up all the future compute production.
And I don't necessarily think it's wrong for Anthropic to introduce QoS or throttling on users of their models. It's pretty much a necessity when offering public access to a scarce resource and it's been a common practice for decades.
What is the alternative? We just accept that it doesn't work half the time because the system is overloaded with molt bots?