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

Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 760 posts

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#681

Post by joshuaissac »

oarsinsync wrote: post #447
joemi wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are contributor guidelines that must be followed also no different from DRM in your view? Plenty of projects have those.

I don't think the GP is calling contributor guideline restrictions a form of DRM. I think the GP is focusing on: > I guess we're giving up on the idea that you're free to do whatever you want with software you own? ... But I see this as no different from DRM and user hostile If I clone an open source git repository, I should be free to point an LLM to review it in any way I choose. I can't contribute code back, but g…

You can also embed references to OpenClaw in the compiled binary to dissuade AI-assisted decompilation.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#682

Post by dubcanada »

trb wrote: post #438

It's fascinating to see all these bugs in Claude Code - HERMES.md, this OpenClaw issue, the recent thinking-message pruning and cache-skipping bugs. They seem like the class of bugs I see in my vibe-coding experiments, and I think the Claude Code lead has said many times that he/his team don't read the code for Claude Code themselves, that it's basically vibe-coded. If Anthropic itself can't make vibe coding work, wh…

Well to be honest, none of these are likely bugs. HERMES.md maybe... but everything else is likely them testing waters.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#683

Post by AbstractH24 »

imiric wrote: post #468
jwilliams wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know what "openclaw" is. It's not something I have knowledge of, and it doesn't appear in your memory or this project's context. As others have pointed out, Anthropic is allowed to have TOS, even if we disagree with it. But having Claude deny the existence of OpenClaw is a way more hazardous and likely straight up violates Claude's Constitution: https://www.anthropic.com/constitution

> likely straight up violates Claude's Constitution A company that goes against their self-proclaimed values... What a shocker.

>> likely straight up violates Claude's Constitution > A company that goes against their self-proclaimed values... What a shocker

Makes you wonder how much of the claims around Mythos are exaggerated to crate hype in advance of a IPO

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#684

Post by duskdozer »

kevincox wrote: post #399
flutas wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make sure you check your extra usage. I thought the same but then noticed that single prompt (exactly as posted) cost $0.20 of extra usage.

It can't be legal that they randomly charge extra usage with no user consent.

Probably "consent" by use of the product, as described in the Terms and Conditions.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#685

Post by AbstractH24 »

davesque wrote: post #391

A lot of the comments here are reacting to the censorship aspect, which is obviously an important point. But the more interesting subtext to me is that I feel like this gives insight into the situation within the company. I'm assuming they wouldn't do something like this unless the recent load issues (mostly driven by OpenClaw usage) were seen as an existential threat. So I'm guessing that's how the leadership views…

> The irony of course is that the way they've gone about reacting to this has damaged their brand so badly at the trust level that the public view of their company has completely flipped.

I you are overstating how much of their user base cares about OpenClaw. Not nearly as bad as the DoD was for OpenAI (particularly because that cut into a pattern of how Sam Altman acts in general)

But it is a reminder they are just another company

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#686

Post by jp57 »

maplethorpe wrote: post #636
jp57 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What are all their SWEs doing, if Claude is coding itself? And why are there hundreds of open SWE positions on their careers page?

There’s all kinds of stuff there that’s not the Claude Code app.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#687

Post by Chyzwar »

davesque wrote: post #391

A lot of the comments here are reacting to the censorship aspect, which is obviously an important point. But the more interesting subtext to me is that I feel like this gives insight into the situation within the company. I'm assuming they wouldn't do something like this unless the recent load issues (mostly driven by OpenClaw usage) were seen as an existential threat. So I'm guessing that's how the leadership views…

All SOTA model providers are losing money. When users run Opus, they are essentially renting a GPU cluster worth half a million dollars for a $100/$200 subscription. If they want to IPO, they need to show a projection toward profit. For that reason, they want to discourage power users and attract normies.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#688

Post by energy123 »

Chyzwar wrote: post #687
davesque wrote: post #391

A lot of the comments here are reacting to the censorship aspect, which is obviously an important point. But the more interesting subtext to me is that I feel like this gives insight into the situation within the company. I'm assuming they wouldn't do something like this unless the recent load issues (mostly driven by OpenClaw usage) were seen as an existential threat. So I'm guessing that's how the leadership views…

All SOTA model providers are losing money. When users run Opus, they are essentially renting a GPU cluster worth half a million dollars for a $100/$200 subscription. If they want to IPO, they need to show a projection toward profit. For that reason, they want to discourage power users and attract normies.

> All SOTA model providers are losing money.

Source? I only read one article on this topic and they approximated gross margins at 50%.

> When users run Opus, they are essentially renting a GPU cluster worth half a million dollars for a $100/$200 subscription.

They use a large batch size, you're sharing the GPU with many other people.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#689

Post by jeeeb »

NamlchakKhandro wrote: post #615
jeeeb wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowledge cutoff is completely insufficient as an explanation. These models have access to a web search tool. Gemini and ChatGPT both happily search for give info on OpenClaw. Claude denies all knowledge. What’s more it’s this part that’s very concerning.. Banned for wrong think.. > I gave it a direct link to openclaw.ai and the chat instantly ended and hit my 5hr usage limit.

the model has no such magical access to tools. it's the harness which responds to the models replies that has access to the tools. I wish people would continue to reiterate this difference.

I said the model has access to a web search tool. Of course it’s the harness that provides that access.

I didn’t spell that out because it’s irrelevant detail, immaterial to the point I was making.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#690

Post by jacamera »

notarobot123 wrote: post #675
raincole wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People say that a mostly-vibed project will collapse under its own weight. I personally doubt it, but I will be amused if the first big one falls this way is Claude Code itself.

I've seen ancient codebases that you need to be blessed by a priest to even touch but they keep chugging away and having new features added. I wouldn't hold my breath for a collapse, just a quagmire that we continually have to wade through to get anything done.

Isn't it also true that the deeper and thicker the quagmire, the more tokens one will have to use to wade through it?

This seems like a path to eventual LLM lock-in once the codebase gets messy enough. These things could end up being like 0% interest credit cards for technical debt. I guess it all depends on how the token usage scales over time. My guess is it will be steeper than linear.

Post reply on HN