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

Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 533 posts

Re: Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

#181

Post by gbear605 »

lemming wrote: post #58

This will piss a lot of people off, and seems like a strange move. I get that this was always a hack and against the ToS. But I've been paying Anthropic money every month to do exactly what I would have done with Claude Code, but in another harness that I like better. All they've achieved here is that I am no longer giving them money. Their per-token pricing is really expensive compared to OpenAI, and I like the resu…

Presumably Claude Code is a loss leader to try to lock you into their ecosystem or at least get you to exclusive associate “AI” with “Claude”. So if it’s not achieving those goals, they’d prefer if you use OpenAI instead.

Re: Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

#182

Post by Xevion »

behnamoh wrote: post #11

Anthro is having its Apple moment: too many customers means the company is always on the news, for better or worse. When iPhones receive negative reviews it's not like only Apple screwed up; others did too, but they sell so much less than Apple that no one hears about them: "Apple violated my privacy a tiny bit" makes the news; "Xiaomi sold my fingerprint info to 3rd party vendors" doesn't. Similarly, Anthropic is un…

Anthropic's models are good. Claude Code isn't good.

Re: Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

#183

Post by ChicagoDave »

dboon wrote: post #15

This is an unusual L for Anthropic. The unfortunate truth is that the engineering in opencode is so far ahead of Claude Code. Obviously, CC is a great tool, but that's more about the magic of the model than the engineering of the CLI. The opencode team[^1][^2] built an entire custom TUI backend that supports a good subset of HTML/CSS and the TypeScript ecosystem (i.e. not tied to Opencode, a generic TUI renderer). Th…

Or just maybe submit feature requests instead of backdooring a closed source system.

Re: Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

#184

Post by globular-toast »

muppetman wrote: post #148

I feel like I'm the only person on this site that doesn't use AI for coding. I guess there's probably a lot of other people that haven't commented on this story who don't use it either. But when I read about how much hype and all that sort of stuff there is in the AI industry, and then I see the amount of posts and commentary and deep technical discussion about how this feature has affected people, I'm not so sure. E…

I use it sparingly. I do still have to produce boilerplate and don't have the time/will to engineer a better solution. But any actual logic etc I do myself. Why would I take a chance on an LLM doing it wrong when I know exactly how I want it and am perfectly capable of doing it myself. Also, what the hell am I going to do in the minutes it takes to generate, just sit there and watch it? No thanks.

Re: Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

#185

Post by baq »

iamkonstantin wrote: post #173
dfabulich wrote: post #112

For folks not following the drama: Anthropic's $200/month subscription for Claude Code is much cheaper than Anthropic's pay-as-you-go API. In a month of Claude Code, it's easy to use so many LLM tokens that it would have cost you more than $1,000 if you'd paid via the API. Why is Anthropic offering such favorable pricing to subscribers? I dunno. But they really want you to use the Claude Code™ CLI with that subscript…

What's ridiculous is that the subscription at 180€/month (excl. VAT) is already absurdly expensive for what you get. I doubt many would sign up for the per-API usage as it's just not sustainable pricing (as a user).

It pays for itself in a day for some folks. It is a lot but it’s still cheap.

Re: Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

#186

Post by brainless »

thorum wrote: post #133
brainless wrote: post #29

I know this will sound strange, but SOTA model companies will eventually allow subscription based usage through third-party tools. For any usage whatsoever. Models are pretty much democratized. I use Claude Code and opencode and I get more work done these days with GLM or Grok Code (using opencode). Z.ai (GLM) subscription is so worth it. Also, mixing models, small and large ones, is the way to go. Different models f…

AI labs are not charities and there is no way to make money offering unlimited access to SOTA LLMs. Even as costs drop, that will continue to be true for the best models in 2027, 2028 etc. - as demonstrated by the fact that CPU time still costs money. The current offerings are propped up by a VC bubble and not sustainable.

I agree but that is not the issue. See the really "large" models are great at a few things but they are not needed for daily tasks, including most coding tasks. Claude Code itself uses Haiku for a lot of tasks.

The non-SOTA companies will eat more of this pie and squeeze more value out of the SOTA companies.

Re: Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

#188

Post by globular-toast »

dfabulich wrote: post #112

For folks not following the drama: Anthropic's $200/month subscription for Claude Code is much cheaper than Anthropic's pay-as-you-go API. In a month of Claude Code, it's easy to use so many LLM tokens that it would have cost you more than $1,000 if you'd paid via the API. Why is Anthropic offering such favorable pricing to subscribers? I dunno. But they really want you to use the Claude Code™ CLI with that subscript…

> More importantly, Anthropic should have open sourced their Claude Code CLI a year ago. (They can and should just open source it now.)

I assume they're embarrassed by it. Didn't one of their devs recently say it's 100% vibe coded?

Re: Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions

#189

Post by Szpadel »

inference costs nothing in comparison to training (you have so many requests in parallel at their scale), for inference they should be profitable even when you drain whole weekly quota every week

but of course they have to pay for training too.

this looks like short sighted money grab (do they need it?), that trade short term profit for trust and customer base (again) as people will cancel their unusable subscriptions.

changing model family when you have instructions tuned for for one of them is tricky and takes long time so people will stick to one of them for some time, but with API pricing you quickly start looking for alternatives and openai gpt-5 family is also fine for coding when you spend some time tuning it.

another pain is switching your agent software, moving from CC to codex is more painful than just picking different model in things like OC, this is plausible argument why they are doing this.

Post reply on HN