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

Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 331 posts

Re: Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

#211

Post by rpozarickij »

aurareturn wrote: post #6
ajb92 wrote: post #3

The trend on the status page[1] does not inspire confidence. Beginning to wonder if this might be a daily thing. [1] https://status.claude.com/

They went from $9b ARR at the end of 2025 to $30b ARR today. That's more than 3x the size in 3 months. I expect growing pains. For some context, they added 2x Palantir or .75x Shopify or .68x Adobe annual revenue in March alone.

It's also worth keeping in mind that Anthropic's compute needs are nothing like those of a company like Shopify or Adobe, so revenue might not paint accurately enough the picture of what they're dealing with right now.

Re: Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

#213

Post by jimkleiber »

skywhopper wrote: post #89
jimkleiber wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked at my cc usage and I was at 90% of my weekly allowance after 3 days of use...BUT, if I looked at the usage stats with the chart, it showed, on a scale of 1-4 intensity of usage (4 being most intense), the three days as such: Day 1: 2 Day 2: 3 Day 3: 1 Not sure how I can hit such limits so quickly with such low scores on its own chart.

The limits are smaller now, is how.

Then why not update their chart to at least say that? The numbers (shading, actually) on the chart are not absolute numbers, they're relative, so just make it look as if I spent a lot of time on it. If they're gonna change their limits without being clear about it, at least go all the way. Right now, I can go, "See, you're actually saying I didn't use that much compared to the limits."

Re: Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

#214

Post by stefan_ »

xantronix wrote: post #75

As much as people on Hacker News complain about subscription models for productivity and creativity suites, the open arms embrace of subscription development tools (services, really) which seek to offload the very act itself makes me wonder how and why so many people are eager to dive right in. I get it. LLMs are cool technology. Is this a symptom of the same phenomenon behind the deluge of disposable JavaScript fram…

I would love nothing more than ditching Claude for a local solution tomorrow. But it doesn't exist today, so it is what it is - you gotta keep up with the joneses.

Maybe in 5 years we'll have an open weights model that is in the "good enough" category that I can run on a RTX 9000 for 15k dollars or whatever.

Re: Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

#216

Post by ericmcer »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #179
ericmcer wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean at this point can we just conclude that there are a group of engineers who claim to have incredible success with it and a group that claim it is unreliable and cannot be trusted to do complex tasks. I struggle to believe that a ton of seemingly intelligent software engineers are too dumb to figure out how to use Claude code to get reliable results, it seems much more likely to me that it can do well at isolate…

I suspect many people here have tried it, but they expected it to one-shot any prompt, and when it didn't, it confirmed what they wanted to be true and they responded with "hah, see?" and then washed their hands of it. So it's not that they're too stupid. There are various motivations for this: clinging on to familiarity, resistance to what feels like yet another tool, anti-AI koolaid, earnestly underwhelmed but don'…

So what do I do differently then?

Hypothetically, you have a simple slice out of bounds error because a function is getting an empty string so it does something like: `""[5]`.

Opus will add a bunch of length & nil checks to "fix" this, but the actual issue is the string should never be empty. The nil checks are just papering over a deeper issue, like you probably need a schema level check for minimum string length.

At that point do you just tell it like "no delete all that, the string should never be empty" and let it figure that out, or do I basically need to pseudo code "add a check for empty strings to this file on line 145", or do I just YOLO and know the issue is gone now so it is no longer my problem?

My bigger point is how does an LLM know that this seemingly small problem is indicative of some larger failure, like lets say this string is a `user.username` which means users can set their name to empty which means an entire migration is probably necessary. All the AI is going to do is smoosh the error messages and kick the can.

Re: Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

#217

Post by daveguy »

aurareturn wrote: post #35
RC_ITR wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the whole selling point of AI agents that you now can do things like scale 3x without scaling your team accordingly?

I assume so. They're doing it with around 99% uptime.

Or, to put it another way, almost 2 9s.

Re: Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

#218

Post by vanchor3 »

abroszka33 wrote: post #81
totalmarkdown wrote: post #72

[flagged]

How are you using it to reach the limit so quickly? I'm 13% at a 10x plan and I have used it for hours every day for the last 5 days. I never hit a limit.

It seems like Cowork can easily chew through a few percent at a time, more if it gets lost in the weeds.

Re: Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

#219

Post by vidarh »

skydhash wrote: post #145
michael_j_x wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really enjoy coding. I've build a number of projects, personal and professional, with Python, Rust, Java and even some Scala in the mix. However, I've been addicted to Claude Code recently, especially with the superpowers skill. It feels like I can manifest code with my mind. When developing with Claude, I am presented with design dilemmas, architectural alternatives, clarification questions, things that really mak…

That’s like saying enjoying composing music, but not enjoying playing music. Or creating stories, but don’t like writing. Yes they’re different activities, but linked together. The former is creativity, the latter is a medium of transmission. Code is notation, just like music sheets, or food recipes. If your interaction with anyone else is with the end result only (the software), the. The code does not matter. But fo…

> That’s like saying enjoying composing music, but not enjoying playing music

Do you think that is impossible? There are plenty of people who enjoy composing music on things like trackers, with no intent of ever playing said music on an instrument.

I love coding, but I also like making things, and the two are in conflict: When I write code for the sake of writing code, I am meticulous and look for perfection. When I make things, I want to move as fast as possible, because it is the end-product that matters.

There is also a hidden presumption in what you've written that 1) the code will be badly written. Sometimes it is, but that is the case for people to, but often it is better than what I would produce (say, when needing to produce something in a language I'm not familiar enough with), 2) and that the collaboration will be with people manually working on the code. That is increasingly often not true.

Re: Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows

#220

Post by torben-friis »

xantronix wrote: post #75

As much as people on Hacker News complain about subscription models for productivity and creativity suites, the open arms embrace of subscription development tools (services, really) which seek to offload the very act itself makes me wonder how and why so many people are eager to dive right in. I get it. LLMs are cool technology. Is this a symptom of the same phenomenon behind the deluge of disposable JavaScript fram…

People will always go along with a removal of friction even against their benefit. It's natural bias, we have a preference for not spending energy.

It's why we pay stupid amounts for takeout when it's a button away, it's why we accept the issues that come with online dating rather than breaking the ice outside, it's why there's been decades scams that claim to get you abs without effort...

LLMs are the ultimate friction removal. They can remove gaps or mechanical work that regular programming can, but more importantly they can think for you.

I'm convinced this human pattern is as dangerous as addiction. But it's so much harder to fight against, because who's going to be in favor of doing things with more effort rather than less? The whole point of capitalism is supposed to be that it rewards efficiency.

Post reply on HN