Just curious if that is automatic or someone manually check all that
Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
211–220 of 760 posts
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its not Claude Code. Its "Fraud Code". All of this is just criminal and fraudulent behavior, done July a whole bunch of people who haven't learned their lesson, and keep sending Anthropic more money for abuse at scale.
It's in the TOS, so no, not fraud. You might not like it that Anthropic doesn't want you running OpenClaw (effectively owned by a competitor) on CC, but that doesn't make it fraudulent or criminal.
TOS is not an impenetrable immunity shield.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
I cancelled my subscription the minute they blocked access via OpenCode and switched to Ollama Cloud. A bunch of people here tried to defend Anthropic, saying that it was justified because it was likely that Claude Code's harness had optimizations that would not be possible on OpenCode. It was clear from the source leak that nothing of this sort was the case, and that they were simply trying to avoid others distillin…
What's just as crazy is people defending ollama.
[deleted]
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
April has been a crazy month for open weights models. I've been using Claude Code for work and Kimi 2.6 for personal projects and Kimi has been very good. Glm-5.1 is also great. Qwen, Mimo and Deepseek I need to test some more, but they all have been producing good results. I have the impression that they are all are at the same level, or close to, Sonnet 4.6.
They are close to Opus, not Sonnet.
Based on benchies or experience?
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's malicious and I think this is scamming from the literal money (you didn't do anything wrong, you executed one command and they scammed you out of the fair usage you paid for). Please raise the ticket or at least GitHub issue for visibility. Sooner or later some sort of complaint to the relevant trade authority should happen - this is a scam operation at this point.
There are many possible explanations for this outcome to have occurred other than malice. If you're an engineer by trade, consider how many bugs you've been responsible for over the course of your career that you didn't intend. Probably a lot. How about we turn down the heat, everyone?
This would have been easy to say if it was the first time it or something similar happened.
But there is a clear pattern emerging. There's no reason to turn down the heat when a company of this size and influence is allowed this level of absurdity time and time again.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many possible explanations for this outcome to have occurred other than malice. If you're an engineer by trade, consider how many bugs you've been responsible for over the course of your career that you didn't intend. Probably a lot. How about we turn down the heat, everyone?
> How about we turn down the heat, everyone? How about Anthropic turn down the heat and refunds money to everyone for every bug it created with its LLM?
[deleted]
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#217I have two comments. One this feels like anti-competitive behavior that should not be accepted or allowed. Two, how can people support this?
There are multiple comments in this thread with comments along the line of: "Oh im sure they didn't mean to, let's not attribute this to malice". There is a long history here of lawyers, back and forth between OpenCode and OpenClaw and various other "Open" harnesses. Digging into my commit history and blocking access based off of a string is not acceptable for a product in my opinion -- and I don't think this was purely on accident.
Other comments calling out that they are compute constrained and need to do this in order to continue functioning. They shouldn't oversell then. I think that overselling airline tickets is abhorrent and so is overselling any product in a way that you know that you will impact legitimate customers. Up your pricing and/or stop accepting invites, we will quickly get to the bottom of it.
A company does not deserve the benefit of the doubt over and over and over again.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
April has been a crazy month for open weights models. I've been using Claude Code for work and Kimi 2.6 for personal projects and Kimi has been very good. Glm-5.1 is also great. Qwen, Mimo and Deepseek I need to test some more, but they all have been producing good results. I have the impression that they are all are at the same level, or close to, Sonnet 4.6.
What are you running them on?
Not OP, but having explored the field a good bit, Openrouter + pi harness in a devcontainer work great as a sane starting point.
Highly recommend as a clean way to try out the upstart models.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unironically yes. I predict that costs will grow to 80% of what it would cost a human, across the board for everything AI can do. "It's still cheaper than a human" they'll say. Loudly here on HN too. Of course this will happen slowly, very slowly. Lets meet again in 10-20 years.
> "It's still cheaper than a human" they'll say. The question is how much friction there will be for people to switch over to Gemini, GPT or maybe even DeepSeek or Mistral or whatever. Even if price hikes are inevitable across the board, the moat any single org has is somewhat limited, so prices definitely will be a factor they'll compete on with one another at least a bit.
> the moat any single org has is somewhat limited
I disagree. The models are going to become commodities (we're already almost there), but the tooling and integrations will be the moat. Reproducing everything Anthropic has already built with Claude Code, Cowork, and all their connectors would be nontrivial, and they're just getting started.
Anyone can implement an AI chatbot. But few will be able to provide AI that's deeply integrated into our daily lives.
Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is nothing wrong with flat-rate plans. I work at an LLM-serving startup, and am aware of at least three competitors, that (a) provide flat rate subs (b) are extremely profitable and (c) are bootstrapped, ie. not beholden to investors (there are also many other competitors but I can't ascertain their profitability or investment status). You simply need to price the flat-rate sub at a price that's profitable when…
> prevent fully automated usage by the power users this is a non-starter
Fully automated usage on a flat-rate plan is an economic non-starter.