381–390 of 740 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know there wasn't account sharing though? I've seen some amazingly dodgy stuff when hiring people from south east Asia, sharing a paid account with friends worth a months rent there seems milquetoast in comparison.
There clearly was account sharing, someone logged into the wife's account from the Phillipines.
Where Anthropic f'ed up was treating their monetization the way they treat model training. Turns out that success in experimentation is not transferrable. They have tried to find the highest that the market pays for sota models; however, on the consumer side, this is just too confusing and unsettling: "You can only use Fable for a week as a part of your plan" "Be ready! You have to start paying per token!" "Nevermind…
> That forces people to look beyond the walled garden. Every time I get "you used your quota, come back in 3 hours, or 2 days" -> that is experimentation time with their competition, leading to changed service plans. When they said "claude -p" will be billed at API pricing even for plan users I moved my harness off claude. After I integrated codex, then it was never going to be a full claude project again. What busin…
Where Anthropic f'ed up was treating their monetization the way they treat model training. Turns out that success in experimentation is not transferrable. They have tried to find the highest that the market pays for sota models; however, on the consumer side, this is just too confusing and unsettling: "You can only use Fable for a week as a part of your plan" "Be ready! You have to start paying per token!" "Nevermind…
>You don't feel they want to give you a dependable service for an, albeit premium, price. It's a constant bargaining game We all know that the subscription prices are not at all sustainable for these providers. You all do, right? Yes, they're struggling to segment the market and find a way to make money, and that basically relies upon emptying the pockets of whales. As someone enjoying a hilariously subsidized Max pl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
remember 4 year ago we use to : have stack overflow open, documentation, obscure forums plus other tabs. An ide open with 20 tabs open each file a component, a class or an interface We also use to hold entire codebases in our brain.
i still do :)
Things just moved up on the abstraction-ladder, but it's still there, hidden beneath all the TUI sessions instead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know there wasn't account sharing though? I've seen some amazingly dodgy stuff when hiring people from south east Asia, sharing a paid account with friends worth a months rent there seems milquetoast in comparison.
There clearly was account sharing, someone logged into the wife's account from the Phillipines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have no idea what you think violates the TOS here? I was doing work at work on a work task using a plan paid for by work.
The $200 max plan is for individuals. The individual plans are heavily subsidized. Employers should be using either the Team plan (which has much lower limits than max) or the Enterprise plan (which is entirely billed on usage). Anthropic know that lots of people are doing all sorts of “bad” things like employers paying for Individual plans, (and using multiple accounts to get more usage) and aren’t yet enforcing the…
I think multiple plans are against the ToS, but I'm not doing that.
The Teams plans are more convenient for a number of reasons, but yes, they top out at the 6x plan, not the 20x plan.
Edit: ToS are here https://www.anthropic.com/legal/consumer-terms and https://www.anthropic.com/legal/commercial-terms
I've re-read it and I'm pretty sure there is nothing that forbids a business paying for a 20x account. Notably they say this in the consumer ToS:
> If you use an email address owned by your employer or another organization, your Account may be linked to the organization's Anthropic enterprise account, and the organization’s administrator may be able to monitor and control the Account, including having access to Materials (defined below). We will provide notice to you before linking your Account to an organization's enterprise account.
which goes at least moderately close to indicating using it in a work environment is allowed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
remember 4 year ago we use to : have stack overflow open, documentation, obscure forums plus other tabs. An ide open with 20 tabs open each file a component, a class or an interface We also use to hold entire codebases in our brain.
And now I'm getting 10-20x as much done. I'd say the trade off is worth it. I'm struggling to scale myself even further. This tech is unreal and I have so many things I can do. For the first time, tech feels like the 90's-00's again. Everything is greenfield and exciting and big tech is struggling to figure out what to do about it. People are just hacking all kinds of stuff, and it's awesome. Feels like techno utopia…
For many coders including myself, LLM based coding agents work well enough to be useful, and in some cases worth paying for. What I don't see is vast areas of industry finding $10s to $100s of billions of value in LLMs. There's no lint or compiler that can check for correctly constructed contracts. So LLMs, which should be useful to law firms, incur a lot more manual checking of their work than coding agents. Less fo…
While there's no linter for writing contracts, my experience (as a commercial lawyer) is that frontier LLMs are far better and error checking and far quicker at writing than the average senior lawyer. The main thing holding back further deployment (in my jurisdiction) are concerns around data residency, privilege and how fundamentally it will break an industry that is so heavily reliant on time based billing.
Funny you should say that. I read somewhere (not on HN, but I think it was a post linked from here) that a number of law firms who deal with extremely sensitive documents have started buying amped-up Macbooks with 512GB of memory to be able to run local models.
These are businesses who literally - and for once this word fits - cannot afford to let some of those documents get anywhere outside their corporate walls.