461–470 of 568 posts
Anthropic employee here (opinions are my own): the response " [...] However, I need to let you know that we are unable to issue compensation [...]" was, as you imagined, generated by Claude. I don't like it, but can't do much about it.
You could quit, for starters
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why did you say that > I need to let you know that we are unable to issue compensation for degraded service or technical errors that result in incorrect billing routing. What prevents you from issuing compensations?
To be fair, that looks like an LLM response.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unsure how true that is. Google cloud is tiny compared to aws for a reason. It matters. People will switch if you piss them off.
Google's lack of customer service isn't new or limited to GCP. They also don't provide any human help if you're an advertiser with them unless you spend a crazy amount of money. Twenty years ago I used to spend upwards of $20-30k a month with them and I couldn't get a single reply to any inquiry I ever sent. If you spend $XXX million / year with them on GCP they will, however, assign a person to be your main point of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also seem to have a bug where people get randomly invoiced: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47693679 I got a random invoice for $45.08 back in March, despite not having auto top up enabled. Trying to reach support met with a brick wall. Based on the post I linked to, I'm not the only one facing this problem.
They also have a bug where people get randomly suspended: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1b82cpu/where_you... It happened this year to my one and only personal account. The account was one week old. Unique e-mail address. $5 balance for API credits. No usage yet. Suspended and refunded. Appeal denied without explanation. I did create the account on a VPN because I was using public WiFi at a tech conferenc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The official response feels AI generated. I suspect this is a preview of our future. "You're totally right! I'm sorry but you're going to have to piss off anyway. Would you like to spend a few more hours discussing it with our AI chatbot? It won't help. But if it makes you feel better, it will probably cost us an extra $0.12 in tokens." I'll bet the first human at Anthropic learns about this from HN.
Does not even need to be AI. Could just be a bad support route in their decision tree. Lots of over reaction here.
The future is very dark where you get a bad charge (it can happen, systems are complex, so I don't want to judge base on that), but you can't fill a ticket or complain to anyone about this. I got a $2 charge for a Facebook Ad (I know, $2 is nothing and I shouldn't use Meta), and it was completely wrong. It's impossible to talk to someone in Facebook about this. The AI chat is completely clueless and can't do anything…
> However, I need to let you know that we are unable to issue compensation for degraded service or *technical errors* that result in incorrect billing routing. This is very surprising. I've never seen a legitimate business not give refunds for technical errors of their own fault. Minimum Anthropic should credit the full amount to them.
This billing cycle my account was billed an extra $200. I investigated. I was being for a Claude Max gift subscription that has been sent to – what appears to be – a randomly generated 27 char alphanumeric icloud email account that bounces. Apparently, Anthropic doesn't have a centralized process that allows you to approve, see or revoke "gift cards." And no I can't use this hypothetical gift card. Because I can't se…
I contacted my bank and got a reply (from a human) that all three payments are valid.
Emails from Anthropic state that the first two payments failed, but the third went through. Fin says that my question will be elevated to a human being, but so far I was not contacted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The official response feels AI generated. I suspect this is a preview of our future. "You're totally right! I'm sorry but you're going to have to piss off anyway. Would you like to spend a few more hours discussing it with our AI chatbot? It won't help. But if it makes you feel better, it will probably cost us an extra $0.12 in tokens." I'll bet the first human at Anthropic learns about this from HN.
A real employee (bcherny) read the issue, responded that the bug was fixed, and then completely ignored the request for a refund.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hermes is one of these OpenClaw clones, so this was certainly intentional, not a model hallucinating something. I think the problem is clear. Anthropic saw their usage go up much more than their capacity could handle. There are a few tried and true solutions to this, like "increase the price" or "restrict signups so you can guarantee service to what you have already sold". Then there is the "large scale fraud" option…
Mind pointing out where exactly in the contract you were allowed to use OpenClaw?
The correct implementation of this condition by Anthropic on the server side would be to block usage by non-Claude apps via Claude's authentication mechanism, and allow it via the per-token API key billing.
Instead of a simple 403 error, which would block usage, they silently redirect to a different billing bucket, which is not ethical behaviour especially since it is based on fuzzy heuristics.
There should have been a two layer approach:
1. Run regex to screen for target word
2. If positive, run the context through a cheap AI model