Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

twitter.com

61–70 of 760 posts

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#61
post #5

I don't understand how, having access to Mythos and unlimited use, their solution to open harnesses is lazy string regex-style matching.

I wonder what happens if you ask Claude to solve the problem, and don't review it's answer properly..

they're just holding it wrong.. what model are they using? they should make sure they're on Opus 4.5+. That was a stepwise improvement and was when AI coding clearly became the futureₖₑₖ

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#62
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have better PR than OpenAI but they are not a more ethical company. They do a bunch of shady stuff and are just as much involved in military applications. Cal Newport’s recent podcast had a good discussion about this: https://youtu.be/BRr3pAPsQAk?si=jaRJYJ_XQE7VpxPN

Pet peeve of mine is people saying "hey this thing is totally shady/false, I've got proof right here links to hour long podcast >". It happens surprisingly often.

Probably some Slopcoded bot which posts fake comments to drive people to their content.

After all, if you’re paying hundreds of millions to buy these shitty podcasts, you might as well host some bots.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#63
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM serving startup => bootstrapped => extremely profitable Mind sharing a link?

I do mind, since I enjoy speaking freely without concern of my opinions being linked to my employment. I assure you companies like this exist. Profiting off of inference is not the hard part, it's frontier training that is prohibitively expensive. You're free to disregard my commentary if you want, of course.

> Profiting off of inference is not the hard part, it's frontier training that is prohibitively expensive.

And given that Anthropic does both, it must make up its training costs by selling inference. jp57 was pretty clearly talking about Anthropic's flat-rate plans, rather than the flat-rate plans of companies that get to skip the most expensive part of the process.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#65
post #20
post #7

It sounds like Anthropic is dangerously low on compute availability if they’re prioritizing these refusals as their OKRs.

I think it's obvious that they are critically lacking in compute capacity especially since OpenAI has committed billions to locking up all the future compute production. And I don't necessarily think it's wrong for Anthropic to introduce QoS or throttling on users of their models. It's pretty much a necessity when offering public access to a scarce resource and it's been a common practice for decades. What is the alt…

Maybe they could not sell more if they’re already exceeding capacity? What kind of apologism is this?

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#68
openClaw does so muhc more then Claude code tbh, running 9 agents from the one machine, schedual some tasks, add some personal personas for each agent, claudeCode (which i like alot) is on rails, openClaw is full openworld.

rate the analogy plz..

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#69
post #50

why do people want to continue to use anthropic despite their shitty service? its not like they have some kind of lock-in as it is still new company and it has shown its color before we are stuck with it unlike google/meta etc.

Totally agree. This is why open source models and toolings are so important for the ecosystem. I would not want these companies decide what we can or cannot do.

Re: Claude Code refuses requests or charges extra if your commits mention "OpenClaw"

#70
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pet peeve of mine is people saying "hey this thing is totally shady/false, I've got proof right here links to hour long podcast >". It happens surprisingly often.

Cal Newport and tech commentator Ed Zitron discussed this disparity between Anthropic's public image and their actual practices. Despite cultivating a reputation as the "ethical" AI company, Zitron argues that Anthropic's actions show they are just as ruthless and ethically questionable as their competitors. Anthropic has been deeply integrated with the US military, having been installed with classified access since…

"LLMS are fundamentally incapable of controlling autonomous weapons" -- This was Anthropic's stance too, right?

"Quietly remained an active part of the war effort" - anthropic was totally transparent about it, but yeah not great.

"Leaks were wrong" - and that's Anthropic's fault?

OpenAI agreed to assist the DoD with zero boundaries and then lied about it. Can we at least give them credit for not doing that? If we just throw up our hands and say "they're all awful, whatever" then the result is reduced pressure on them to be better. Like it or not, I do not think AI is going away and as far as I can tell, despite billing problems, Anthropic's still the least bad frontier lab.

Post reply on HN