Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code weekly rate limits

news.ycombinator.com

621–630 of 724 posts

Re: Claude Code weekly rate limits

#621
post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes me sad that devs start relying on proprietary online services to be able to work. We have been lucky enough to have FOSS tools to do everything and not to have to rely on any specific service or company to work and some of us are deciding to become like Monsanto-addicted farmers who forgot how to do their jobs without something they have to pay every month.

Do you mind sharing what industry you’re in where you can fully rely on FOSS? In my industry we’re dependent on MATLAB, Xilinx tools, closed source embedded software and more. To name a few industries: game devs might be stuck with unity, finance quant devs might be stuck with Bloomberg terminals, iOS app devs are stuck with apple’s tooling etc… this isn’t just an LLM problem IMO.

I think this is different. Yes, 3rd party tools and services are nothing new. Depending on 3rd party libraries is also a standard thing, although minimum dependency is generally considered a good practice. But all these services provide something you don't want to do yourself and are willing to pay. They all complement what you do, and don't replace your core competency.

Apple is your business partner, doing marketing and distribution for you, and shares its user base. Bloomberg terminals provide real time data and UI to non-technical finance people. Github provides you Git hosting service so you don't need to setup and maintain servers. MATLAB (although there are Octave, Python and open alternatives) sells numerical computation environment to non-CS engineers. Xilinx is sells its hardware and dev tools. Game devs use Unity because they want to focus on gameplay and not game engine development.

These are all the examples of Division of Labor. This time, however, you have to pay for your core competency, because you cannot compete with a good AI coder in the long run. The value you provide diminishes to almost nothing. Yes you can write prompts, but anyone, even a mediocre LLM can write prompts these days. If you need some software, you don't need to hire SW engineers anymore. A handful of vendors dominate the SW development market. Yes, you can switch. But only between the 3 or 4 tech giants. It's an Oligopoly.

If we have FOSS alternatives, at least we can build new services around them and can move on to this new era. We can adapt. Otherwise, we become a human frontend between the client and the AI giants.

Re: Claude Code weekly rate limits

#622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like using Claude Code overnight while you sleep or sharing your account with someone else is equivalent to taking home leftovers from an all-you-can-eat buffet. I also find it hard to believe 5% of customers are doing that, though.

If that’s off-peak time, I’d argue the adjacent opposite point, that Anthropic et al could implement deferred and/or scheduled jobs natively so that folks can do what they’re going to do anyway in a way that comports with reasonable load management that all vendors must do. For example, I don’t mind that Netflix pauses playback after playing continuously for a few episodes of a show, because the options they present…

Is there really an off peak time, though? I think Anthropic is running on AWS with the big investment from Amazon, right? I'm sure there's some peaks and valleys but with the Americas, Europe and Asia being in different time zones I'd expect there'd be a somewhat "baseline" usage with peaks where the timezones overlap (European afternoons and American mornings, for example). I know in my case I get the most 503 overloaded errors in the European afternoon.

Re: Claude Code weekly rate limits

#625
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real bottleneck isn’t Jevons paradox, it’s the Theory of Constraints. A human brain runs on under 20 W, yet every major LLM vendor is burning cash and running up against power supply limits. If anything pops this bubble, it won’t be ethics panels or model tweaks but subscription prices finally reflecting those electricity bills. At that point, companies might rediscover the ROI of good old meat based AI.

Meat has far higher input requirements for good performance above raw energy

Hire Vegan Developers... :-)

Re: Claude Code weekly rate limits

#626
post #588

I'm not sure how this will play out long term, but I really am not a fan of having to feel like I'm using a limited resource whenever I use an LLM. People like unlimited plans, we are used to them for internet, text messaging, etc. The current pricing models just feel bad.

The problem is that this company is haemhorraging money and cannot possibly offer an unlimited plan.

*cannot possibly subsidize an unlimited plan and must course correct on pricing to reflect cost-plus-pricing instead.

Re: Claude Code weekly rate limits

#627
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not what the parent commenter asked though, they wanted a price for not being concerned about limits. The API pricing is that.

I doubts thats what they want. They want a static fixed price, $5k a month for example and never have to think about it.

The way these work is they're net profitable given all users, so you have to recategorize users in one of two ways:

- a user subsidizing other users

- a user subsidized by other users

I don't know what OP prefers, but given that people are saying "woof, API pricing too expensive", it sounds like the latter.

The problem, of course, is the provider has to find a market where the one sustains the other. Are there enough users who would pay > $200/mo without getting their money's worth in order to subsidize users paying the same rate, but using more than the average? I think the non-existence of a higher-tier plan says there probably isn't, but I don't want to give too much credence to markets, economics, etc.

Re: Claude Code weekly rate limits

#628

Their business model with the pro plan is to sell a dollar for 80 cents for a while to gain market share. Once they have spent the money allocated to this plan and bring it to a close, don’t expect them to resume it in response to righteous indignation: the money will be gone. See also Uber, MoviePass etc

Inference costs have been in freefall since ChatGPT[1], so this is different than Uber/MoviePass. The primary cost is a technology which is getting cheaper as more investment is put into algorithm + hardware R&D. [1]: https://epoch.ai/data-insights/llm-inference-price-trends

future hardware costs do not erase losses on existing capex expenditures, if they bought an (overpriced) nvidia GPU and then it turns out local LLMs or a Chinese competitor can do it for much cheaper investors effectively notice the mortgage is underwater. Tech getting cheaper is only handy if your company (e.g. ChatGPT) didn't already make a big gamble they can't sell off (for fear of hurting the cost of the asset they're trying to sell) see also coin "reserves".

Re: Claude Code weekly rate limits

#629
post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that this company is haemhorraging money and cannot possibly offer an unlimited plan.

*cannot possibly subsidize an unlimited plan and must course correct on pricing to reflect cost-plus-pricing instead.

Last year they had $900 million in revenue and ended up losing $5.6 billion. I suspect cutting off a few whales isn't enough to reverse that and they're gonna need to "course correct" a bit further

Re: Claude Code weekly rate limits

#630
Having 4 separate limits that all are opaque and can suddenly interrupt work is not ok.

We don't know what the limits are, what conditions change the limits dynamically, and we cannot monitor our usage towards the limits.

1. 5 hour limit

2. Overall weekly limit

3. Opus weekly limit

4. Monthly limit on number of 5 hour sessions

Post reply on HN