Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 245 posts

Re: Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

#71

Post by bayarearefugee »

joshuafuller wrote: post #64
pxtail wrote: post #53

Recently after noticing how quickly limits are consumed and reading others complaints about same issue on reddit I was wondering how much about this is real error or bug hidden somewhere and how much it's about testing what threshold of constraining limits will be tolerated without cancelling accounts. Eventually, in case of "shit hits the fan" situation it can be always dismissed by waving hands and apologizing (or…

This feels a lot like the same playbook we’re seeing with dynamic pricing in retail, just applied to compute instead of products. You never really know what you’re getting, and the rules shift under you. What makes it worse is the lack of transparency. If there were clear, hard limits, people could plan around it. Instead it’s this moving target that makes it impossible to trust for real work. At some point it stops…

The clear trend over the past decade or so has been using analytics and data gathering to extract maximum rents from every customer in every industry and AI is going to massively accelerate this.

The only way out is government regulation which means we are screwed in the US (our government is too far gone to represent average citizen interests in any meaningful way) but Europeans maybe have a chance if they get it together and demand change.

Re: Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

#72

Post by lukewarm707 »

susupro1 wrote: post #13
lukewarm707 wrote: post #10

please tell me if i'm crazy. i just refuse to use openai/google/anthropic subscriptions, i only use open source models with ZDR tokens. - i like privacy in my work, and i share when i wish. somehow we accepted that our prompts and work may be read and moderated by employees. would you accept people moderating what you write in excel, google docs, apple pages? - i want a consistent tool, not something that is quantise…

You are not crazy, you are just waking up from the SaaS delusion. We somehow allowed the industry to convince us that paying $20/month to rent volatile compute, have our proprietary workflows surveilled, and get throttled mid-thought is an 'upgrade'. The pendulum is swinging violently back to local-native tools. Deterministic, privately owned, unmetered—buying your execution layer instead of renting it is the only wa…

i don't use local llms. it's mostly the closed source subscriptions that are not private, it really is a choice.

there are many cloud providers of zero data retention llm APIs, and even cryptographic attestation.

they are not throttled, you can get an agreed rate limit.

Re: Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

#74

Post by horsawlarway »

bigbinary wrote: post #26
xnx wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> on a single entity Contrary to the popular opinion here, there are other services beyond Claude Code. These usage limits might even prompt (har har) people to notice that Gemini is cheaper and often better.

On-premise LLMs are also getting better and likely won’t stop; as costs go up with the technical improvements, I would imagine cost saving methods to also improve

I still think it's basically unavoidable that most people who might pay for api access will end up on-prem.

Fixed costs, exact model pinning, outage resistant, enshittification resistant, better security, better privacy, etc...

There are just so many compelling reasons to be on-prem instead of dependent on a 3rd party hoovering up all your data and prompts and selling you overpriced tokens (which eventually they MUST be, because these companies have to make a profit at some point).

If the only counterbalance is "well the api is cheaper than buying my own hardware"...

That's a short term problem. Hardware costs are going to drop over time, and capabilities are going to continue improving. It's already pretty insane how good of a model I can run on two old RTX-3090s locally.

Is it as good as modern claude? No. Is it as good as claude was 18 months ago? Yes.

Give it a decade to see companies really push into the "diminishing returns" of scaling and new models... combined with new hardware built with these workloads in mind... and I think on-prem is the pretty clear winner.

Re: Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

#75

Post by jakobloekke »

toss1 wrote: post #62
jorvi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a second I hoped you were gonna comment on how LLMs are going to rot out our skillset and our brains. Like some people already complaining they "have to think" when ChatGPT or Claude or Grok is down. Oh well.

Unsurprising people complain. "Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is why so few people do it" — attrib Henry Ford Now we have tools that can appear to automate your thinking for you. (They don't really think, but they do appear to, so...)

“Thinking is to humans as swimming is to cats. They can do it, but they prefer not to.” - Kahneman

Re: Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

#76

Post by nicce »

pxtail wrote: post #53

Recently after noticing how quickly limits are consumed and reading others complaints about same issue on reddit I was wondering how much about this is real error or bug hidden somewhere and how much it's about testing what threshold of constraining limits will be tolerated without cancelling accounts. Eventually, in case of "shit hits the fan" situation it can be always dismissed by waving hands and apologizing (or…

Are they going to pay back if subscription was payed but token limit was less than advertised? Is there some tiny text somewhere preventing just suing or pulling money back with credit cards?

Re: Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

#77

Post by Tade0 »

tartoran wrote: post #69
joshuafuller wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels a lot like the same playbook we’re seeing with dynamic pricing in retail, just applied to compute instead of products. You never really know what you’re getting, and the rules shift under you. What makes it worse is the lack of transparency. If there were clear, hard limits, people could plan around it. Instead it’s this moving target that makes it impossible to trust for real work. At some point it stops…

What a horrid glimpse in the future. I hope we won't get there and we all collectively fight back with our wallets.

I'm worried that the present is actually living off a line of credit that will be spent/closed soon.

Re: Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

#79

Post by jadar »

nicce wrote: post #76
pxtail wrote: post #53

Recently after noticing how quickly limits are consumed and reading others complaints about same issue on reddit I was wondering how much about this is real error or bug hidden somewhere and how much it's about testing what threshold of constraining limits will be tolerated without cancelling accounts. Eventually, in case of "shit hits the fan" situation it can be always dismissed by waving hands and apologizing (or…

Are they going to pay back if subscription was payed but token limit was less than advertised? Is there some tiny text somewhere preventing just suing or pulling money back with credit cards?

Part of the issue is that they don't actually advertise what the token limit is. Just some vague, "this is 5x more than free, and 5x more than pro". They seem to be free to change the basis however they please, because most of us are more than happy to use what they give us at the discounted subscription pricing.

Re: Claude Code users hitting usage limits 'way faster than expected'

#80

Post by reenorap »

The only way AI will be profitable to companies like Anthropic or OpenAI is to make the cost $1000-2000/month or more for coding. Every programmer will be forced to pay for it because it's only a fraction of their salary (in the US anyway) and it's the only way the programmer will be competitive. Whether the company pays for it, or they pay for it themselves, it will need to be paid.

There's no other way that these companies can compete against the likes of Google, and Facebook unless they sell themselves to these companies. With AWS and GCP spending hundreds of billions of dollars per year, there's no way that Anthropic or OpenAI can continue competing unless they make an absurd amount of money and throw that at resources like their own datacenters, etc and they can't do that at $20/month.

Post reply on HN