Live data from Hacker News

Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

status.claude.com

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#71
post #8

A bit surprised by the snarky comments here -- I also want Claude to work reliably but very few (no?) companies have ever seen this level of rapid growth. We're going to go through a long fail-whale-style period and I can imagine very, very few companies that could avoid that.

When the narrative around AI is that people should rely on it all the time, people will be judged by your token use (it better be high), the AI is smarter than everyone and will take all the jobs, the AI is the best programmer, and more… When things fail repeatedly, it highlights that the emperor has no clothes. If it’s as good as they say, why can’t it figure out how to not go down every day? How can people rely on…

I have to agree with this. The economic culture around this tech is very toxic.

There seems to be a mass anxiety around the job market even. I‘ve seen a lot of social media content, including videos of people giving advice, especially to younger tech workers.

The most dangerous (psychologically, socially, economically) are people in important positions, who understand just enough to see some of its usefulness, but not enough to assess where its assumptions and guarantees actually are.

Even moreso if they see workers as a mere cost center instead of an asset.

But here is my perhaps naive, hopefully brave prediction: the real winners of this shake up are not decided yet, and neither bean counting nor superficial engagement with the topic will be sufficient or even useful.

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read this on reddit daily ; we have usage monitoring running and collect all stats; we have seen no difference at all. Guess they are split testing or something maybe?

Could you elaborate what these usage monitors look like? I collect data locally and can easily show that cost per token has gone up in some of my sessions

All our people run a cron script which counts tokens (from jsonl) use and runs a scripted cli /usage (sending keyboard input to the running claude code) and sends that to a central system where we can see this. We see no real changes on any of the accounts or averaged. I have to note here that we only use sonnet 4.6; opus always ran over limits if not continuesly monitored and switched over to sonnet since it came out and it's useless to us for that reason.

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#73
post #47
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it’s extremely obvious. The recent “we give you $100/$200 extra credit for a month” is clearly just “you’re supposed to pay extra for the same usage from the now on” dressed up as a “bonus”, just like giving “bonus” usage off-peak before announcing faster burn rate during peak a short while ago. And the recent “Investigating usage limits hitting faster than expected” [1] is probably them intentionally gauging ho…

Anthropic bonuses seem to be code for "your usage limits are going down soon."

Literally every time

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re asking for $100+/mo for the plans that are actually usable at scale. If I’m paying that much I have very high expectations. There’s also the fact that they’re known for dogfooding heavily, I imagine that contributes to it a lot.

> They’re asking for $100+/mo for the plans that are actually usable at scale. If I’m paying that much I have very high expectations. If you think $100 is that much and get very high expectations from it, you're not the target customer. You're a loss leader to Anthropic, and the fact that you don't see that / still have high expectations means your expectations are unrealistic.

I think the bigger point is that the price tag is simply not competitive, especially given all of the issues, downsides and dangers.

Whether Anthropic makes money from the $100 subscriptions or not, is their problem.

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#75

As long as everyone is here, have you seen the token usage just go up remarkably recently for the $100 plan? it lasts a lot less time than it used to recently. Might be related to recent releases of claude.

Maybe you're experiencing normal usage rates now that the 2x March promotion is over?

> From March 13, 2026 through March 28, 2026, your five-hour usage is doubled during off-peak hours (outside 8 AM-2 PM ET / 5-11 AM PT / 12-6 PM GMT) on weekdays). Usage remains unchanged from 8 AM-2 PM ET / 5-11 AM PT / 12-6 PM GMT on weekdays. Source: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14063676-claude-march...

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#76
post #8

A bit surprised by the snarky comments here -- I also want Claude to work reliably but very few (no?) companies have ever seen this level of rapid growth. We're going to go through a long fail-whale-style period and I can imagine very, very few companies that could avoid that.

They have this new Mythos model. I am sure it can fix all the bugs and reliability issues since it's nearly AGI. /s

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#77
post #42
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They always have the option to stop accepting new customers when their infrastructure is peaked out instead of lowering quality for everyone.

You can't stop accepting new customers unless you're fine with killing your potential future customer base. That's a ridiculous suggestion. Either your current customers or your potential future customers are going to be unhappy so long as compute resources are finite. Take your pick.

Waiting lists are a thing.

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#78
post #17
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can Claude work reliably if Claude keeps going on vacation for several hours? Maybe it is recovering from the weekend a few days ago, but wanted to take an extra day off like it did on Monday, hence the "outage".

> How can Claude work reliably if Claude keeps going on vacation for several hours? Not that I wish to anthropomorphise it in this answer, but businesses have managed just fine when humans do this for "lunch breaks" and "going home for the evening to sleep". (And even mandatory meetings which should have been emails).

Thing is, if Dave the programmer goes on vacation or calls in sick for the day, hopefully you have a larger team to fall back on and your business doesn't grind to a halt.

No one is apparently noticing that if they build their entire business model around AI being a certain price and availability they're essentially building one giant point of failure into their productivity.

What if the price shoots up 10x or Claude goes down for a day, or what if he's occasionally drunk (hallucinating). Reliability is sometimes a more important facet of business than ultra speed and productivity.

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#79
post #8

A bit surprised by the snarky comments here -- I also want Claude to work reliably but very few (no?) companies have ever seen this level of rapid growth. We're going to go through a long fail-whale-style period and I can imagine very, very few companies that could avoid that.

>I also want Claude to work reliably but very few (no?) companies have ever seen this level of rapid growth.

You do understand however that aside from the growth/maturity path, this is also a path to enshittification and skinning their users, which might come even faster to LMMs than say Google , because the latter managed to have hundres of billions in investments in record time to recoup and IPOs on sight.

Re: Sonnet 4.6 Elevated Rate of Errors

#80
post #42
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They always have the option to stop accepting new customers when their infrastructure is peaked out instead of lowering quality for everyone.

You can't stop accepting new customers unless you're fine with killing your potential future customer base. That's a ridiculous suggestion. Either your current customers or your potential future customers are going to be unhappy so long as compute resources are finite. Take your pick.

>You can't stop accepting new customers unless you're fine with killing your potential future customer base. That's a ridiculous suggestion.

And yet, it's what any business with limited stock or slots (from restaurants and car companies to airlines) have done since forever...

Post reply on HN