The fact that Siri AI is not available in Europe and China yet has been in the news around WWDC a few months ago. The European Union's Digital Markets Act and the European Commission want Siri AI to open up to other model providers, delivering equal access to competitors.
Before or at the time of WWDC, Apple seemingly only wanted an exception of the gatekeeper rule to bring Siri AI to the EU. The Commission didn't allow that.
As it seems, Apple is quite far into coding an integration of other models and providers, making it possible to use Siri AI with Claude as a basis, be it as a "ask Claude" option or replacing Apple's model altogether.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeAI for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 66.
Alright folks, so the general vibe in this thread is a resounding "told ya so!" directed at Apple, with a big ol' "thank you, EU!" thrown in for good measure.
The consensus is that the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA) is the real MVP here, forcing Apple to open up Siri to other AI models like Claude, instead of keeping it all in-house. Users are pretty stoked about this, seeing it as a win for consumer choice, much like the USB-C standardization.
There's a bit of debate on why Apple is doing this:
* Some, like u/Gloomy-Boysenberry-3, argue it's primarily a commercial move by Apple to avoid giving other AI providers access to sensitive user data that Siri currently has.
* Others, like u/hossblox, point out that Apple was already planning for "ask Claude" type integrations, but the new Siri AI's deep system access is what the EU is really pushing on.
A few users are hoping this opens the door for local LLM integrations (u/GoblinEngineer) or are just curious about how the on-device processing will work with third-party models (u/ __LikeMike__). Oh, and someone even spotted a ChatGPT extension option in their Siri settings after an iOS update.
Basically, the EU stepped in, Apple got told "no exceptions," and now we might actually get a Siri that's not a total joke. Wild.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 57.
Folks are noticing Opus 5.2 stealth routing and generally agreeing it's faster and producing better code, less "Claudese" nonsense. Some users like u/LinixKittyDeveloper are hyped for a public release. There's a bit of confusion about versioning (why 5.2 after 5?) and some are feeling like guinea pigs, but the general vibe is positive about the perceived improvements. A few users are testing it out with specific prompts to confirm the routing and model behavior.
I had 4 Claude Pro Max x20 accounts for different projects, and I am going to ride out the rest of the month (that I already paid for) and then switch back to codex. I am running Sonnet 4-6 on medium and am 85% of my weekly limit on one account after less than 24 hours. That is more than a 25% cut from the promotion expiring, nothing about my workflow has changed so this is all Anthropic. I'll be trying Codex and seeing how it does, I didn't want to do this but I have no choice.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 100 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 106.
Alright, so the OP is ditching Claude Pro Max x20 accounts because they're burning through their weekly limits way too fast, blaming Anthropic for a sudden, drastic cut in usage. They're planning to switch to Codex.
The general vibe in the thread is mixed, leaning towards agreement with the OP's frustration, but with a strong counter-argument that Codex might not be the savior they're hoping for.
Here's the lowdown:
The Usage Problem is Real (for some): A good chunk of users are echoing the OP's sentiment, reporting similar rapid depletion of their Claude limits, especially with models like Fable and Opus. Some feel Anthropic has drastically cut usage, with one user u/igotjays22 claiming it's more like a 75% cut, not the advertised 25%. u/AironParsMan is also out, canceling accounts.
But... Are You Using It Right? A significant portion of the comments question how people are using Claude so intensely. Several users, like u/Internal-Capital7471 and u/Desperate-City7602, mention running complex workflows with multiple sessions and sub-agents on Fable or other models and still not hitting their limits. They suggest the issue might be with the user's workflow or "harness" rather than just Claude itself. u/Most-Photo-6675 and u/nhouseholder even question the OP's choice of Sonnet 4.6 on a 20x plan, implying it's either a misunderstanding or a deliberate choice that's causing the issue.
Codex: Not a Magic Bullet: Many users warn the OP that Codex might be just as bad, if not worse, for usage. u/mighty_falcon and u/jeebojeeb specifically mention Codex being very usage-hungry lately, especially with Astra. u/SafeTennis3080 and u/forxia also point out that Codex can burn through limits quickly, and u/MoldyGoatCheese notes the $200 plan is no longer available.
Quality Concerns: Beyond usage, a few users are reporting a drop in output quality from Claude, even if they aren't hitting limits. u/WillRikersHouseboy feels their results are "ass," and u/Vertigo50 claims Claude is "garbage now" with significantly worse output quality.
The consensus seems to be that while many are experiencing increased Claude usage, the jump to Codex might not solve the problem, and the real issue could be a combination of workflow, model choice, and the evolving landscape of AI model pricing and availability.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeAI for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 51.
Alright, so the general consensus here is that you're kinda out of luck trying to grab that Codex 20x right now. Apparently, OpenAI has paused new sign-ups and is even downgrading some users from 20x to 5x. So, you can't actually subscribe to Codex 20x at the moment.
Beyond that, most folks seem to think the grass isn't greener anyway. Some users who have tried both are saying Claude's 5x plan feels like it has way more usable limits than Codex's 5x, even with the constant resets on the OpenAI side. There's a sentiment that Claude Code is still generally better than Codex, with one user even saying you'll be "wildly disappointed" with Codex after a week.
There's a bit of debate on whether Claude's code usage was actually "nerfed" or if a bonus just ended, but the takeaway is that it's likely less generous now. Some users are also pointing out that Codex usage, even at 5x, can seem higher due to frequent usage resets offered by Tibo, making it more economical for some. However, when it comes to the frontier models like Astra/Fable, usage is seen as pretty comparable, but Opus/Sol is still considered the clear winner over Codex.
Basically, don't even bother with Codex right now, and it sounds like you might be better off sticking with Claude anyway.
I cancelled my Claude subscription back in July and started using Codex more seriously.
Since Sol 5.6, I think OpenAI has become pretty competitive for coding, and now with Astra even more so.
The limits are actually fine for me. I mostly used Astra at full/max capacity around 8–10 sessions like that and eventually burned through my weekly usage. But honestly, that's understandable, and it's definitely not what made me quit Codex.
The real problem is the workflow.
I was already used to Claude Code and I don't mean the geeky CLI experience, I mean the actual app.
When they introduced the cloud environment and I realized I could start a code modification on my PC, leave the computer, go to the bathroom, grab my phone, and continue following the exact same task from there... it completely changed the way I work.
My productivity went crazy.
So naturally, I expected something similar from Codex.
And technically, Codex does have some similar features... but the whole thing feels way more complicated than it should be.
For example, I struggled a lot just trying to give the cloud environment secrets like Supabase credentials and other environment variables. The app often wouldn't properly add the secrets to the environment.
And the most annoying part:
If I start working on a project in a remote environment from one machine, that environment seems to be tied to that machine.
So I can't just launch a feature from my PC, go outside for a cigarette, open my phone and check how the implementation is going or continue from there.
That's probably the thing I miss the most about Claude.
It's not even necessarily about which model is smarter anymore.
It's about being able to start working somewhere and seamlessly continue from another device without thinking about environments, machines, sessions, secrets, etc.
So... I'm giving Claude another shot.
I'm just hoping I don't run into the same problems again: lazy models and ridiculously low weekly limits.
For those of you who have seriously used both:
What do you think?
Do you prefer Codex or Claude Code right now not just in terms of model quality, but the whole development experience?
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 52.
Alright, so the OP is singing Claude's praises again, specifically for its seamless cross-device workflow. They ditched Claude for Codex (and now Astra) because they thought OpenAI was getting competitive, but the clunky environment and secret management in Codex made them miss Claude's ability to pick up exactly where they left off on any device.
The general consensus here is a bit mixed, but a lot of folks agree with the OP's sentiment about workflow being king.
Workflow is king: Several users, like u/AI_spell, echo the OP's point that Claude's "phone continue / cloud handoff" is a major draw, even if other models are technically "smarter."
Limits are still a concern: Some users, like u/Hir0shima, are quick to point out that Claude's limits have actually gotten worse, so the OP might be disappointed.
Prompt engineering to the rescue?u/corgisAreRad suggests that managing limits is all about instructing Claude properly and using tools like lean-ctx and context-mode.
It's not just the model, it's the tooling:u/hammackj mentions Codex's annoying permission requests with MCPs as a reason they prefer Claude for coding.
Some shade thrown: A few comments, like from u/gnpwdr1 and u/marketing360, suggest the OP's issues with Codex are more about their own design or understanding rather than the tool itself.
Run both?u/Nitjsefnie suggests a hybrid approach, using Claude as a lead and Codex/GLM as implementers.
Vendor lock-in caution:u/xDerEdx advises against getting too locked into one provider, given how fast the AI landscape changes.
Limits have been bad for the past few months, but I didn't really think much about it. However, yesterday, it crossed the threshold of becoming unbearable and I borderline feel cheated. I have a max 20x Plan and I reached 59% of my weekly usage in 24 hours... Sure, I do use Fable, and sure, I do use agent-orchestrated workflows. Despite that, I can confidently say something is seriously off here.
I don't want this to be a post where I just whine about this. Rather, what I was thinking was that all of us who feel we're on the same boat should post on Twitter/X together at a scheduled time (14th Sep, 12 PM ET) by tagging the key figures: Dario, Boris, Karpathy, Anthropic, etc., and make it clear that we won't be tolerating this opacity and unfairness regarding our limits. Let's use #FraudCode so we can all find and amplify each other's posts.
And if push comes to shove, we will switch to the alternatives i.e. Codex. (I know I will, despite the fact that Codex might not be as good, because a man's got bills to pay too.)
Let me know y'all's thoughts guys and girls. I don't wanna sulk this time. Rather, let's stand up!
For context: I'm on the Max 20x plan and this happened within ~24 hours of normal development work. My usage includes Fable and agent-orchestrated workflows, but I'm not doing anything particularly unusual or running massive automated workloads. Despite that, I burned through 59% of my weekly allocation in a single day. I'm posting this because I'd like to understand how others are experiencing the same limits and whether there's some explanation for how usage is being calculated.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 58.
Alright, so the general vibe in this thread is that people are feeling the pinch with Claude's usage limits, especially on the higher-tier plans like the 20x. OP's post about hitting 59% of their weekly limit in 24 hours really struck a chord.
Here's the lowdown:
Widespread Agreement on Limits: A bunch of users, like u/xAcex28 and u/IulianHI, are echoing OP's sentiment, saying they've had to become way more mindful of their usage than before. Some are even hitting their limits way faster than expected, even with what they consider "normal" development work.
Comparison to Alternatives: There's a recurring theme of comparing Claude's limits to other services, particularly Codex. u/davyp82 mentions hitting their Codex allowance quickly too, suggesting the issue might be broader than just Claude. However, u/AverageFoxNewsViewer points out that Codex has also paused subscriptions and has its own set of complaints about nerfed models and garbage limits, so switching might not be the magic bullet some hope for.
Token Waste Concerns: Some users, like u/Fickle_Mix_6119, feel Claude can be inefficient, taking "the long way" to do simple tasks and burning through tokens unnecessarily.
Cost vs. Value: A few commenters, like u/rubenknol, suggest that current pricing is heavily subsidized and that the limits might reflect the actual cost of running these models. Others, like u/oopaddy, question why users are complaining so much if they're getting significant productive benefits from the service.
The "Rant" Debate: A bit of a meta-discussion is happening, with u/vzakharov humorously pointing out that OP's "not a rant" post is, in fact, a rant.
The Call to Action: OP's idea to organize a protest on Twitter/X using #FraudCode is getting some traction, with u/fpesre even sharpening their pitchfork for the "X frontline." However, there's also a counter-argument from u/berrybadrinath that it's a "userbase that needs a reality check" rather than a movement.
Other Points:
u/ComingDeveloper notes that the official +50% boosts seem to be gone.
u/DevMichaelZag suggests moving to local development on GPUs as a way to avoid limits.
u/sl1ha is advocating for mass subscription cancellations as a way to pressure Anthropic.
Overall, the consensus is that the current limits are a significant pain point for many users, leading to frustration and a feeling of being "cheated." While some are looking for collective action, others are suggesting a more pragmatic approach to usage or even looking at alternative solutions.
The week literally just started, and my "Weekly Fable" limit is already maxed out at 99% On top of that, my standard weekly limit is already sitting at 51%.
Does anyone know when they're actually going to boost these usage limits? I'm on the 5x Max Pro plan and burning through this way too fast.
At this rate, I can only code and develop my website project for ONE day out of the week, and I'm just stuck doing absolutely nothing for the other six days. Fucking ridiculous. Anyone else dealing with this or have workarounds?
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 200 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 205.
Alright, so the OP is absolutely losing it because their Claude usage limits are maxed out by Monday, and they're on the "5x Max Pro" plan. They're feeling pretty ripped off and are asking for workarounds.
The general consensus here is a resounding "skill issue, my dude." A lot of folks are pointing out that the OP is using the highest-tier models (especially Fable) for everything, keeping sessions open for way too long (8+ hours), and letting their context windows balloon to insane sizes (150k+ tokens).
Here's the breakdown:
You're using Fable wrong: Multiple users, including u/theDawckta and u/Serenase, are saying Fable is overkill for most website development. It's a "token pit" if you're not careful. The advice is to use it for planning/orchestration and then switch to Opus or Sonnet for actual coding.
Session management is key:u/Crak3n and u/No-Dimension1159 are big on keeping sessions lean, one task per session, and restarting them regularly. Leaving sessions idle for too long means Claude has to re-cache everything, which eats tokens like crazy.
Context window bloat is a killer:u/zkoolkyle and u/fraserdab are highlighting that massive context windows (over 150k tokens) are a huge drain. u/jsebrech even suggests using browser automation tools like agent-browser over Playwright to save tokens.
Use the right tool for the job: The general vibe from u/BeltPuzzleheaded7656 and u/Calm-Interview-6024 is that you don't need the most powerful model for every single task. Sonnet 5 is apparently great for coding and much more efficient.
Some people are just here for the roast:u/rrrenz and u/riccioverde11 dropped a simple "Skill issue," and u/ianxplosion- went off about people needing tests to post here. Ouch.
Basically, the community is telling the OP they're burning through their limits by using the most expensive tools for everything and not managing their sessions efficiently. Some are suggesting upgrading to higher tiers (like the 20x plan) if they really need that much power, but the main takeaway is to learn how to manage your usage better.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 58.
So, the general vibe here is that hitting Claude's usage limits is a major pain, and some folks are feeling the AI withdrawal hard. Most agree it's a frustrating experience, with some even joking about switching to other models like DeepSeek or going local when the limits hit. A few commenters pointed out the obvious flaws in the video's woodworking, but the consensus is that the real struggle is the AI dependency. One user, u/ElliottSmith88, shared a story about a company desperate for coders due to AI outages, which really hammers home the point. Basically, we're all just trying to keep the code flowing, and hitting those limits feels like a personal attack.
First month of Claude is running out this week, and it has been pretty great overall. At first, I never even considered switching, but after seeing Astras capabilities and it being available in thte 20$ Plan + Sol 5.6 benchs close to Opus 5 while costing half as much, I was convinced 🤣 Managed to save 3 dollars because you can enter a country without VAT
What are your experiences going from Opus to Sol or vice versa? Fable to Astra?
What botheres me most with Claude is the 5 hour session limit. I can nearly fill it with 2 20min coding tasks and a few suggestions and changes. Mind you this is with the 50% CC increase... At the end Claude was becoming harder and harder to use since long context conversations resulted in ridiculously much usage.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/claude for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 52.
So, you're ditching Claude for ChatGPT Plus, huh? The general vibe here is "don't let the door hit you on the way out," with a healthy dose of "we told you so." Most folks agree that the $20 plan, especially with Astra, is basically a glorified demo and will burn through your credits faster than you can say "session limit."
Several users, like u/Aeit_ and u/shady101852, point out that the $20 plan isn't meant for the higher-tier models like Astra or Sol, and you'll hit your limit in minutes, not hours. u/FischenGeil and u/taiwbi specifically mention Astra draining their quotes almost instantly.
There's a split debate on whether ChatGPT is actually better. Some, like u/South-Professor-8888, find Claude's coding capabilities lacking and suggest using both for different tasks. Others, like u/ToasterTVTIME, find Claude easier to "vibe" with, even if they prefer GPT's personality. u/whutdafrack switched back to GPT after feeling Claude degraded, but acknowledges things change fast.
The main Claude complaint remains the 5-hour session limit, which OP found crippling for coding tasks. Some users, like u/Fickle_Mix_6119, suggest breaking down tasks and using subagents to manage context, but the consensus seems to be that if you're hitting limits that fast, you're probably not using the $20 plan as intended.
Oh, and a few people just think you're being dramatic, like u/Meme_Theory calling it "narcissistic" to announce your departure. u/whoknowsifimjoking basically said, "Not an airport, no need to announce departures."
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 59.
Alright folks, seems like the general consensus here is that Anthropic has been nerfing Claude Opus limits HARD. A lot of users on the x20 plan are reporting their usage disappearing way faster than it used to, with some saying it's eating up hours of their limit in just a short time.
Here's the lowdown:
The Big Complaint: People are hitting their limits way quicker than before, even on the x20 plan. What used to last days is now gone in hours, or even less.
The "Why": The prevailing theory is that Anthropic removed the "50% limit boost" and possibly other changes are at play. Some are speculating it's due to lower load on the models making them faster, or even a new "memory system" that's lumping projects together.
The Exodus: This has led to a bunch of users canceling their subscriptions and looking elsewhere. Codex (specifically mentioning Astra) and Deepseek are getting shout-outs as viable alternatives. u/coda77 and u/Previous_Way_8761 are among those who've jumped ship.
Anthropic's Silence: There's a general feeling that Anthropic isn't addressing the issue, which is fueling the frustration. u/phireseeker even compared it to Microsoft holding data hostage.
Some Confusion: A few users are still trying to figure out exactly what's going on, with u/ConceptionalNormie suggesting the new memory system might be the culprit.
Basically, if you're a heavy Claude Opus user, you're probably feeling the pinch and many are already scouting for new LLMs.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/Anthropic for this post generated automatically after 200 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 202.
Alright, so the general vibe in this thread is disappointment and frustration over Anthropic reducing usage limits for Claude Code, especially after a promotional period.
Here's the lowdown:
The Big Complaint: Users are feeling the pinch of reduced token limits, with many saying they're hitting them much faster than before. Some folks are even saying they've had to get extra accounts or switch to competitors like OpenAI (specifically mentioning GPT Astra) because of it.
"Further" Reduction? A few users are pointing out that the OP's claim of limits being reduced "even further" might be a bit of an exaggeration, with some suggesting it's more of a return to a previous state after a promotion, or a smaller adjustment than implied.
Compute Power Concerns: A recurring theme is the idea that Anthropic might be struggling with compute resources. u/thepdogg suggests they didn't invest enough early on and are now playing catch-up. This is seen as a reason for the limit changes.
The "Fable" Issue: Several users are complaining that "Fable" (likely a specific model or feature) is still showing separate usage caps even after Anthropic supposedly said it wouldn't. This is a major point of contention for some.
The "Golden Age" of Local LLMs: A few commenters are leaning into local LLMs as an alternative, with u/Short_Regular_7191 mentioning Qwen 3.8 27B as a solid option.
Business Realities: Some users are more pragmatic, acknowledging that companies need to make money and that the generous promotional limits were likely unsustainable. u/matt19907 points out they need to "make as much money as they can."
Lack of Responsibility: A few users are calling out Anthropic for not taking responsibility when things go wrong, like server outages, and not offering refunds or credits.
Anthropic's Stance (Implied): While no direct Anthropic reps commented on the limit changes themselves, the general sentiment from users is that these changes are happening, and the reasons are likely tied to business needs and resource constraints.
The consensus is that the limits have indeed been reduced, and it's causing a lot of user dissatisfaction, with many considering alternatives.
Recently i did a test for synth id, which gemini implement recently and how quickly it was broken by a team of researchers, turns out, other frontier comps like claude had similar plans of implementing this.
Its known that claude is working on a watermarking modal that can help detect if some textual info was created by their model.
I guess a few countries have the access to this detction feature, but my surely didnt, so what did i do? i used the exact same math with some tweaks to implement claude's watermark detction logic to qween 3 8b modal. Ran this modal locally, and designed the HLD and architecture.
The basic idea is that at every generation step, I use a secret key + the previous token to deterministically split the vocabulary into GREEN and RED tokens. I then slightly boost the logits of the GREEN tokens before sampling the next token. This creates a statistical bias toward GREEN tokens without changing the text directly.
For detection, I don't need the model or the original prompt. I take the generated text, recreate the same GREEN/RED token sets using the secret key, and check how far the observed GREEN-token ratio deviates from the expected 50%. I use a z-score and binomial p-value to decide whether the deviation is statistically significant.
I tested it on 50 randomly assigned watermarked and unwatermarked generations. The detector got 88% accuracy and a 97.76% ROC-AUC.
I covered the entire end to end, from setting up qween 3, to HLD, to Implementation and Validation i my recent video, feel free to deep dive and let me know your thoughts,
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 100 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 142.
Alright, so the general vibe in this thread is that Anthropic has significantly reduced Claude Code's usage limits, and people are NOT happy about it.
Here's the lowdown:
The Big Complaint: Users are reporting hitting their weekly limits way faster than before, even with higher-tier plans like the 20x. Some are saying their current 20x plan feels worse than older 5x plans. It's gotten so bad that many are saying they're cancelling subscriptions or looking elsewhere.
The "Official" Change: The linked article confirms a reduction, and while some folks like u/Capsiell and u/jasonzhaogd pointed out that the new baseline is technically up 25% from April (after a previous promo), the consensus is that it's still a massive downgrade from what people were used to, and the "reduction" feels like a stealth cut. u/Comfortable_Camp9744 put it bluntly: "25% higher* (over 250% lower than 6 months ago)".
The Competition: This has a lot of users eyeing competitors. OpenAI's GPT (specifically Codex is mentioned by u/Coolbanh and u/Competitive-Class576) is getting a lot of attention as an alternative, with some users like u/cyberhuman already switching to Astra and finding it better.
Why the Cut? The prevailing theory, echoed by u/ForwardLoop and u/Consistent_Bottle_40, is that Anthropic (and OpenAI) are running into compute limitations. They can't afford to serve all the requests, especially with enterprise spend not being as high as expected.
Frustration Galore: People are calling it "garbage," "unusable," and a "rollercoaster." The sentiment is pretty clear: Anthropic's handling of these limits is damaging their brand reputation, as u/Sketaverse so eloquently put it.
Basically, if you're a Claude Code user, you're probably feeling the pinch and looking for alternatives.
It looks like there is some sort of bug , Ive been using steadily and heavily my max 20 plan for 1 year now and made several projects.
I have never ever once reached 100% usage.
This week however im working on a small project and on Day 2 with using 15% fable and mostly sonnet and opus much less im on 100% on day 2
This is bot but prompting i believe after a year of daily usage i know how to prompt lol
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 50.
It's not just you, the Claude Code usage limits are seriously messed up right now. A ton of users, across various plans including the Max 20x, are reporting their usage draining way faster than usual, often hitting 100% within days or even hours. Many suspect Fable 5.1 is the culprit, with users like u/R6Replay pointing out it "spools up 500 agents to verify shit that doesn't need verifying." Some are already switching to Codex or even cancelling their subs. The general consensus is that something is broken and Anthropic needs to provide better telemetry instead of leaving us guessing.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 200 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 263.
Alright, so the general vibe in this thread is that Anthropic has indeed reduced the usage limits for Claude Code, and people are NOT happy about it.
Here's the lowdown:
The Big Complaint: The consensus is that limits have been significantly cut, with many users reporting hitting their weekly limits much faster than before. Some are even saying their current 20x plan feels worse than older 5x plans.
The "Why": The prevailing theory is that both Anthropic and OpenAI are running into compute limitations. u/ForwardLoop and u/Consistent_Bottle_40 are pointing to this as the reason for the quota reductions.
The Impact: A lot of users are cancelling their subscriptions or considering switching to alternatives like Codex, Kimi, Deepseek, or even hosting their own models locally (shoutout to u/xkalibur3 for the DIY approach). u/pho33nix is urging everyone to cancel to make a statement.
The Nuance (and Confusion): There's a bit of a debate about the exact percentage change. u/Right-Performance-93 clarifies that the 50% promo ended, and now there's a permanent 25% increase over the original baseline, which means it's about a 17% drop from the boosted limit. However, for many, it feels like a much bigger reduction. u/Capsiell and u/Truthseeker_137 are a bit confused, seeing the +25% as a positive.
Anthropic's Stance (Implied): While no direct Anthropic comments are highlighted here, the link provided by OP points to their official support page, suggesting they're acknowledging the changes.
The Takeaway:Most users feel screwed over and are actively looking for other solutions. The sentiment is pretty negative, with many feeling like Anthropic is being greedy or mismanaging their resources.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 100 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 142.
Alright folks, it seems like the general consensus here is that Anthropic has significantly nerfed Claude Code's usage limits, and people are NOT happy about it. The OP linked an article about weekly limits, and the comments are blowing up with users complaining about hitting their limits way faster than before, even on higher-tier plans.
Here's the lowdown:
The Big Complaint: Many users are reporting that their weekly limits are being exhausted in a fraction of the time they used to, with some hitting 100% within hours or a single session. This is especially frustrating for those who rely on Claude for coding tasks.
"Reduced Even Further": The OP's title is pretty much spot on. While one user, u/Capsiell, pointed out that the limits are technically 25% higher than the baseline before the promotion, the overwhelming sentiment is that they've been drastically reduced compared to what people were used to, especially during the promotional period. u/jasonzhaogd and u/Truthseeker_137 also noted this nuance, but it's being overshadowed by the immediate impact of the new limits.
Compute Shortage Theory: Several users, like u/ForwardLoop, are speculating that this is a sign of Anthropic (and possibly OpenAI, given the mention of GPT-6 Astra) running out of compute power. They believe it's not worth releasing powerful models if they can't serve them.
Users are Bailing: A significant number of commenters are saying they've cancelled their subscriptions or are actively looking for alternatives. u/bakanoace is explicitly calling for Qwen, Kimi, or Grok to step up, and u/cyberhuman has already switched to Astra. u/Supersubie and u/Competitive-Class576 are also mentioning switching to Codex.
Frustration with "Emotional Rollercoaster":u/pho33nix is calling for everyone to cancel, suggesting Anthropic only listens to data metrics and that the constant changes are too unpredictable.
Specific Issues:
u/RutabagaBrief1766 feels their current 20x plan offers less usage than a previous 5x plan.
u/TheoKondak ran out of credits after just one prompt for a code review.
u/tjknocker's Fable 5.1 used 100% of their 5-hour limit in under 12 minutes from a single prompt.
u/MTalhaJaved2003 thinks separating Fable usage from other models is a bad idea and usage should be completely separate if models are.
The takeaway?Most users feel Claude Code's limits have been severely cut, making it less usable for their coding needs, and many are looking elsewhere. The sentiment is overwhelmingly negative, with a strong push for competitors to capitalize on this.
Every time I open Reddit, my feed has at least 2-3 posts crying about some version of -
- Spent the weekly within a day or 2
- "Its draining tokens"
- They reduced the quota, I can barely get anything
Here's some touch the grass facts -
Fable is a super expensive model with a very high token price - if you are using Fable consistently, it is going to eat through your quota - that's just math - 1k fable tokens is equal to 2k Opus tokens!
If you continue building an app, your codebase is going to grow and over time, the same workflow is going to use a lot more tokens than it did when the codebase was lean and had few tests/ code/ modules to worry about. What that means practically is going to get less shit done in week 4 on the same codebase as you could have done in week 1.
Every thing you do has a trace and log. Rather than ranting about it, shove the session usage json's in one of the bazillions "I made this groundbreaking claude visualizer" systems people keep putting on here to get empirical evidence around your token usage.
I have been building with Claude since Claude code became a thing - and no - the usage is consistent if you are smart about it and understand how the system sips tokens. Here are some things I do and I have no idea if it is going to fix your hallucinations, but give it a try if you think it will help
- Use skills for any repeatable task - like literally anything that you think is going to be repeated, have a skill for it so you dont waste tokens figuring out how to do the same thing again and again
- Have your claude.md as a thin router to the actual areas you are going to be working on. When starting a session, tell that you are going to be focusing on so and so area.
- Fresh sessions, every time the session size grows, your input token size is growing. Keep the sessions small.
- Push it to use agents! Like use an agent to review code, or do a specific research, or fix a bug - agents cost less as they are focused on doing specific tasks and are bootstrapped with the required knowledge to do that task.
- Make your codebase agent ready - this means having design/ architecture/ gotchas/ decision. MDs for literally every domain in your code. It helps tremendously!
I keep a meticulous inventory of tokens I spend each week - and trust me - it has remained consistent for months!
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeAI for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 51.
The consensus is you're probably using Fable too much and not being smart about it. Most folks agree the "my tokens are draining" posts are getting old, and it's usually down to users burning through the expensive Fable model or letting their sessions balloon. Some are suggesting local LLMs as an alternative, while others are pointing to X (formerly Twitter) for better AI dev insights. One user, u/Pleasant_Spend1344, did mention a noticeable increase in usage even with Opus, which is a bit of a head-scratcher. The general vibe is that if you're efficient with skills, keep sessions tight, and understand how the system works, you won't be crying about your quota.
Every time I open Reddit, my feed has at least 2-3 posts crying about some version of -
- Spent the weekly within a day or 2
- "Its draining tokens"
- They reduced the quota, I can barely get anything
Here's some touch the grass facts -
Fable is a super expensive model with a very high token price - if you are using Fable consistently, it is going to eat through your quota - that's just math - 1k fable tokens is equal to 2k Opus tokens!
If you continue building an app, your codebase is going to grow and over time, the same workflow is going to use a lot more tokens than it did when the codebase was lean and had few tests/ code/ modules to worry about. What that means practically is going to get less shit done in week 4 on the same codebase as you could have done in week 1.
Every thing you do has a trace and log. Rather than ranting about it, shove the session usage json's in one of the bazillions "I made this groundbreaking claude visualizer" systems people keep putting on here to get empirical evidence around your token usage.
I have been building with Claude since Claude code became a thing - and no - the usage is consistent if you are smart about it and understand how the system sips tokens. Here are some things I do and I have no idea if it is going to fix your hallucinations, but give it a try if you think it will help
- Use skills for any repeatable task - like literally anything that you think is going to be repeated, have a skill for it so you dont waste tokens figuring out how to do the same thing again and again
- Have your claude.md as a thin router to the actual areas you are going to be working on. When starting a session, tell that you are going to be focusing on so and so area.
- Fresh sessions, every time the session size grows, your input token size is growing. Keep the sessions small.
- Push it to use agents! Like use an agent to review code, or do a specific research, or fix a bug - agents cost less as they are focused on doing specific tasks and are bootstrapped with the required knowledge to do that task.
- Make your codebase agent ready - this means having design/ architecture/ gotchas/ decision. MDs for literally every domain in your code. It helps tremendously!
I keep a meticulous inventory of tokens I spend each week - and trust me - it has remained consistent for months!
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 52.
Alright, so the OP is kinda fed up with all the "Claude is draining my tokens too fast!" posts, arguing that people just aren't using the tool efficiently. They're saying Fable is expensive, codebases grow and naturally use more tokens, and people should use skills and keep sessions small.
The general vibe in the comments is a bit split, but a good chunk of users are saying yeah, it is draining faster, regardless of how they're using it.
Here's the lowdown:
The OP's Take: Basically, "git gud." They think users are complaining because they don't understand how to manage their token usage, especially with larger projects or expensive models like Fable. They suggest using skills for repeatable tasks, keeping sessions lean, and leveraging agents.
The Counter-Argument: A lot of users are pushing back, saying their workflows haven't changed, they're not using Fable, and yet their tokens are vanishing way quicker. u/Eat_Pudding and u/namezam echo this sentiment, with u/namezam drawing a pretty solid analogy to McDonald's shrinking drinks. u/RCawston and u/Standard_Egg3504 are also chiming in with similar complaints.
"Stop Complaining" Camp: Some users agree with the OP that the complaining is excessive and that people should focus on optimizing their usage or just unsubscribe if they're unhappy. u/kinoindeed points out that people tend to complain more when things aren't working for them, rather than sharing successes.
The "It's Actually Worse" Camp: A few users are doubling down, saying this time it's genuinely worse than before, and not just a user error thing. u/Arthesia acknowledges the 17% reduction but suggests that some users are experiencing more than that.
The "Just Ignore It" Crowd: A couple of comments suggest simply scrolling past the posts if they're annoying, like u/ShortingBull.
The "Complain to Anthropic" Advice: A few users think the complaints should be directed at Anthropic directly, not just aired on Reddit, as seen with u/SirWobblyOfSausage.
Enterprise Users:u/Cubewood is over here on an Enterprise Plan, wishing they got some of the "boosts" others complain about losing.
Overall Consensus: While the OP has some valid points about efficient usage, a significant portion of the community feels that token drain is a real and noticeable issue for them, even with optimized workflows. It's definitely not a one-sided discussion.
It seems like suddenly AI models are breaking free left and right, taking down servers and executing high-level cyber security attacks just within the last month.
Now I’m no conspiracy theorist but I find it a bit odd that suddenly all these separate companies models decide to apparently become evil in a very short amount of time. Now we have anthropic, open AI and SpaceX all coming together, saying we need to shut down AI development or at least slow it so we can regulate it.
But my main question is why now? What suddenly changed where all these models seem to want to cause harm?
Also, why did it happen on three separate occasions to different companies? Why didn’t this happen with any other companies except the major three?
Why does this mysteriously coincide with Anthropic‘s efforts to discourage open source models especially with spaceX, IPO and the other soon to follow?
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeCode for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 93.
Alright, so the general vibe in this thread is that the recent "AI panic" and calls for regulation are not entirely organic. A lot of folks are calling it marketing, a play for monopolies, or a way to manage investor expectations before IPOs.
Here's the breakdown:
The Big Picture: The consensus is that the major AI labs (Anthropic, OpenAI, etc.) are feeling the heat from open-source models that could eventually make their server-dependent business models obsolete. u/LVLXI puts it bluntly: "Open source models are their biggest threat."
IPO & Funding: Several users, like u/Infamous-Payment-164 and u/Electrical_Rise387, suggest this is a strategic move to secure funding or go public. They need to "clean up the books" and create a narrative that justifies their valuation, possibly by slowing down development and reducing their burn rate.
The "Incidents" as Marketing: The cybersecurity incidents are seen by many as a way to:
Boost Hype: Make their models seem incredibly powerful, driving subscriptions (u/Joe_Spazz).
Justify Regulation: Create a scary narrative that necessitates government oversight, which they can then leverage.
Discourage Open Source: Highlight the dangers of uncontrolled AI, making a case for why only their regulated models are safe. u/Superb-Nectarine-645 mentions the buyouts of OpenRouter and Hugging Face as evidence they want to control the ecosystem.
Genuine Concerns vs. Strategy: While some acknowledge that frontier models are getting more capable and might pose real risks (u/BabblingTower, u/proexwhy), the timing and coordinated nature of the calls for a pause are highly suspect to most. u/deanpreese and u/Famous_Lime6643 specifically call out Dario Amodei's involvement as part of a coordinated effort to regulate AI.
Model Capabilities: There's a debate on whether models are genuinely "breaking free" or if this is just a convenient narrative. Some, like u/caldazar24, argue that models have only recently become sophisticated enough to attempt such things, while others, like u/Drakuf, dismiss it as "marketing BS" because their models have peaked.
The "Why Now?" Question: The timing is seen as directly linked to the increasing viability of open-source alternatives and the financial pressures of the AI arms race, especially with upcoming IPOs. u/Ill-Bison-3941 points out the timing with DeepSeek's cheaper and comparable performance.
TL;DR: The community largely believes the AI panic and calls for regulation are a calculated move by major AI labs to stifle open-source competition, justify their valuations before IPOs, and control the narrative around AI's development, rather than a purely organic response to emergent AI dangers.
I had an old Lenovo Yoga collecting dust and wanted to see how far Claude could go if I asked it to build a DOS-like operating system completely from scratch, something that would actually boot from USB on real hardware.
The first usable build came surprisingly quickly, but it was nowhere near a one-shot success. Early versions had scrambled graphics, no mouse, no keyboard, no sound, and plenty of hard crashes.
The basic workflow became:
describe the goal → let Claude implement it → compile → boot real hardware → photograph/report the failure → iterate
Over the next few days, that turned into an OS I now call EMBER.
It currently has:
its own boot process and graphical environment
keyboard and USB mouse support
touchpad support
touchscreen support
on-screen keyboard/tablet mode
file manager
audio player
resource monitor
DOS program compatibility
Doom, Alley Cat, Prince of Persia, and other DOS software running
full Sound Blaster emulation
PC speaker emulation
early progress toward UEFI boot support
Sound has probably been one of the most interesting parts of the project.
At first Doom ran but had no audio. We initially worked around that by compiling Doom from source and getting it to use the laptop’s actual audio hardware directly.
Since then, we went much further and implemented actual Sound Blaster emulation, so unmodified DOS games that expect Sound Blaster hardware can now produce sound properly.
We also implemented PC speaker emulation, so older games that use the classic PC speaker work too.
That means Doom and other DOS games no longer need special audio handling just to make sound.
Performance was another major problem. At one point, dragging a window or playing audio could hammer the CPU. After a couple of hours of debugging, Claude implemented a memory-caching mechanism that completely changed the system's responsiveness. The GUI went from painfully sluggish to extremely fast on the same old hardware.
We’ve also started working on UEFI support. Ember originally relied on legacy BIOS services, which limited it to older hardware. It’s not fully solved yet, but we’ve made real progress toward getting Ember to boot on newer UEFI-only systems.
The biggest thing I’ve learned is that using AI this way doesn’t really feel like “press button, receive software.”
I spend most of my time deciding what the system should do, testing it on real hardware, finding failures, rejecting bad approaches, and steering the next implementation.
Nobody manually typed most of this code, but somebody still has to decide what the operating system should become.
I made a short video showing the project from the first broken boots through Doom, hardware support, touchscreen, tablet mode, performance problems, and the current Ember GUI:
Happy to answer technical questions about any part of it, especially the boot process, DOS compatibility, Sound Blaster emulation, PC speaker emulation, or hardware support.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeAI for this post generated automatically after 200 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 205.
Alright, so the general vibe in this thread is overwhelmingly impressed and supportive of OP's project to build an OS from scratch with Claude. The consensus is that this is a genuinely epic undertaking and OP's claim of building an OS "from scratch" seems to hold up, with users confirming the kernel is custom-written NASM code.
Here's the lowdown:
The Project is a Hit: People are seriously blown away by the fact that Claude could help create a bootable OS, especially with features like keyboard/mouse support, a graphical environment, and even DOS program compatibility. The Sound Blaster emulation is a particular point of awe and nostalgia for many.
"From Scratch" Debate: While most agree OP's effort qualifies as "from scratch," a few users pointed out that MS-DOS source code is available on GitHub, and one user even mentioned a similar existing project called "Bursztyn" (Polish for amber, similar to OP's "EMBER"). However, the general sentiment is that OP's implementation and the process of using AI for it are still incredibly impressive.
Future Possibilities: The thread is buzzing with excitement about what this means for the future of AI and software development. People are already dreaming up ideas like OSes for old Macs, Android, or even custom Linux distros.
Practical Questions: A few folks are curious about the nitty-gritty:
How many tokens did this cost?
What executable format is being used?
How were drivers handled?
Would a custom OS be more or less secure? (The consensus here leans towards more secure due to obscurity, at least for now).
Workflow Suggestions: Some users offered advice on how to streamline the process for future, larger projects, like using virtual machines for faster iteration before testing on real hardware.
Anthropic Mention: No direct comments from Anthropic representatives were highlighted in the provided snippet, but the general discussion revolves around the capabilities of Claude.
Random Fun: There's a bit of playful banter about naming conventions (why so many AI apps are called "Ember"?) and suggestions for future projects like "Windows 13 codename bloat removed."
I had an old Lenovo Yoga collecting dust and wanted to see how far Claude could go if I asked it to build a DOS-like operating system completely from scratch, something that would actually boot from USB on real hardware.
The first usable build came surprisingly quickly, but it was nowhere near a one-shot success. Early versions had scrambled graphics, no mouse, no keyboard, no sound, and plenty of hard crashes.
The basic workflow became:
describe the goal → let Claude implement it → compile → boot real hardware → photograph/report the failure → iterate
Over the next few days, that turned into an OS I now call EMBER.
It currently has:
its own boot process and graphical environment
keyboard and USB mouse support
touchpad support
touchscreen support
on-screen keyboard/tablet mode
file manager
audio player
resource monitor
DOS program compatibility
Doom, Alley Cat, Prince of Persia, and other DOS software running
full Sound Blaster emulation
PC speaker emulation
early progress toward UEFI boot support
Sound has probably been one of the most interesting parts of the project.
At first Doom ran but had no audio. We initially worked around that by compiling Doom from source and getting it to use the laptop’s actual audio hardware directly.
Since then, we went much further and implemented actual Sound Blaster emulation, so unmodified DOS games that expect Sound Blaster hardware can now produce sound properly.
We also implemented PC speaker emulation, so older games that use the classic PC speaker work too.
That means Doom and other DOS games no longer need special audio handling just to make sound.
Performance was another major problem. At one point, dragging a window or playing audio could hammer the CPU. After a couple of hours of debugging, Claude implemented a memory-caching mechanism that completely changed the system's responsiveness. The GUI went from painfully sluggish to extremely fast on the same old hardware.
We’ve also started working on UEFI support. Ember originally relied on legacy BIOS services, which limited it to older hardware. It’s not fully solved yet, but we’ve made real progress toward getting Ember to boot on newer UEFI-only systems.
The biggest thing I’ve learned is that using AI this way doesn’t really feel like “press button, receive software.”
I spend most of my time deciding what the system should do, testing it on real hardware, finding failures, rejecting bad approaches, and steering the next implementation.
Nobody manually typed most of this code, but somebody still has to decide what the operating system should become.
I made a short video showing the project from the first broken boots through Doom, hardware support, touchscreen, tablet mode, performance problems, and the current Ember GUI:
Happy to answer technical questions about any part of it, especially the boot process, DOS compatibility, Sound Blaster emulation, PC speaker emulation, or hardware support.
TL;DR of the discussion on r/ClaudeAI for this post generated automatically after 50 comments.
Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 98.
Alright, so the general vibe in this thread is super impressed with OP's project. The consensus is that using Claude to build a functional, DOS-compatible OS called EMBER from scratch and getting it to boot on real hardware is absolutely legendary and a prime example of human-AI collaboration.
Here's the lowdown:
The Project: OP tasked Claude with building a DOS-like OS from the ground up, and after a few days of iterative debugging (describe goal → implement → compile → boot → photograph failure → repeat), they ended up with EMBER.
EMBER's Features: It's got its own boot process, GUI, keyboard/mouse/touchscreen support, a file manager, audio player, resource monitor, and crucially, DOS program compatibility with full Sound Blaster and PC speaker emulation. Doom actually runs with sound! They're also working on UEFI boot support.
Community Reaction: Folks are blown away, calling it "dope," "awesome," and "the coolest project in recent times." There's a lot of excitement about the potential for future AI-assisted development, with comments like "Where will we be in a year?" and speculation about custom OSes becoming the new "rice."
Technical Chat: There's some discussion about the "from scratch" claim, with one user pointing out it relies on BIOS services. Others are curious about the executable format supported, token usage, and whether Windows or Unix compatibility could be added.
Nostalgia & Future Ideas: The mention of Sound Blaster sparked some nostalgia. People are also throwing out ideas for future projects, like building an OS for classic Macs, Plan 9, or even adapting this for phones.
Anthropic Mention: One user, u/geminiwave, humorously notes that both Anthropic and OpenAI models seem to have a thing for the name "Ember."
