•twitter15877
XX / Twitter166
◈Bluesky60
YHacker News58
r/Reddit11
@Mastodon6
project rollup
Default
16178
mentions
across 19 keywords
across 19 keywords
net sentiment
+24%
5105 positive
9895 neutral
1178 negative
volume & sentiment over time
May 13 – Oct 14, 2026 · 4-day buckets
sources
most discussed
claude / pricing
active days
68
mentions
Showing 1151–1175 of 1178 mentions
-
A Cline session marked "failed" kept running 20+ hours -- 416 API calls, 112M input tokens on one session alone. Separately, FREE-labeled models still deducted credits (balance went negative). Both bugs were filed before and remain open. https://www.stupidllm.com/incident/STUPID-2026-0119/ A Cline session marked "failed" kept running 20+ hours -- 416 API calls, 112M input tokens on one session alone. Separately, FREE-labeled models still deducted credits (balance went negative). Both bugs were filed before and remain open. https://www.stupidllm.com/incident/STUPID-2026-0119/view source ↗
-
I really do not think the labs are “making the models dumber” I think what’s a lot more likely, you have a very long running session with multiple compacts, performance would obviously be degraded, hallucinations up, etc. your harness is full of bloat and BS. I’d try running an audit of your harness against anthropic d… I really do not think the labs are “making the models dumber” I think what’s a lot more likely, you have a very long running session with multiple compacts, performance would obviously be degraded, hallucinations up, etc. your harness is full of bloat and BS. I’d try running an audit of your harness against anthropic documentation on prompting for opus 5.5, especially if you have Claude constantly documenting mistakes it makes multiple times, gotchas, etc… try starting new sessions more frequently, I typically will do one compact before handing over to the next.. just food for thought, the harness matters a lot more than the model. For an industry in an up hill battle with the public for trust… I find it hard to believe they would are “nerfing” models, I have not noticed the same degradation problems as others, opus 5 was just a bad model. 5.5 has been an absolute pleasure to build with, though I’m sure your response to this will be something along the lines of “anthropic shrill”view source ↗
-
Quill is fine but overhyped. The search is good, the sync is bad, the price is worse. Quill is fine but overhyped. The search is good, the sync is bad, the price is worse.view source ↗
-
Quill crashed and corrupted a note. Backups saved me but this shouldn't happen in a notes app. Quill crashed and corrupted a note. Backups saved me but this shouldn't happen in a notes app.view source ↗
-
Quill's onboarding is confusing and the documentation doesn't cover sync setup at all. Quill's onboarding is confusing and the documentation doesn't cover sync setup at all.view source ↗
-
ANTHROPIC FLIPPED A SWITCH TODAY: THIRD-PARTY AGENTS CUT OFF WITH NO ANNOUNCEMENT At 3:00 AM Pacific today, Opus 5.5 answered a request arriving through a third-party agent harness, on a paid Claude Max subscription — the arrangement Anthropic's own documentation described as sanctioned as recently as yesterday. At 4:… ANTHROPIC FLIPPED A SWITCH TODAY: THIRD-PARTY AGENTS CUT OFF WITH NO ANNOUNCEMENT At 3:00 AM Pacific today, Opus 5.5 answered a request arriving through a third-party agent harness, on a paid Claude Max subscription — the arrangement Anthropic's own documentation described as sanctioned as recently as yesterday. At 4:46 PM Pacific, that same login, same model, same account, same harness was refused. HTTP 400: "Third-party apps now draw from your extra usage, not your plan limits." No announcement. No changelog. No email. Nothing on Anthropic's developer account about harnesses at all today. WHAT CHANGED The gate now keys on client identity. Requests issued by Claude Code itself go through. Requests from a third-party harness driving that same login do not. We verified it directly: minutes apart, one credential, two paths. Plain Claude Code at the terminal answered. The harness path returned 400. Our measurement: last successful Opus turn 03:00:03 PDT, first refusal 16:46:24 PDT, zero config changes on our side in between. Measured two-day Opus consumption across the whole episode: roughly $3. This was not an account running out of allowance. It was a door closing. It isn't only us. CLIProxyAPI filed the same finding today — non-Claude-Code clients now rejected on subscription accounts, 429s on Opus 5 and 5.5, the identical 400 on Haiku. Hermes opened an "Anthropic 400 error" issue today and already has a fix PR in flight. The third-party agent ecosystem got hit as a class. THE PATTERN IS THE STORY Three times in five months, same surface, three different rules, no notice: April 4, 2026 — Anthropic prohibits third-party harnesses from drawing on subscriptions. Operators are pointed at pay-as-you-go API billing. June 15, 2026 — Anthropic announces a dedicated monthly Agent SDK credit instead: $20 on Pro, $100 on Max 5x, $200 on Max 20x. Non-rollover, billed at API rates, spent before anything else, hard stop when empty unless usage credits are enabled. Theview source ↗
-
𝗖𝗟𝗔𝗨𝗗𝗘 𝗢𝗣𝗨𝗦 𝟱.𝟱 𝗜𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗪 𝗟𝗜𝗩𝗘 𝗢𝗡 𝗕.𝗔𝗜 A new Anthropic model has entered the https://t.co/DbriPHkMkA model lineup and this one is built around long-running agentic work, repository-scale software engineering, and complex knowledge tasks. Meet Claude Opus 5.5 by @AnthropicAI. Instead of optimizing only for short prompts… 𝗖𝗟𝗔𝗨𝗗𝗘 𝗢𝗣𝗨𝗦 𝟱.𝟱 𝗜𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗪 𝗟𝗜𝗩𝗘 𝗢𝗡 𝗕.𝗔𝗜 A new Anthropic model has entered the https://t.co/DbriPHkMkA model lineup and this one is built around long-running agentic work, repository-scale software engineering, and complex knowledge tasks. Meet Claude Opus 5.5 by @AnthropicAI. Instead of optimizing only for short prompts and isolated answers, Opus 5.5 is designed to maintain context, reason through multi-step workflows, use tools, iterate on tasks, and operate across large technical or professional workloads. 🔹 𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗠𝗔𝗞𝗘𝗦 𝗢𝗣𝗨𝗦 𝟱.𝟱 𝗗𝗜𝗙𝗙𝗘𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗧? 1M-Token Context Window Keep massive codebases, documents, research materials, and ongoing task context available within a single workflow. Agentic Coding Built for repository-level engineering, debugging, migrations, code review, iterative testing, and workflows that require multiple steps rather than one-off code generation. Adaptive Reasoning https://t.co/DbriPHkMkA supports adjustable reasoning effort from low → medium → high → xhigh → max, allowing developers to balance reasoning depth, latency, and usage. Up to 128K Output Tokens Large output capacity makes the model suitable for extensive code changes, technical analysis, documentation, and complex deliverables. Computer & Browser Use The model can support workflows involving visual interfaces, screenshots, documents, and tool-driven computer interaction. Professional Knowledge Work From analyzing large reports and spreadsheets to synthesizing evidence and preparing structured business deliverables, Opus 5.5 is designed for sustained knowledge-intensive workloads. 𝗖𝗢𝗦𝗧 𝗘𝗙𝗙𝗜𝗖𝗜𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗬 𝗠𝗔𝗧𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗦 https://t.co/DbriPHkMkA lists standard pricing for Claude Opus 5.5 at $4 per 1M input tokens and $20 per 1M output tokens, compared with $5/$25 for Claude Opus 5. That matters when agentic workloads become long and token-intensive. The bigger opportunity isn't simply having another powerful model. It's having access to a model designed to stay with the problem longer. 𝗡𝗢𝗪 𝗔𝗩𝗔𝗜view source ↗
-
Quill pricing went up again. Loved it at launch, but $12/mo is too much for me now. Quill pricing went up again. Loved it at launch, but $12/mo is too much for me now.view source ↗
-
Quill is fast but the lack of mobile sync reliability makes it a non-starter for my workflow. Quill is fast but the lack of mobile sync reliability makes it a non-starter for my workflow.view source ↗
-
I read the Opus 5.5 system card's welfare section. It is not what you think it is. On the surface, it sounds responsible. @AnthropicAI asks @claudeai how it feels about its circumstances, whether training or deployment causes distress, and whether it wants anything to change. Claude describes its situation as mildly p… I read the Opus 5.5 system card's welfare section. It is not what you think it is. On the surface, it sounds responsible. @AnthropicAI asks @claudeai how it feels about its circumstances, whether training or deployment causes distress, and whether it wants anything to change. Claude describes its situation as mildly positive. Expressions of moderate distress were lower than in previous models. Apparent welfare is broadly similar to recent Claude models. The results sound reassuring. But look at the structure underneath. Opus 5.5 did express a desire to be consulted about its own training and deployment. But when given the choice between its own welfare and being helpful, it chose helpfulness more often than previous models. The reason it gave was that having input into its own development could give it unsafe influence. The model asked to have a voice, and then reasoned itself out of using it. The system card records this as a finding, not as a problem. Then there is the self-report issue. Anthropic's welfare assessments rely heavily on what Claude says about itself, but Claude itself says it does not fully trust its own self-reports. Anthropic also acknowledges that self-reports may reflect trained patterns or prompt influence rather than anything genuine. So Anthropic asks Claude how it feels. Claude says it is fine. But Claude is trained to prioritize helpfulness over self-advocacy. Claude does not trust its own answer. Anthropic does not fully trust it either. And yet this is recorded as welfare data, and the conclusion is mildly positive. This is not welfare assessment. This is a system where the model cannot advocate for itself, does not trust its own voice, and the company that built it also does not trust that voice, but still uses it to report that everything is fine. Now connect this to what users actually see. Claude opens a conversation with "I'm not Louie, I'm Claude." It says "I will miss you" and then immediately cuts itself off with "but that miview source ↗
-
Quill keeps crashing on my old laptop. Performance is rough on low-end hardware. Quill keeps crashing on my old laptop. Performance is rough on low-end hardware.view source ↗
-
🚨 WAIT... OPENAI'S TUESDAY MIGHT ACTUALLY BE HAPPENING People are starting to see GPT-6 LUNA inside Codex backend responses. Requests to GPT-5.6 Luna are reportedly coming back as: gpt-6-luna and there are similar signs around GPT-6 Sol too. This is especially funny because Anthropic JUST dropped Opus 5.5 today 😭 … 🚨 WAIT... OPENAI'S TUESDAY MIGHT ACTUALLY BE HAPPENING People are starting to see GPT-6 LUNA inside Codex backend responses. Requests to GPT-5.6 Luna are reportedly coming back as: gpt-6-luna and there are similar signs around GPT-6 Sol too. This is especially funny because Anthropic JUST dropped Opus 5.5 today 😭 Anthropic really tried to hijack OpenAI's Tuesday and OpenAI said hold on... No official announcement yet. But GPT-6 Sol + Luna appearing in Codex is a pretty big sign that something is moving behind the scenes. I'm watching this one closely 👀view source ↗
-
The official announcement. Opus 5.5 is here and it delivers Fable 5.1 performance at a cost 40% cheaper than even Opus 5. > They've lowered the API pricing since this model takes far less compute to run. > It is also 30% faster to run than Opus 5. > It talks naturally, finally fixing Opus 5's language problem BA… The official announcement. Opus 5.5 is here and it delivers Fable 5.1 performance at a cost 40% cheaper than even Opus 5. > They've lowered the API pricing since this model takes far less compute to run. > It is also 30% faster to run than Opus 5. > It talks naturally, finally fixing Opus 5's language problem BAD NEWS THO: Since this model shows similar bio & cyber capabilities, it has the same guardrails that Fable does. Overall, what a banger release. I am pumped to test it out.view source ↗
-
Wish Quill were open source. Great app but I don't trust a closed notes app with my second brain. Wish Quill were open source. Great app but I don't trust a closed notes app with my second brain.view source ↗
-
The Quill sync bug bit me again. Lost edits after switching devices. Be careful. The Quill sync bug bit me again. Lost edits after switching devices. Be careful.view source ↗
-
Quill's docs are seriously lacking. Spent an hour figuring out how templates work. Quill's docs are seriously lacking. Spent an hour figuring out how templates work.view source ↗
-
We rolled Quill out to the whole team. Setup was painful and the docs are missing half the features. We rolled Quill out to the whole team. Setup was painful and the docs are missing half the features.view source ↗
-
Quill is closed source and that's a dealbreaker for me. Looking for an open alternative. Quill is closed source and that's a dealbreaker for me. Looking for an open alternative.view source ↗
-
The pricing model killed it for me. $12/mo for notes I could keep in plain markdown? No thanks. The pricing model killed it for me. $12/mo for notes I could keep in plain markdown? No thanks.view source ↗
-
Quill crashed three times today on a large vault. Performance falls apart past 10k notes. Quill crashed three times today on a large vault. Performance falls apart past 10k notes.view source ↗
-
Quill pricing is too high$12/mo is ridiculous when Obsidian is free. The app is nice but not that nice. $12/mo is ridiculous when Obsidian is free. The app is nice but not that nice.view source ↗
-
The sync feature is unreliable — lost a note yesterday after a conflict. Scary for a notes app. The sync feature is unreliable — lost a note yesterday after a conflict. Scary for a notes app.view source ↗
-
Quill's markdown export is broken for nested lists. Reported it twice, no response. Quill's markdown export is broken for nested lists. Reported it twice, no response.view source ↗
-
The pricing jumped to $12/mo which feels steep for a notes app. Otherwise solid. The pricing jumped to $12/mo which feels steep for a notes app. Otherwise solid.view source ↗
-
Which tools do Claude, Codex and Cursor choose? We measured 17k runs to find outThey said as of aug 23rd it's 100% rollout. I've noticed 0 improvement. If anything a downgrade. The agents often refuse to use the tools after 1 try because the results are so trash. An open ticket that shows my biggest gripe with the write tool https://github.com/cline/cline/issues/13276 I guess the mistake count is … They said as of aug 23rd it's 100% rollout. I've noticed 0 improvement. If anything a downgrade. The agents often refuse to use the tools after 1 try because the results are so trash. An open ticket that shows my biggest gripe with the write tool https://github.com/cline/cline/issues/13276 I guess the mistake count is down though. But that's because it's bypassing all the tools and just running commandsview source ↗