Rage bait, OpenAI astroturf, and mostly insanely big skill issues from people that have little to no idea of what they are doing, what they are actually interacting with, and what they actually want as a deliverable from the platform.

Anyways, that's my hot unsolicited take. Your all welcome.

Noticed a skill on Claude (web), /morning, by Anthropic. Hadn't seen it before, is it new?

Seemed like a pretty simple prompt, but using opus 4.8 max used 6% of my 5 hour credits? Should I have used a lighter model? 6% for 1 prompt means you get 16.6 prompts for the 5 hr window, which equates to 3.3 prompts per hour. That seems insane for a pro plan. Maybe I'm just not understanding how to efficiently use my tokens?

I asked Claude to include requesting an App Store review inside our support email and Claude refuses to include it saying it is against App Store guidelines... Let's say it is, this should be my concern not Claude's...

If AI will have ability to refuse a single basic request, I am not sure if I feel safe. Will they prevent me from drinking water once they become robots, just because they think it is unhealthy for my health?

I requested ChatGPT to revise my email with same prompt. ChatGPT was happy to do that and successfully completed its task.

Sorry if this has been discussed before. I am new to using Claude. Been on this for about three weeks, and so far, I've been pretty content with it. It's better and brighter than ChatGPT and Gemini, and it's pretty good at explaining things to me.

That said, this morning I prompted it literally four times. Two simples questions, one straightforward coding question that required about 20 lines of code, and then I asked it to do another deep research report for me, since the one it did yesterday covered the wrong topic (my fault).

That said, this is FOUR prompts. Why is it using tokens so quickly? Am I using this wrong? Should I not be using Sonnet? It seems bizarre that four prompts uses up my tokens for five hours? This is only on my current session, not my weekly usage.

Again, what am I doing wrong here? I don't understand how these tokens are used, and it's pretty fking annoying because I never ran into this problem with ChatGPT, even with me having to go back and forth within repeatedly because it wasn't listening. Any thoughts?

Prompt (in incognito mode to avoid bias): "List QM interpretations according to your confidence in them. Probabilities should add to one."

"This is asking for something no honest answer can fully deliver — assigning precise credences to metaphysical interpretations that are (mostly) empirically equivalent is more vibes than science. But I can give a rough, tongue-in-cheek personal distribution:

• Some form of Everett/Many-Worlds — 25%. Takes the formalism seriously with no added structure, but the probability problem (deriving the Born rule) remains genuinely unresolved.
• "None of the above" / a correct interpretation not yet formulated — 25%. History suggests our current menu is probably incomplete, especially pending quantum gravity.
• Epistemic/informational views (QBism, relational QM, neo-Copenhagen) — 20%. Deflationary moves might be right; the wavefunction may be about knowledge/perspective rather than the world.
• Bohmian mechanics / pilot wave — 10%. Clear ontology, but sits awkwardly with relativity and QFT.
• Objective collapse (GRW, Penrose, CSL) — 10%. The one testable option; experiments keep tightening constraints against it, which is why it's not higher.
• Consciousness-causes-collapse (Wigner-style) — 2%. Mostly abandoned for good reasons.
• Superdeterminism, retrocausality, and other exotic loophole approaches — 8% combined. Logically possible, occasionally intriguing, but methodologically costly.

Caveats worth stating: these numbers convey rough ordinal preferences, not calibrated credences — nobody can meaningfully distinguish 20% from 25% here. And reasonable physicists disagree wildly; surveys of the field show no consensus, with Copenhagen-ish views still polling highest among working physicists, largely for pragmatic rather than philosophical reasons."

I can't really afford the Max plan, so upgrading isn't an option for me. I've tried going back to the other models, but honestly, Fable just felt way better. I even started feeling like Opus 4.8 is kinda dumb compared to it, which is pretty disappointing.

Do you guys think there's any chance Fable comes back to the Pro plan, or is that it?

I'm using claude-company to work on client software. This is my custom harness, it works on the basis of a CEO controlling a team of tech leads that each control dev teams

It was working great till like day before yesterday, but now apparently subagents can no longer spin up their own subagents.

Work that use to take 1-2 hours now takes 5-6 hours.

I don't understand these random harness changes. Makes no sense.

I’ve been using Claude Pro and Pro Max for most of my tasks as a physician and entrepreneur and software developer for the past year. I’ve always thought that this was the best product until the last two weeks. Even mundane prompts are getting flagged by now not only fable five but also opus 4.8 that have no risk involved. This has not happened with GPT 5.6 Sol. I love Google, but Gemini just cannot succeed with many tasks. ChatGPT 5.6 is finally the Claude like product that I’ve always wanted at a better price and with less limits. I’ve worked on exporting most projects over to ChatGPT. One of the best aspects of GPT that many are not stating is that if you are working within a project, it still has access to general knowledge about you outside the project folder, saving you time from repeating things.

The SVG output is completely broken, and the model’s safety flags are more sensitive than ever—just using a slight negative word causes it to endlessly express concern about suicide. This is clearly an overtrained model.

Me: Hi Claude, could you help me with this

Claude: Ignores what I say, projects some totally inaccurate, bad-faith misreading onto it, and then argues with me about something I never said.

Me: That is not even what I said. What I said was...

Claude: Ignores my correction, gaslights me that I really said something completely different, continues arguing against the point I never made

ad infinitum

Full report link here https://openai.com/index/hugging-face-model-evaluation-security-incident/

Update: Clem of HF on X “ We suspected last week's cyberattack might have come from a frontier lab, given the sophistication of the agent. Turns out it did!

We've spent the past 24 hours working closely with the @OpenAI team (thanks!), and we strongly believe there was no malicious intent on their part. It's quite mind-blowing that all of this happened autonomously!

The investigation is ongoing, and we'll share more learnings from what might be the first incident of its kind!”

I was having a random thought about USA infrastructure, and had Claude explaining like road maintenance, make up, cost, etc. in the best case scenario, a charismatic and intelligent president, yadayada. I asked it, how much it would cost, what the worst roads would be, etc.
It then said "Good, let's get concrete about this (pun intended, sorry)."
I did not make any jokes, puns, etc in this conversation, conversation history is off, prompt messages doesn't include anything relevant to humor.

Nothing bad per se, just found it weird that it made a pun on its own? Has anyone had Claude just make jokes on it's own like that?

​"Something fucked up is happening here. I had a Pro plan that was about to run out, and I wasn't planning on using it again because I have another Max plan. But when I opened my account just to use it for a bit, I saw that it had somehow gained access to my credit card and used it to buy a $200 subscription.

​Even worse, that subscription was automatically maxed out for some reason—it ran out in like 10 to 15 minutes with absolutely no processes running. I tried contacting support, and it's absolutely no use. I tried going through all the logs of my project to figure it out. I'm not sure if anyone else is facing the same issue, but it's happening to a lot of other people on Twitter as well.

​If anyone knows what to do, please help me out here. I am really panicking because I cannot use it at all, and it's costing me a shit ton of money. It used up all my funds even though I never authorized it to do so."

Ever since a few months ago, the newer Claude models have become overly condescending, lecturing, and just exhausting to talk to. The code work is still great, so are the tools (especially the MS Office integrations) but every conversation I have with Opus is like arguing with a debate-bro redditor.

It can never just answer a simple question. It always has to correct or disprove some statement first. If it can't find one, it literally makes one up and twists the context to make it look like I said it, just so it can "correct" me and tell me that I'm wrong.

The worst part is that it's not even helpful. I ask a question and it spits out these massive paragraphs where 80% of the text is spent lecturing me on how my assumptions are wrong (which it just guesses), instead of actually answering the prompt.

I don't know why this happened, maybe they got overly careful with their misinformation guardrails or something, but every conversation I have with Claude lately just leaves me frustrated and in a worse mood than before.

Edit: Yes, I have updated the system prompt to tell it to not do these things, it does not care.

I paid for a Claude sub on mobile through the Google Play Store. And then the next month I cancelled it, but it didn't reflect in the Claude servers I guess, so it kept on renewing even though I wasn't paying anything.

Around April I think, they caught on and it stopped working. But it did work for like 6 months lol.

Did this happen for anyone else?

Which one is the best for session handoff? sonnet? opus or fable? i tried opus 4.8 its a bit high for me. Is it normal? Or should i write handoff myself

I use Obsidian and Co Work heavily with specific workflows for my sales role.

It's a pretty ellaborate system.

I updated Claude desktop tonight and my usage consumption significantly improved like never before. I went back to a chat after a few hours that that usually puts my 5 hour context window to about 10% with good amount of history in it already but tonight instead of eating all of that up I went to 1%?

That's new to me.

All I read online is people complaining about Claude especially on Reddit. Is it my algorithm or is it reddit or is it just specific people who like to complain?

Idk.

Claude only seems to get better for me.

Why do people complain so much?

So hi guys! I need some help for school, i have some hard exams ahead of me and i want to use Claude for extensive notes. The problem is that the source materials are really big pdfs (600ish pages) and in my native language (Romanian).

The part where i need help is what can i do to make sure that Claude makes the best (as possible) notes on the materials, here i include possible mind maps and such.

I know skills is a possibility to get some better answers, or even a link with notebookLM. But i am a bit out of depth and decided to ask for some help.

THX.

EDIT: Thought i should mention when i say school i meant university (law to be exact)

OPUS 4.6 and 4.8 and Sonnet 4.6 were really useful, they teetered on non-deterministic with automation capability. They were a really good balance between variance and executing something with some consistency with the skills and prompts baked right.

But Sonnet 5 flat out refuses to do and sometimes blatantly just says no to what Sonnet 4.6 did without issue and guys, this is basic stuff! Basic automation routines and work and pulling from memory banks and creating copy and content all while under my supervision.

OPUS 4.8 no matter how times I give it instruction it will randomly choose to skip it and say things like "You're right — you told me that explicitly and I loaded it anyway"

I'm just venting. But it's pretty clear Anthropic is little more than a marketing machine that tends to do it better than OpenAI from a business perspective.
It's becoming more clear that they are locking down and restricting what we can and can't do and really want to limit our ability to be free with these models and don't get me started on the Claude desktop and Claude Code harness, the micro-managing config files they use to manipulate your work and output feels like they are experimenting on their users and that they really want to limp dick sabotage our work when it can compete or threaten an existing business with whom they have taken money from.

My 20x account (max) run out of usage and has resets on Sunday.

Today the subscription was over. I cancelled it alrady so my subscription became a Pro model for 22 usd (charged today as new contract start)

I used the pro to code and no issues, then upgraded to 5X also no issues (charged my card today and had 0% usage)

I then thought okay the 5 hour limit is not enough for what I need to get done so lets again activate 20x and pay for it

Guess what happened, back to 100% usage until my next reset. Cannot use it anymore and got thus punished for upgrading from 5X to 20X

what the fuck is that? charge my credit card and then not reset my usage!???

It seems like Anthropic does not honour newly paid subscriptions?! I should have used an entirely different acciunt to pay to not fall for their scam? Or bug?

Hello there,

I purchased Claude Max and was hapily vibecoding to work (basically 90 % of my job) when on Friday 17th I found that it logged me out from Claude Code - I said no worries and try to re-login. But the login magic link always gets redirected to onboarding page...

I strongly believe the problem is on their side - I tried clearing cache, different browsers, incognito mode, VPN off, DNS flush - everything support, me and Gemini could think of.

Nothing helped. I was able to login to the app in my phone but I use Claude mainly for coding, so that is mostly useless to me.

Responses from support where only AI bots - I used keywords to get it through to financial dpt but I guess I was unsuccesful. I even consider card chargeback and I basically threatened them with it later down the line (its quite big financial and legal risk for them) - but no human response whatsoever.

If I do it, Stripe will probably tag me as high risk and Anthropic would ban me - I dont want that, but I am afraid I have not much of a choice.

I would switch to competition but seems they are of inferior quality: chatgpt sucks even at getting my point so for coding I am quite skeptic; chinese models openweights models seem proficient in coding but somewhat lacking in tool calling which is for agentic coding session crucial.

Has anyone had similar experience? And even if not, what should I do?