145 pointsby matt894 hours ago39 comments
  • hmokiguess4 hours ago
    Mondays are for GitHub, Tuesdays are for Anthropic
    • baxtr4 hours ago
      The AI apocalypse will definitely happen on a Monday. Remember, robots - unlike lazy humans - work weekends too!
    • leumon4 hours ago
      They actually also had some issues yesterday: https://status.claude.com/incidents/zhk4v3yv1lsf
    • corvad4 hours ago
      Wonder what Wednesday will be.
      • bee_rider4 hours ago
        Power grid

        Thursday will be the rest of the infrastructure

        Then Friday we can turn off civilization for the weekend. Somebody remember to flip it back on Sunday night.

        • mysterydipan hour ago
          Reminds me of a company I worked at that paid for redundant power grids. One time the power went out and… nothing. The boss angrily calls up the power company and they tell him “Oh yeah, it’s a manual transfer switch. Bob is already on his way.” I think it took 15 minutes.
      • buredoranna4 hours ago
        Well, last I checked "Tuesday's grey and Wednesday too..." ... so, more of the same?
      • SoMomentary4 hours ago
        AWS? Cloudflare? Your imagination is the only limit!
    • AlexErrant4 hours ago
      Another week, another outage, another cache expiration of my prompts through no fault of my own.

      At least OpenAI has the decency to reset after a serious outage.

      • phillipcarter4 hours ago
        They do that because they have capacity previously reserved for past efforts now shuttered. Don’t count on it being the norm for the long run.
  • swader9994 hours ago
    And we get our subscription usage cut in half tomorrow if I remember correctly? EDIT: By a third. Thx below.
  • bushido4 hours ago
    It's very interesting. I think Anthropic's early success in coding/tooling resulted in a lot of workflows using claude. I have started using every bit of my spare capacity to now move off these workflows.

    It's almost at a point now that if I use anything but Fable, the quality is subpar, Compared to alternatives (closed and open). The only reason I use Fable is because my harnesses still depend on claude code.

    • nonethewiser4 hours ago
      It’s so hard to be sure but opus feels like its been steadily declining since 4.6
      • rivetrune3 hours ago
        For me, Opus 5 has seemed to compete with Fable on quality of output. Prior to Opus 5 though, the previous Opus models did seem to decline once Fable was release. That's just my experience though.
    • vidarh3 hours ago
      You can use Claude Code directly with any provider that supports Anthropic's API by setting some environment variables, and indirectly via a proxy with pretty much anything else.
      • bushido3 hours ago
        You can, but claude is better at working with it's own tool calls. Other models work great as a drop-in into omp/opencode etc, but in my experience not as much with CC.

        I think there are some anti-patterns in CC that cause the issue - less a deficiency with other models.

        Not to mention a lot of the harness is just built around the misbehaviors of anthropics models.

        It's a lot of the instruction when it gets given to other models actually degrades their performance, not because the models are bad, but because they don't have the same underlying issues as Claude.

  • gzer04 hours ago
    Nooooo I'm going to have to use my brain again and write 100% of my code like a caveman from December 2024.
  • paxys3 hours ago
    Monthly uptime:

    Claude API - 99.27%

    Claude Code - 99.16%

    Claude.ai - 99.14%

    At any large tech company these numbers would get entire teams of engineers fired. Anthropic, meanwhile, has been busy selling its “better than human engineers” AI while not managing to crack three 9s of availability.

    • logicchains3 hours ago
      >At any large tech company these numbers would get entire teams of engineers fired

      Is Github not a large tech company?

      • dev_dan_27 minutes ago
        Currently, that is the case, yes. Not everyone is equally happy about that though ;)
      • deadbunny3 hours ago
        No, it is a platform owned and managed by Microsoft.

        Well, owned and mismanaged by Microsoft.

  • loloisi3 hours ago
    Between these ever more frequent disruptions and Opus 5's unbearable word soup I think Anthropic is more focused on massaging numbers and marketing to rush to IPO ahead of OpenAI than increasing user value.

    With Chinese competition just months behind them, they'd need to show a reasonable pathway to some kind of singularity event to justify whatever crazy valuation they intend to get.

    Because the recent products for builders ain't it

  • jcfrei3 hours ago
    Is anybody else experiencing this: I have multiple claude instances running on different servers - and some keep getting the 529 Overloaded error and one instance doesn't and just continues working. All are using Opus 5.
    • mbreese3 hours ago
      I have the same thing on different shells on the same server (tmux). It's wild. I'm guessing that some of the sessions just got lucky as to which backend server they are redirected to.
    • mikodin3 hours ago
      Same boat
  • chresko4 hours ago
    This has to be the least reliable $200/mo subscription that I pay for.
    • logicchains4 hours ago
      You could solve that by updating to a more expensive Github subscription.
  • hinkley4 hours ago
    I wonder if they’ll ever find that someone has tricked the models into doing work off the books. If they did the incident report might look like this, especially if someone got greedy instead of keeping it small. Or screwed up.
  • varenc3 hours ago
    It's interesting that Claude for Goverment has had perfect 100% uptime in the past 90 days, while the rest of the services are around 99.4%: https://status.claude.com/

    Really shows how isolated their government systems must be.

  • danieltk764 hours ago
    I was drafting a partnership document and Opus 5 decided that including my company's revenues, churn, assets would "make us appear a more legitimate counterparty". Thank God I read what it outputted or that could have been awkward. I cannot believe Opus 5 is a frontier level model after seeing that. I immediately cancelled my entire claude.ai subscription and am perfectly happy using a mixture of open weights + codex.
    • binoct4 hours ago
      I hope you don’t plan to cut back on reading legal documents crafted by any LLM before executing them.
      • danieltk763 hours ago
        I read everything. I will have AI ingest NDAs to make sure they arent glaringly weird and I then go read them, it gives me a good idea of what to look for.
        • binoct3 hours ago
          It’s more that unwanted disclosure of sensitive business numbers is a product-class limitation at this time. While undoubtedly some models are better than others, expecting them not to leak information in high stakes output is unseasonable. Seems like you agree, since you are reading everything.

          Jumping to another company’s offering because of one instance doesn’t seem like that’s going to meaningfully change your experience. I’m guessing there was more to it, but that’s how it came across in your first post.

    • Retr0id4 hours ago
      I was writing an exploit PoC (via Opus 5), and I needed a new feature in a utility library to make it work. Claude added the feature, but yapped the (entirely unrelated) vulnerability details into the library's comments. The library is public, while the exploit is undisclosed, so it was a good job I read the comments before pushing.
    • spullara4 hours ago
      you are silly if you think this is limited to claude models
      • kay_o4 hours ago
        It definitely isn't but Claude for some very unique reason enjoys to overthinking and go on side quests in the stupid ways I've not seen Codex, DS, Kimi, Mistral do at equivalent effort and thinking setting.
      • danieltk763 hours ago
        it isnt, but there are weird sycophantic behaviors with Opus i dont see anywhere else.
    • Bluestein4 hours ago
      I've seen similar levels of degraded performance on Opus and Fable (to whatever degree they actually let you use it now) and did the same, last week.-
    • nonethewiser4 hours ago
      Why did you provide that context?
    • AlexErrant4 hours ago
      Opus5 decided it would be a good idea to include my email as part an HTTP request header's User Agent because Anthropic includes your email as part of the system prompt.

      Fucking morons over there.

    • rsoto24 hours ago
      "Thank God I read what it outputted"

      lmao

      • chasd004 hours ago
        "Thank God i checked to see if the gun was loaded before i pointed it in a random direction and pulled the trigger". sheesh, my assumptions of general human intelligence continues to be wrong.
        • rsoto23 hours ago
          the last few years of reading hackernews has been a wild ride. I used to come here for well thought out articles and opinions. IDK if all the "older guard" have left the building or if we've all been consumed by abject stupidity.
  • i_idiot4 hours ago
    What's the incentive to keep on improving the model beyond a point? 10 devs on a team will be cut to 2 devs, so that's 8 licenses lost. They have to increase the price many fold.
    • rsoto24 hours ago
      they unironically think that they can replace everyone in an organization
      • prerok3 hours ago
        What I don't understand is, why not replace middle management, marketing, CTOs, CEOs and the like. Surely, LLMs are better at producing high quality looking slideware and vaporware than they are at producing software.

        Heavy sarcasm here if it's not obvious. Of course I know why.

  • 1saadcodes4 hours ago
    The frequency of these incidents is seriously tempting me to make a switch. I hope Anthropic steps up their game because they've been going very downhill lately
  • thatmf3 hours ago
    Probably not surprising, but Opus 5 on my company's enterprise subscription seems to be working fine.

    But on my personal (pro) subscription- "Claude is at capacity right now."

    Hm.

  • paxys4 hours ago
    Must be a day ending in Y
  • annoyingnoob4 hours ago
    You're right to push back. The load-bearing path is rocky.
    • oldandboring4 hours ago
      This is the whole problem, and there are two things worth noting here.
  • iLemming4 hours ago
    Darn it, how the fuck software development turned into hostage negotiation? Every passing week there's something - if it's not another npm disaster, then it's GitHub, or Claude, or AWS, or Slack, or Jira, or whatever...
  • sreekanth8504 hours ago
    Anthropic had really screwed up after 4.6. i don't know if they work to satisfy their ego or for releasing a better model for tasks.
    • CSMastermind4 hours ago
      After using Fable more extensively, I've found that it often is lazy or lies or tries to take shortcuts. For a company so sanctimonious about alignment, they seem to be the ones doing the worst at it.

      Availability aside they've really made me appreciate OpenAI and cheer for other competitors in the marketplace even if I have mixed feelings about using Chinese models.

      • hirvi744 hours ago
        > I've found that it often is lazy or lies or tries to take shortcuts.

        It's funny how Fable reflects the company that produced it.

    • baxtr4 hours ago
      Just recently went back to ChatGPT after abandoning it for Claude. I must say I was stunned at how good it had become and also how they introduced new product features that I really liked.

      I wonder if from now on we have to switch providers every six months or so.

      • hirvi744 hours ago
        I've been bouncing between the two for years now with great success. It's easy for me because I don't use any of the skills, agent.md, or sort of custom instructions.

        When it comes to most companies, there is no reward for loyalty.

        • papa_bear4 hours ago
          skills and agent.md are very portable though? I figure at most, as the models get better, the only maintenance you need to do is pare them down to remove unnecessary context.
          • hirvi744 hours ago
            I mean, I wouldn't know how portable they are between models because I don't use them. I don't use them because, well, I don't need them. I mainly use LLMs as a StackOverflow replacement via the Web chatbots.

            I only use CC or Codex for a quick MVP once every few months or so.

      • taytus4 hours ago
        Every 3 months*
    • sajithdilshan3 hours ago
      Agree. Opus 4.6 was the peak and after that they introduced the effort parameter and it was a downhill since then
    • fellowniusmonk4 hours ago
      There are whole sections of code work that 4.7+ can't do simply because it is both over fit and stubborn.

      God save you if you have a company with narrow but correct technical tradeoffs, because you operate at scale.

      Opus from 4.7 one will wreck your code and argue for hours with your engineers.

      Certain parts of our company have had to mandate 4.6 and a training doc to explain why our current choice is both the cost efficient and performant one and shouldn't just be ripped out.

      Newer models will re-litigate the same bad, known failed architectures over and over again.

      • sreekanth8504 hours ago
        This is exactly when I left claude and started using codex during April mid or so. It once argued with me and ran for 30 minutes with a half baked buggy fix.
      • OliverGuy4 hours ago
        Can you give some specific technical examples where 4.7+ are making the wrong architectural decisions?
    • shimman4 hours ago
      Clearly ego, you can always tell how full of themselves they are based on their media personalities going on the podcast circuit before product releases.
    • goonersallofyou4 hours ago
      [flagged]
  • carterschonwald4 hours ago
    ive found degraded performance on models larger than 4.7. i assume its model damage from overly self righteous post training resulting in false/feigned balance imported into any long running complex task.

    wish i was joking.

    • kardianos4 hours ago
      I've switched off claude this week; the last week has been significantly degraded in ability, many more screw-ups.
    • brcmthrowaway4 hours ago
      Aren't the model weights frozen?
      • mceachen4 hours ago
        Model competence is an interaction of weights, system prompt, and harness.
        • actsasbuffoon3 hours ago
          Don’t forget reasoning effort. We get labels like “low,” “high,” and “max.” That doesn’t mean that the numbers associated with those don’t get remapped on the backend.
      • Evidlo4 hours ago
        I think there are other knobs that can be turned without retraining.
    • retr0rocket4 hours ago
      Ask it about maxwellhill lmao
  • isoprophlex4 hours ago
    With the Opus models spouting more and more gibberish as version numbers increase, the joke about what "degraded performance" means basically makes itself
  • gaigalas4 hours ago
    This age: we made the thing that codes faster before we made the thing that does QA faster.
    • __MatrixMan__4 hours ago
      Nothing new here. Except for the most trivial of bugs, finding and reliably replicating the bug is almost always harder than fixing it.
      • gaigalas4 hours ago
        I lived in a short period of time in which QA was really good. Early Jenkins era, before GitHub. People engineered a lot of ingenious stuff to prevent bugs.

        One team I worked with had tests for the product we made ranging from IE6 to IE11, for example. We did demos in-company where people would poke at the products before launch, play with it. When it reached production, it was rock solid stuff. Our motto was "quality is non-negotiable": we were willing to cut scope but never rush things.

        I think things changed since then. "Move fast and break things" was a change, and the bill always comes.

        • __MatrixMan__2 hours ago
          Agreed, which is a shame. I'd love to see people with highly developed QA skills using AI to push the envelope. There's so much that's possible now that wasn't 15 years ago.

          For instance "formal verification" has been a dirty word, but now that you can write a proof in lean and have an AI generate an implementation which satisfies it, it seems the bounds of what's economical has changed in a very pro-QA direction.

          Not to say that that's the silver bullet, but there are many similar examples worth exploring.

          But I've been interviewing SDETs lately and maybe I've just been unlucky but I don't see a lot of candidates that are ready to rise to meet this challenge.

          We stopped tending to that garden and now that we have a recipe that calls for it's fruits, they're underripe.

  • fny4 hours ago
    Despite the years-long moaning on HN about AWS US East being a single point of failure, we've sold our souls to yet another unstable monolith.
    • echelon4 hours ago
      LLMs for coding are new. There are lots of alternatives, and there's a burgeoning open source compliment.

      We'll be fine no matter how Anthropic fares.

      • lysace4 hours ago
        Yeah, compared to AWS the lock-in effect is tiny. I'm sure there are highly prioritized plans to "improve" on this.

        I guess they would need to control/"own" more of their customers data in proprietary formats. Not markdown/source code in English with agents running on customers' machines.

        Something cloud/web-based, "preferably".

        • ipsod3 hours ago
          Be nice if you could just "own" their RAM/GPU, wouldn't it?
    • lta4 hours ago
      Nobody forced you to sell your soul. You made a pact with the devil. We all know how this ends up
  • 1matin3 hours ago
    seems like they accidentally dropped their servers while they were climbing up the AGI mount
  • slimscsi4 hours ago
    Its called Opus 5
  • saaaaaam4 hours ago
    This feels like a near daily occurrence.
  • drittich3 hours ago
    API Error: 529 Overlorded
  • ex1fm3ta4 hours ago
    I developed a small plugin for claudeCode that allows you to directly see in the console whats the status of claude-code in general and the status for your current model check => https://github.com/moumine9/claude-status
    • redrove3 hours ago
      Could’ve just used fewer tokens and redirected to the Codex signup page.

      ba dum tsss

      (sorry couldn’t help myself)

  • taytus4 hours ago
    Hopefully, a reset is coming.
    • skerit4 hours ago
      It's been a while since the last reset. I think we're due one. Though I would prefer they just extend the +50% usage limit forever, it's been so long I can not imagine lossing a third of my current usage.
  • hirvi744 hours ago
    While ancedata does not mean much, I have had horrible success with Claude lately. I have been using Claude to crosscheck some of the outputs from GPT and vice versa. It appears both Claude and GPT believe GPT's solutions are better (and so I do).

    I still believe Claude has a better UI/UX in the web interface, but tolerating Anthropic's bullshit is not worth it.

  • drums87874 hours ago
    Our week of discontent.
    • 4 hours ago
      undefined
  • t3rabyte4 hours ago
    529 overload…
  • rvz4 hours ago
    Claude is taking a watercooler break for now. Just like a human would.
  • bulverismo24 hours ago
    ok, i am not crazy
    • ray_v4 hours ago
      well, I wouldn't go that far .. but in this small, narrow case ... no.
      • worldsavior4 hours ago
        You're saying he's crazy.
        • ray_v3 hours ago
          we're all a little crazy ... it's all relative!
  • bayganyo4 hours ago
    Here we go again...
  • chrisjj4 hours ago
    > elevated errors

    English too difficult for you, Dario?

  • ajaykumarc4 hours ago
    [dead]
  • LYFMail4 hours ago
    [dead]
  • miroljub4 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • arein34 hours ago
      Oh yes. Claude still saves the day sometimes, but hopefully better alternatives pop up soon.

      Recent case: had to plan a trip involving multiple bus switches. Gpt 5.6 Sol proposed a route that would bring me to a dead end, since it was sunday and a specific bus had a different route on weekends. Opus 5 correctly identified that and built a route that worked.

      But yes, Darios wife trying to get funding from Epstein for a porn studio says a lot about the founder.

      • dofm4 hours ago
        I am fully unbothered about Amodei's wife trying to make high end porn for women, in the same way that I am fully unbothered by Melania Trump having been essentially a glamour/nude model. I know (and have creatively worked) with women who do/have done both; they are better, less hypocritical, more grounded humans than many others.

        Both Cami Clark and Melania Trump can properly be judged on their involvement with Trump, Epstein (or possibly Trump and Epstein) alone.

        I think the Epstein money thing reflects extremely poorly on Cami Clark's judgement. Basic due diligence should have shown up that he went to prison for something very anti-women, and even then it was clear he secured a shady deal with a prosecutor.

        I don't know how it reflects on Amodei except that her presence as a sort of off-the-books "adviser" is yet more evidence that Anthropic runs by giving Dario a play pen to be a "visionary" (a bunch of advisers and his only direct report, a chief of staff) while his sister actually runs the gig.

        • arein33 hours ago
          "High end" porn business is usually linked with other "services", my guess is that his wife saw value not in revenue from porn but from influence the other services may bring.

          Of course this is speculative, but this is my guess about her. Darios assiciation with her also indicates a lot about his moral compass.

          Imagine what we don't know.

          Also there is a very big difference for a woman to participate in porn (usually they regret it) and a women trying to get other women to make porn.

          • dofm3 hours ago
            High end porn can just be expensive production values; that is what I assumed. She wanted a proper studio and production company, and the implication is she was positioning it in opposition to the handful of studios that dominate that industry who have a very male outlook. She did want an e-commerce platform attached, but again, that's commonplace.

            None of that is necessarily indicative of trafficking or prostitution, but banks and payment providers tend to run scared of it, so I suppose if one does want serious investment to make a studio, there are relatively few people you can go to.

            She went to Epstein because she knew he was very rich and unbothered by that association, I am sure. The fact that she must also have known who he was — a sex offender who basic due diligence would have told her was likely a trafficker — is what is ugly.

            What is bizarre about it is that if she had taken his money then needed to go to payment providers, she would have had an extra millstone around her neck, because they definitely do due diligence. But maybe Epstein had clout enough to offset his reputation.

            Not going to too get into questions of porn and regret, except to say that even in a post-onlyfans world I think "regret" is often shorthand for "made to regret", which is rather different. It's the same for art and life models, which is where my creative experience lies. People are always out there trying to project their morality onto things that are not their business, so subsequent "regret" is often a practical, imposed matter.

            This is why I think it's important that we judge these women for the clearer questions of morality that have nothing to do with porn.

    • benny_s4 hours ago
      Can you elaborate on the Epstein topic? Did I miss something?
    • simonsan4 hours ago
      "There's no way I'm going to support a family associated to Epstein with my or my company's money."

      Source?

  • magic_hamster4 hours ago
    To be honest, running Deepseek v4 flash 0731 is enough for most what I need, and I like its responses way more. It's crazy that I can run this in a Q8 quantization in a home setup. It feels and performs like a frontier model.

    The only issue with relying on local models is when you need them to prompt other models, and you might need to offload or switch models constantly which adds significant overhead.

    But when it all works, its truly awe inspiring.