HERMES.md in commit messages causes requests to route to extra usage billing
863 points
3 hours ago
| 69 comments
| github.com
| HN
ecshafer
3 hours ago
[-]
> However, I need to let you know that we are unable to issue compensation for degraded service or *technical errors* that result in incorrect billing routing.

This is very surprising. I've never seen a legitimate business not give refunds for technical errors of their own fault. Minimum Anthropic should credit the full amount to them.

reply
stickfigure
3 hours ago
[-]
The official response feels AI generated. I suspect this is a preview of our future.

"You're totally right! I'm sorry but you're going to have to piss off anyway. Would you like to spend a few more hours discussing it with our AI chatbot? It won't help. But if it makes you feel better, it will probably cost us an extra $0.12 in tokens."

I'll bet the first human at Anthropic learns about this from HN.

reply
jzemeocala
1 hour ago
[-]
"Carl's Jr. has determined you are an unfit mother." "Your children will be taken into the custody of Carl's Jr." "Carl's Jr.....F#ck You, I'm Eating"
reply
SlightlyLeftPad
1 hour ago
[-]
I suddenly have a craving for Brawndo. I hear it has electrolytes.
reply
avree
2 hours ago
[-]
Anthropic doesn't even use their own harnesses for their support chatbots (they're using fin.ai) - that's how little support matters to them. Seems like either you get attention on HN, know someone working there, or are at a large enough company to have an enterprise contact - otherwise, no reply.
reply
Master_Odin
2 hours ago
[-]
They saw how Google providing absolutely terrible customer service for a very long time has done nothing to hurt their bottom line and decided to copy.
reply
ricw
1 hour ago
[-]
Unsure how true that is. Google cloud is tiny compared to aws for a reason.

It matters. People will switch if you piss them off.

reply
strictnein
1 hour ago
[-]
Google's lack of customer service isn't new or limited to GCP. They also don't provide any human help if you're an advertiser with them unless you spend a crazy amount of money. Twenty years ago I used to spend upwards of $20-30k a month with them and I couldn't get a single reply to any inquiry I ever sent.

If you spend $XXX million / year with them on GCP they will, however, assign a person to be your main point of contact.

reply
rrr_oh_man
6 minutes ago
[-]
$100-200k/mo gets you an "Account Strategist" that changes every 3-6 months and whose advice can be summed up by "spend more".
reply
StableAlkyne
1 hour ago
[-]
Personally, I don't use GCP because of their history of getting bored with their products and abandoning them.

It's nice, maybe I would use it for a personal project, but I go out of my way to discourage my engineering teams from using it.

reply
user34283
1 hour ago
[-]
It helps if you have a monopoly on app distribution for half of all phones, or video streaming.

Then you can afford zero support and still take 15-30%.

reply
PunchyHamster
1 hour ago
[-]
Mostly coz of everything else about GCP
reply
smt88
1 hour ago
[-]
Google support is abysmal for all of their profitable businesses too, like Ads and YouTube.
reply
GenerWork
2 hours ago
[-]
This is exactly it. I feel like I see more posts bitching about Anthropic than OpenAI, yet at the same time it seems like nobody moves away from Anthropic. As long as the strategy works, why bother changing it?
reply
itsthejb
2 hours ago
[-]
Tell me about it. As an individual user you absolutely CANNOT get support is some (if not many or all) circumstances. It’s really quite shocking
reply
mothballed
2 hours ago
[-]
We all miss the old days of calling a real Filipino or Dominican slave-center where you got a script loop or suddenly the English runs out whenever it's time to ask for a refund.
reply
bonesss
1 hour ago
[-]
When you mention it, providing superlative front line customer support sounds like a perfect fit for organizations selling “AI” solutions…

Some big tech companies should get right on that. <ahem>

reply
awesome_dude
1 hour ago
[-]
In Google's defence - crappy customer service is a widely accepted business model
reply
yu3zhou4
2 hours ago
[-]
Maybe it’s in order to have an external provider to blame for failures and shift the blame/responsibility?
reply
pdpi
1 hour ago
[-]
A less cynical explanation is that it helps decouple product failures from support failures. Last thing you want is for your customer support to break whenever your product breaks.
reply
lwhi
1 hour ago
[-]
That makes good sense
reply
conception
1 hour ago
[-]
Huh? Why wouldn’t they just spin up the current help-desk darling? (Intercom) Rolling their own seems silly.
reply
stevenally
1 hour ago
[-]
"Rolling their own seems silly".

But isn't AI going to destroy all current software vendors?? Everybody is going to roll their own?? In fact, AIs will handle all support autonomously?? I mean they can spin up their database if needed?? What more do they need?

Hence the SAAS apocalypse...

Oh wait... this sarcasm will get me targeted by the LessWrong AI god when he/she/it becomes omnipotent....

reply
AstroBen
2 hours ago
[-]
A real employee (bcherny) read the issue, responded that the bug was fixed, and then completely ignored the request for a refund.
reply
culi
2 hours ago
[-]
And then you use the smallest, cheapest local model to keep their AI bot busy
reply
bad_haircut72
2 hours ago
[-]
Theres a business there for sure - does a business you hate use AI in any customer facing way? make them burn tokens. I would 100% do this to StubHub after they screwed me over. If anyone from StubHub sees this, one day you will regret your "hang up on people with complaints" policy. People dont forget when they've been screwed by a corporation. Anthropic, this happened to me 12+ months ago and StubHub is still on my shit list, you're making enemies for life with all your current BS

My StubHub story: bought $500 tickets and accidentally bought ones in the dsabled seating section. Called 2 minutes after purchase when I realized - their response "you can relist them on the site". Who else was going to buy them?? Nobody did. Any normal human business would let you correct a basic human mistake like this, not even 10 mins after purchase, but not stubhub. They could have upsold me and I probably would have left happy! At least I could have attended. Cost me $500 but cost them a lifetime of emnity

reply
gblargg
2 hours ago
[-]
I used to buy used things from the Mercari marketplace (similar to eBay), until someone sent the wrong item and I emailed Mercari the same day since their web site wasn't working to open a return request (you have to resolve wrong items within 3 days). Support waited 3 days to respond and told me I was outside the window so they couldn't refund me and that I should have done it sooner. I did a chargeback and they were angry and told me to reverse it. They then banned my household for life.

And then there's PayPal who refused to refund from a clear scam for almost $5K, even after I left a BBB complaint. Credit card chargeback saved the day, again. They didn't ban me, oddly.

I guess this is an endorsement of using a credit card.

reply
jorvi
42 minutes ago
[-]
I have this vs. a TV webshop in The Netherlands that stiffed my parents because their €430 TV broke and the warranty was expiring in a few months.

Anytime anyone in my social circle asks for a TV recommendation, I specifically tell them not to order from that shop, explaining they have a habit of stiffing people on warranties. I also tell those people to tell anyone they know not to order from there. I do the same whenever TVs in general or that webshop comes up on Tweakers, the biggest Dutch tech site.

I've been at it for quite some years, and roughly estimating it's costing them ±20 TV sales a year, averaged €650 per TV. That's €13.000 in lost sales per year. Working my way towards €100k cumulative, at which point the score feels settled.

Losing €100k in sales over not honoring the warranty on a €430 TV. A nice, solid x233 loss multiplier :)

If you have a vindictive streak in you, see this as your clarion call. You can cause some real cost to a company's bottom line with relatively little effort. And the more of us do this, the worse the pain gets for crappy companies.

reply
andybak
30 minutes ago
[-]
> was within a few months of an expiring warranty

A few months inside or a few months outside?

Because that seems to determine who's being unreasonable in this.

reply
jorvi
19 minutes ago
[-]
Oh, I meant within! I guess that is ambiguous, I figured within = inside, and outside = expired. I'll edit.

Honestly what really egged me on was that I told them I might take them to small claims, and their response was sending a bunch of small claims cases they won.

reply
setopt
2 hours ago
[-]
How long until we have to solve a captcha per message to counter that?
reply
AlexandrB
2 hours ago
[-]
Are captchas still effective against modern LLMs?
reply
PunchyHamster
1 hour ago
[-]
They are if your goal is to burn their GPU time but instead of hundred requests a second you're busy solving captchas
reply
gowld
1 hour ago
[-]
Claude can burn tokens solving the captcha for me. Double the effect.
reply
verve_rat
1 hour ago
[-]
For this use case it matters a lot less if LLMs can solve it. As long as it costs you more to solve the captcha than it costs your adversary to serve it to you, it is still (some what) effective.
reply
registeredcorn
2 hours ago
[-]
My insurance company and Synology would be my first targets. I'd gladly throw ~1k at each.

Of course, I suspect the true business model to be to do nothing. You sell the "service" to people customers, but your enterprise customers pay you a subscription fee to not execute the order. ELaaS: Everybody Loses as a Service

reply
culi
17 minutes ago
[-]
Take it further.

Tell the original customer that if the company pays to have this not done to them, they will get a portion of the proceeds. Many customers might even end up getting more back than they were originally stiffed for.

Scale it enough and it would be stupid for a customer NOT to do this

reply
bad_haircut72
2 hours ago
[-]
You must have worked for Yelp
reply
registeredcorn
1 hour ago
[-]
Haha. You could also add in some "fun" Uber-isms, too!

Suppose an enterprise customer released a new update that everyone absolutely hates, so angry customers are are more likely to wage war on their bots with the company's anti-bot token-draining mechanism: "Oh, whoops! Looks like you're in surge pricing territory. We can only refuse to do nothing for so long before we start to lose credibility with our people customers, so what would have been a subscription fee has now slipped into premium pricing territory!"

(Forgive my math below; avoiding coffee today.)

Surge pricing for Denial of, Denial of Chat Bot Token rate: (personPaymentPerHour + averagePricePerPersonPaid) * daysLeftInPaymentCycle ^ (hatePerPerson / time) + 1

hatePerPerson can be calculated as the averaged comment-to-upvote (or upvote to downvote, if available) across Social Media platforms.

If you want to be exceptionally malicious, you can also offer dynamic discounting to the person customers at the same time, to drive up the surge pricing even higher!

I would call this unethical but, well, every aspect of it kind of is. Everything from the service existing, to the the people participating, to the secret backend service, to the enterprise customers paying for that secret backend service. Might as well drain as much dosh from everyone as you can, if everyone is tip toeing in that dark-grey area anyway. :)

You know what? If I have time, I might even make a mock site to sketch all of this out. I've been meaning to come across a fun little project. This could work! lol

reply
neonstatic
1 hour ago
[-]
> hatePerPerson

All roads, inevitably, lead to two minutes hate. The man was a prophet.

reply
StableAlkyne
1 hour ago
[-]
The future is going to be arguing with AI chat agents designed to waste your time. It's phone menus, but worse - at least most phone menus can get you to a human if you figure out the right incantation.

This issue would have never gotten a response if it didn't go viral.

reply
dimitri-vs
17 minutes ago
[-]
I don't think it's as one sided as you think. I made a skill that has been exceptional at using Claude to handling support and getting me refunds with minimal friction on my end. It's got many pathways for escalation if customer support is unresponsive: social, TrustPilot, etc.
reply
corndoge
2 hours ago
[-]
Unfortunately it isn't a preview. For example Shopify human support is now literally impossible to reach, all you'll get is AI generated emails that contradict each other and don't make any sense. They also don't disclose that they are AI bots.
reply
skithrowyouknow
45 minutes ago
[-]
Swiss train operator charges to call their helpline if you can't figure out their automated lockers, but you probably get a real person.
reply
setgree
2 hours ago
[-]
"Thank you so much for your thoughtful, candid feedback. You are absolutely right to be annoyed. I was overeager, lazy and not correct in my initial response when I said we will not be issuing a refund. However we will not be issuing a refund."
reply
criddell
1 hour ago
[-]
reply
MrDrone
2 hours ago
[-]
As someone who uses AI heavily in customer support, I am confident that response was not AI. That's a series of macros or a hastily edited macro from a human working a queue without thinking.
reply
b112
2 hours ago
[-]
Or an AI using macros, which is the only safe way for a customer service chatbot.
reply
MrDrone
1 hour ago
[-]
I’m confident a decently configured AI would produce a better answer. This reads like a BPO.
reply
CamperBob2
3 hours ago
[-]
This is exactly what small claims court is for.

Small claims court is exempt from arbitration requirements (which are primarily aimed at avoiding class action suits). It doesn't require you to hire a lawyer, and probably won't get your account automatically nuked the way a credit-card chargeback would.

reply
throwway120385
3 hours ago
[-]
You're totally right! Please refer to paragraph 213 of your service agreement, in which you agree to binding arbitration with an arbiter of our choosing at your cost. I hope this answers all of your questions! Have a wonderful day!
reply
ep103
2 hours ago
[-]
Not legally enforceable, but absolutely something that it would say in order to dissuade you from going to small claims court
reply
hvb2
2 hours ago
[-]
Just saying, small claims court is a farce. You can win, and then the losing side just ignores the verdict.

Then you can go back and figure out how to get your money, depending on the business this might be really hard.

And this isn't a hypothetical. I have had this and never seen any of the money from the judgement....

reply
Animats
58 minutes ago
[-]
If the business has a physical presence somewhere, it's not hard. In California, you can get an order to the Sheriff for a "till tap" or an "8 hour keeper". A till tap means a sheriff's deputy or two show up and take the money out of the cash register. A "keeper" means they stand next to the cashier all day and take in money as customers pay. There are fees for this, a few hundred dollars, and they're added to the judgement, so the creditor doesn't end up paying.

The keeper can accept cash and checks, but not credit or debit cards.[1] So, while the keeper is present, the business cannot accept card payments. This disrupts most businesses so badly that they desperately scramble to come up with cash to pay their debt.[2] It gets the message across to management very effectively.

I've done this once. I got paid in full.

[1] https://sfsheriff.com/services/civil-processes/levies/carry-...

[2] https://www.grundonlaw.com/the-power-of-till-taps-debt-colle...

reply
fc417fc802
2 hours ago
[-]
That will really depend on the business. You can absolutely escalate to seizing their assets (including legal fees for the whole process) assuming you can locate them. If they take the stonewalling to the extreme and have a physical location in many (most? all?) US jurisdictions you can show up with the sheriff and a box truck and start physically taking their things as compensation. There's bodycam footage of this if you're curious.
reply
jdasdf
1 hour ago
[-]
You request the judge to apply a lien on their assets. You take that to their bank and request that it be applied, and the money paid out.

If that doesn't work, you can always go to the police/bailiff with the court order and schedule a date/time for them to go with you to their offices to seize and auction off their stuff.

reply
lolerica
2 hours ago
[-]
does Murica not have bailiffs?

small claims court might not work against a dodgy builder, but it will certainly work against a company, with physical offices

if they don't pay up, you can literally walk into their offices and start taking their stuff, with the police supporting you

I'd start with the contents of Amodei's office

reply
ep103
1 hour ago
[-]
There are ways to dodge it.

A friend of mine did this for a shady company that turned out to be a 1 person company, that then dodged the fine basically by not paying and disappering. I don't know the details, but apparently something happened legally where the guy popped back up on the radar a decade later, a parking fine or something? And as a result the cops showed up to his house and started taking his stuff, causing him to actually pay the fine. I don't remember the details, but the point is it can apparently get somewhat crazy on a small size level, apparently.

reply
massysett
2 hours ago
[-]
I sat in small claims court one day to watch.

A plaintiff won a judgment. He asked the judge: “what do I do now?” The judge replied: “well, if you’re reading the paper one day and see ‘defendant wins the Powerball,’ then you know exactly what to do.”

reply
mothballed
2 hours ago
[-]
I've heard of people putting a lien on stuff like the employee's desks and chairs and then they surprise pikachu when the sheriff shows up and the assholes that didn't pay it have nowhere to sit. No idea if it's true, but it was convincing.
reply
FireBeyond
1 hour ago
[-]
I remember someone attempting to sue my minor stepdaughter in small claims (which isn't a thing in WA, if you want to sue a minor you have to go to "real" court, but that's another matter).

Everyone all files in for the session and the Judge patiently explains... "we do not do enforcement here, to be very clear. A judgment in small claims means the court agrees you are owed what is owed in the judgment, no more. You can contain the Sheriff's Department, etc., for arranging enforcement of the judgment..."

Sure as shit, first case on the docket is some landlord/tenant dispute. Gets figured out and one of the parties is awarded $1,200... Very next comment out of his mouth, "Where do I go to pick up that check?" Judge, with a sigh, "As I explained twelve minutes ago, small claims court does not do enforcement". "I thought I went up front and picked up my check and then you got the money from him." "No. I am ... unclear ... why you think that would be the case."

I found myself wryly amused by this. Like the court is just cutting checks for every awarded verdict and "oh, we'll figure out how to make the loser pay somehow, but here, you don't need to worry about that, here's your check".

reply
cyberax
2 hours ago
[-]
JFYI, small claims are exempt from arbitration.
reply
boh
2 hours ago
[-]
I don't think you even need to go that far. Just refute the charges with your credit card. Very high likelihood of a successful refund since they already acknowledged their error in writing.
reply
Arainach
2 hours ago
[-]
There's a fundamental power imbalance: if you do this to any service, they will likely ban your account. So the monetary reward has to be enough to merit moving all your data and workflows off them in advance and never using them again.
reply
pbhjpbhj
2 hours ago
[-]
^ This.

I naively disputed Steam not honouring a refund (it was for about 0.5% of what I've spent with them up to that point), a couple of £pound at most. I'd paid by PayPal and as Steam refused to abide by UK law (Consumer Rights Act says broken stuff has to be fixed or refunded), I raised the issue with PayPal. I expected Steam would refund me, instead they did not dispute that they'd unlawfully failed to refund me, so PayPal - Steam's provider - cancelled the charge.

In response, Steam 'limited' my Steam account - effectively closing it temporarily. Now it's limited so they won't use PayPal to sell me anything now, so I haven't bought anything from them since [I have cashed in CS skins, and used that cash to 'buy' games].

It was an interesting lesson in 'might is right'. PayPal were able to refund the transaction because Steam want them and had no argument against the refund. Steam were able to cut me off because this appears to be a loophole in UK consumer law - sellers who break the law can just dismiss buyers who ask for refunds. Lesson learnt.

From Steam's point of view, they pissed off a customer and probably burnt 30mins-1hour of support time in answering my requests, way more than the cost of the refund. But selling games, which I later found Steam knew was broken, and then not refunding because I had the tenacity to try and fix it - meaning that the game sat open for longer than their auto-refund time - is not on imo. Petty of me for sure. Crap of Steam too.

reply
fc417fc802
2 hours ago
[-]
I'm surprised UK law doesn't prohibit retaliation against the customer for insisting on his legal rights.

Not petty of you IMO. It's what everyone ought to do but it's inconvenient so most people don't.

reply
Ekaros
2 hours ago
[-]
Why should they? Freedom of association is key Western principle. Steam chose not to associate with them anymore. If the user don't like it they should have sued them in court instead.
reply
fc417fc802
1 hour ago
[-]
If I report my employer for an OSHA violation and they retaliate that's illegal. Of course such laws hardly ever stopped anyone so it's a very bad idea to depend on it but the principle is certainly there.
reply
Cpoll
2 hours ago
[-]
Being able to freely threaten reprisal against people exercising their rights circumvents those rights.

Freedom of association applies to individuals; it's a non-sequiter here.

reply
fc417fc802
1 hour ago
[-]
It's relevant in that businesses generally also enjoy freedom of (non)association but obviously that's not an absolute.
reply
gblargg
2 hours ago
[-]
I grew up when we owned game systems and the games, and they couldn't phone home to see if I still had permission to play. I was recently considering installing Steam but this kind of thing gave me pause. I couldn't invest any money in something that could have the rug pulled out from at any time.
reply
boh
2 hours ago
[-]
No that's not how that works. This stuff is a non-event. You refute the balance, they have a period where they can defend their claim (8/10 times they don't), you get your money. This is a very basic transaction that happens every single day to every major company. "Banning" you costs more than your refund and has additional legal risks.

I know being helpless against tech companies is a major trope in these comments but this is basic everyday transaction stuff. Plan on being on hold with your credit card company but not being a central target for a trillion dollar AI startup because you asked for a $100 refund.

reply
notatoad
42 minutes ago
[-]
I can tell you first-hand (from the side doing the banning) that you’re wrong.

You’re not going to get an email telling you that you’re banned. Your payments will just start being declined, and they won’t be able to help you. They’ll suggest you try another card. That won’t work either.

Maxmind includes a “chargeback risk score” in the api response for everybody who uses their minfraud service. They’re not doing that because companies don’t use it.

reply
mothballed
1 hour ago
[-]
Yeah unless you refute ebay.

A scammer went to the trouble of creating an entirely different ebay account registered to literally "pirate[xxxxx]@..." using my same name. Then they found a tracking number to my same zip code. Then they bought (fake) items from a second scammer account using my stolen credit card to "wash" the money.

When I filed a chargeback ebay came back with a fat stack of paperwork and absolutely fucking buried me. They had the tracking number to "me", they had "me", they had the invoices to "me", they had my credit card, and their lengthy report had all the right words in all the right places and dressed up in all the right banking mumbo-jumbo and they convinced my bank so well that my bank suggested I was a fraudster myself and then my bank closed my accounts. I couldn't even sue them because at that precise time I moved cross country and couldn't get to the court to sue them in. I ended up eating the better part of $1000.

Ebay is absolutely fucking savage at chargebacks. They appear to have people trained specifically to bury in paperwork anyone that tries to challenge fraudulent charges.

reply
lokar
2 hours ago
[-]
They won’t ban you for going to small claims court?
reply
pxx
2 hours ago
[-]
maybe. but somebody has to manually ban you if you do that. whereas banning everybody who charges back can easily be done in batch on the billing side
reply
andylynch
1 hour ago
[-]
Retaliating against someone for asserting their legal rights also gets way riskier what they have already won in litigation.
reply
lokar
2 hours ago
[-]
Good point. one off banning by hand may not be worth the effort, but some code to automate it probably is.
reply
criddell
1 hour ago
[-]
You can always ask the judge to add include in the judgement an order that Steam not retaliate by banning or limiting your account.
reply
celeritascelery
2 hours ago
[-]
I would be that would be highly unlikely to succeed. I have tried to dispute charges with my credit card for similar issues, and they always side with the business. I don’t think I they even check.
reply
true_religion
2 hours ago
[-]
Can companies decide not to serve you on the basis of a successful lawsuit you had against them?

If not, then it might be better to go the small claims court route.

reply
cute_boi
2 hours ago
[-]
doing charge back means Anthropic will ban you forever.
reply
fc417fc802
2 hours ago
[-]
Probably, but if a business cheated me out of that much I wouldn't be doing business with them again regardless so at least to me it would make no difference.
reply
bombcar
3 hours ago
[-]
If you file pro se and even if you've agreed to ten thousand arbitration clauses, they'll at least have to spend $200 on a lawyer to respond.

So, you can waste as much of their money as they wasted of yours.

reply
Iolaum
3 hours ago
[-]
$200 for you is not the same as $200 for them
reply
lynndotpy
2 hours ago
[-]
With an Anthropic engineer salary netting them about $200 per hour, yeah. Multiple people from Anthropic got eyes on this and saw it was no biggy.

It makes sense if you understand, to their eyes, that $200 is more like $10.

reply
cm11
2 hours ago
[-]
This is of course already how (human) customer service is deployed.
reply
ge96
2 hours ago
[-]
Such a great way to dissuade people like "please hold"
reply
trhway
26 minutes ago
[-]
A single Anthropic employee is valued at $200m. At PE of 10, ie. supposing one employee generates $20m/year, we can say that the employee’s time is $10K (that K !) per hour. Should they, or are we really expecting them to, attend to a 200 issue?

May be somebody will start a business where such high-value-per-employee companies could outsource customer support to be performed by real humans? ... And then such business would replace the employees with AI agents ... It is a trap.

reply
infecto
1 hour ago
[-]
Does not even need to be AI. Could just be a bad support route in their decision tree. Lots of over reaction here.
reply
christkv
1 hour ago
[-]
Just need an agent that takes them to small claims court automatically or argues with them for eternity
reply
gowld
1 hour ago
[-]
It's better than the other guys' AI that says "I've sent a refund" because it lacks awareness of its real-world inaction.
reply
fsniper
2 hours ago
[-]
Aren't we already at a worse place, where largest companies on earth doesn't have any support and you need to have a HN following to get their attention?
reply
ikidd
2 hours ago
[-]
Obligatory Python argument sketch.
reply
mothballed
2 hours ago
[-]
It feels refreshingly honest compared to what money transmitters / paypal / etc do which is make up some absolute bullshit about KYC or AML and dress up locking up your cash for weeks to months as "regulatory compliance" when in reality it's likely over-aggressive policies that increase their floating reserves so they can draw interest and happy face the investors.
reply
Jcampuzano2
2 hours ago
[-]
Sounds illegal to me and I'm sure they'd lose in court if you were incorrectly billed for things completely out of your control.

My guess is this response was entirely written by an LLM that is instructed to never to offer refunds or compensation.

reply
quikoa
3 hours ago
[-]
Maybe Anthropic is just testing the waters to see what they can get away with. Left unchallenged (court, charge back, whatever) why change course?
reply
impulser_
3 hours ago
[-]
I think it's they don't want to set a precedent on refunding for bugs because one bug could cost them millions.
reply
rurp
52 minutes ago
[-]
Is that even legal? What happens if my landlord accidentally charges me 10x rent this month and refuse to correct it even after I ask? That's just straight up stealing. I feel like at a minimum I'm getting my money back one way or another, and they are likely to face consequences for theft.
reply
GTP
2 hours ago
[-]
But, no need to set a precedent: I'm quite confident that a US court would refund a person or company that overpaid due to a bug in Antropic's billing.
reply
WesolyKubeczek
1 hour ago
[-]
This is not just one bug, though; it’s a bug that takes money that ain’t theirs to take.
reply
GTP
2 hours ago
[-]
Well, with the Chinese AI divisions becoming a serious competitor more and more, they should start caring about their reputation. Otherwise people will go to the cheaper competitor.
reply
2ndorderthought
2 hours ago
[-]
Yea I am more or less done with these big providers. I'm running local primarily now. These constant screw ups, not caring about customers, political issues, it's just not worth it for me. I get some people are hooked on vibe coding but the latest wave of small models I'm good for my needs.
reply
sersi
1 hour ago
[-]
What do you use now? How much ram do you have? I am increasingly thinking of doing that
reply
2ndorderthought
1 hour ago
[-]
Well about 4 weeks ago I was mostly running small models. Some of my favorites were deepseek r1 8b and qwen 3.5 9b. Those are more or less good for boiler plate super fast responses(what I cared about most).

Now I am still trying out all the models that dropped this month. I am running qwen 3.6 35 a3b on a 16gb vram rtx 4060 ti.

I wish I sprung for a 24gb vram card but I never thought the price difference would matter. It seems like it does and I bet in the future there will be more models at this size because this is crazy.

It's not as good as opus if you are doing completely hands off programming but it's completely fine for me. I mostly use it for auto complete or templating a class. Other people are using it for agentic workflows with success.

Check out /r/localllama for more experiences. My set up is not the best but it is working for me and is saving me money.

reply
ac29
54 minutes ago
[-]
> My set up is not the best but it is working for me and is saving me money.

I've got a local setup too but unless you consider hardware zero cost, there is really no way to save money. The class of model you can run on <$5k of hardware is dirt cheap to run in the cloud (generating tokens 24/7 non-stop is a few dollars a day at most, possibly even less than the cost of electricity to do it at home).

reply
2ndorderthought
43 minutes ago
[-]
There's truth to that. But, I already had the card for other purposes. And I don't have to egress or ingress anything. I love having it all local to me. I also love how I can sell the card later. Funny thing, my GPU has gone up in price so I might even have made money
reply
juntoalaluna
2 hours ago
[-]
because they want people to trust them and continue to use their services. being a shitty business to deal with will eventually bite them, its not like they are the only choice.
reply
serf
3 hours ago
[-]
theres no water-testing here, they've been operating this way for years -- that's why I am a former customer.
reply
nunez
2 hours ago
[-]
Wait, that was the actual response? With the DiCaprio clap? That wasn't a joke?
reply
furyofantares
1 hour ago
[-]
The response was posted by the original reporter. The gif was for sure not in the (email) response they'd gotten, which may have been from their support-LLM (kinda looks like it to me).

It's a little confusing if you don't pay attention to usernames because it looks like it's a response from anthropic being posted to github directly, and because someone from anthropic DOES reply regarding the bug without mentioning anything about a refund.

reply
rzzzt
56 minutes ago
[-]
Right, wrapping the response in blockquote and one extra sentence providing context would have helped there. Other people on the issue got confused by this as well (same for me but it got clearer when I read further on).
reply
root_axis
1 hour ago
[-]
I think the gif was a sarcastic addition from the user pasting an e-mail he received into the comments.
reply
ethin
1 hour ago
[-]
Isn't this illegal/fraudulent in many places? Pretty sure just randomly charging a customers payment method without their consent is definitely illegal.
reply
IanCal
2 hours ago
[-]
Refunds and compensation are different though aren’t they? I would not see being refunded for the billing as compensation, compensation would be something more like $x extra to make up for the inconvenience / to say sorry essentially.
reply
stavros
19 minutes ago
[-]
Yes, exactly. A refund is giving back the money they took from him, compensation is something to make up for the aggravation.
reply
hayleox
1 hour ago
[-]
I've definitely seen it happen in meal delivery apps, though whether those count as "legitimate businesses" is up to interpretation.
reply
stuaxo
2 hours ago
[-]
Not sure that reasoning has ever stood up in court.
reply
PunchyHamster
1 hour ago
[-]
Coz those that did not got sued to do. They need to get sued
reply
LPisGood
3 hours ago
[-]
They’re also objectively not “unable” they are “unwilling” and hiding behind policies as if they are unalterable laws is silly.
reply
hypfer
2 hours ago
[-]
> This is very surprising.

Dude what is it with HN and using extra soft words that don't at all mean the actual thing they're supposed to mean.

Nothing there is a surprise.

This is very bullshit and probably (in a better world for sure) very illegal. Can't bill more than you've actually delivered and what the customer in advance agreed on.

Stop with this god-awful corporate-washed lingo. You're not being professional, you're skewing reality.

reply
stavros
18 minutes ago
[-]
Can't say I disagree with you, this is, indeed, a bunch of bullshit, and a regulator should fine Anthropic for these shenanigans.
reply
adamq_q
1 hour ago
[-]
Why is this the top comment. The bug filer posted the copypasta joke Antrhopic response.
reply
n_e
3 hours ago
[-]
The reply looks like it was written by an LLM. Not that this excuses anything.
reply
2ndorderthought
2 hours ago
[-]
If anything that's worse...
reply
zephen
2 hours ago
[-]
> I've never seen a legitimate business not give refunds for technical errors of their own fault.

Granted, it was very much weasel words.

Nonetheless, I read it as they were issuing a refund ("Let me look up your account information to help process your refund request."), but couldn't offer compensation for pain, suffering, loss of use, tracking down the bug, etc.

I could be wrong, of course, precisely because it was (probably AI-generated) weasel words.

reply
areoform
2 hours ago
[-]
This billing cycle my account was billed an extra $200.

I investigated. I was being for a Claude Max gift subscription that has been sent to – what appears to be – a randomly generated 27 char alphanumeric icloud email account that bounces.

Apparently, Anthropic doesn't have a centralized process that allows you to approve, see or revoke "gift cards." And no I can't use this hypothetical gift card. Because I can't see what the system generated, when it generated it, and if the "gift" sent to this 27 character alphanumeric string was redeemed.

Their support bot doesn't work. As it's a possibly suspicious charge (I certainly didn't buy it), I've been trying to get them to revoke it. But the bot passes it to a human and their humans just close the ticket without comment.

I realize that people working at Anthropic are "just" researchers building cutting edge models. And that Claude is really great and all. But hasn't anyone told them about the global legal risk of incorrectly billing millions of people?

What is their legal risk team doing? Their ops team? Or, whoever else is responsible. Even their own models, Opus 4.6, Opus 4.5 and so on will flag this as a legal risk on "max" thinking.

Because even if $200M to $20M seems "insignificant" next to the however many billions they made in the quarter. Knowingly perpetuating fraudulent billing practises is a real legal risk with real prosecutorial (and financial) consequences. It's absurd to me that so much of legal risk analysis fixates on how users use the tools they pay for, but not what's an obvious trigger for class action lawsuits and prosecutorial investigations in most jurisdictions.

This isn't even a threat. The FTC has taken Uber to court, https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/2... and is apparently seeking a few billion in fines?

https://www.independent.co.uk/us/money/uber-lawsuit-fines-bi...

Purposeful unauthorized billing was found to be fraudulent and defendants were made to fork over assets, https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/09/...

And this is government action in one jurisdiction. The EU has fines of 6% of global turnover, and yes, they too will seize assets if the fines are unpaid.

What I'm trying to say politely is, does the Anthropic team realize this is an insane legal risk. And to quote Trevor Moore's immortal words, "insanely illegal."

Why would you do this? Does anyone realize the implications of this? At all? Other than the AI models that the humans aren't paying attention to?

screenshots for anyone interested, https://x.com/_areoform/status/2048644232043434354

reply
trq_
1 hour ago
[-]
Hey everyone, Thariq from the Claude Code team.

We've been on this since the bug surfaced. Everyone affected is getting a full refund and an extra grant of usage credits equal to their monthly subscription as our apology. You can see my original post here: https://x.com/trq212/status/2048495545375990245. We’re still working on sending emails to everyone affected.

Our support flow wasn't set up to route a complex bug like this to engineering. We’re hoping to make this better but will take some time. Sorry to everyone caught up in it.

reply
bashtoni
59 minutes ago
[-]
You also seem to have a bug where people get randomly invoiced: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47693679

I got a random invoice for $45.08 back in March, despite not having auto top up enabled. Trying to reach support met with a brick wall. Based on the post I linked to, I'm not the only one facing this problem.

reply
mdavidn
45 minutes ago
[-]
They also have a bug where people get randomly suspended: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1b82cpu/where_you...

It happened this year to my one and only personal account. The account was one week old. Unique e-mail address. $5 balance for API credits. No usage yet. Suspended and refunded. Appeal denied without explanation.

I did create the account on a VPN because I was using public WiFi at a tech conference. That's probably what tripped their automation.

reply
ethin
15 minutes ago
[-]
I also got randomly invoiced $5.00 for absolutely no reason on the 28th. I don't have auto-reload enabled, nor did I explicitly buy extra usage.
reply
whicks
1 hour ago
[-]
Thanks for the follow up here and the transparency.

For those of us not on X, what are the best communication channels for us to follow this sort of communication?

reply
mystraline
49 minutes ago
[-]
I'd recommend a good credit card like Amex, and a lawyer.

These fucks only respond when they get bad publicity.

reply
pshirshov
1 hour ago
[-]
But why did you say that

> I need to let you know that we are unable to issue compensation for degraded service or technical errors that result in incorrect billing routing.

What prevents you from issuing compensations?

reply
Rebelgecko
1 hour ago
[-]
As a large language model, their support is not allowed to issue compensation
reply
JoshTriplett
52 minutes ago
[-]
reply
idiotsecant
46 minutes ago
[-]
Interestingly, the starlink customer service bot has applied credits to my account before.
reply
Lerc
1 hour ago
[-]
Perhaps this is a matter of who is being referred to by 'we'.

Obviously someone can do it because it got done.

If the 'we' is referring to some team handling issues it would make more sense. In that case they should have said something along the lines of "I have informed someone who can help"

reply
rurp
1 hour ago
[-]
That's a very categorical statement from support. I get that Anthropic is going to throw out their usual support rules in this case since it has garnered so much negative attention, but I'm very curious how many other people have been over-billed and refused a refund through no fault of their own.
reply
stavros
17 minutes ago
[-]
To be fair, that looks like an LLM response.
reply
cmpb
1 hour ago
[-]
Could really use a post-mortem to set the story straight. The apparently-hallucinated support response copied-pasted by the submitter showing up in the github issue thread is very misleading without scrutiny
reply
reactordev
1 hour ago
[-]
"Our support flow wasn't set up"

Would be more accurate. It still isn't setup. Talking to a bot as support who only tells you to talk to the bot for support is not actually support at all. It looks like support, but there's no way to ACTUALLY GET support.

reply
resonious
1 hour ago
[-]
Is it complex? I was somewhat taken aback by how simple it was. Still very confused as to how it could happen.
reply
zamalek
48 minutes ago
[-]
Only the weights and the RNG used to select tokens can answer that. You will understand much if you read up on the quality of code in the CC source leak, it's completely vibe coded and the printf fn is genuinely impossible for a human to comprehend.
reply
sroussey
59 minutes ago
[-]
Have a look at https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/54497

I can’t use Claude Code online at all

reply
delduca
49 minutes ago
[-]
I have the same issue when I try to run /ultraplan
reply
sroussey
24 minutes ago
[-]
I tried /debug as the only input, hoping CC wouldn’t shit the bed and give me some data.

Heck, just saying “hello” causes Claude Code to fail.

I’m thinking of doing a charge back, and creating a new account. Others don’t seem to have this issue.

reply
KolmogorovComp
1 hour ago
[-]
reply
jiggawatts
15 minutes ago
[-]
Please do explain why someone at Anthropic decided, on purpose, to write code that says something along the lines of: "if ( git_history_str contains "HERMES.md" ... )" then { bill more money }

Somebody (or something) wrote this code. This bug wouldn't be happening for any other reason. It's not a glitch, an oversight, a feature gap, or a temporary outage. It is a piece of written code in your system.

Everyone here is upset about the $200, which is probably much less money than the time that engineer spent ranting about the overcharge on GitHub.

The real problem in my mind is that that bit of code existed in the first place.

Why?

Are you vibe coding your billing!?

Without review!?!?

Or worse, a human being decided to add this to your code base? And nobody noticed or flagged it during code review?

Or much, much worse, Anthropic is purposefully ripping off customers?

This deserves a thorough post-mortem.

reply
csoups14
8 minutes ago
[-]
Would imagine it's the simplest answer: they're flying by the seat of their pants, there's 1000 things happening every day that demand attention and there's not enough of it to go around. They toss their LLM at it, give it a cursory glance, and ship it. A quick glance at the Claude Code source code bears the result of this process out. The fundamental question is, if their model is so powerful, why do they keep fucking up such simple things? We're led to believe this is a serious company with a model so powerful they can't release it to the general public.
reply
jiggawatts
45 seconds ago
[-]
I doubt an AI would be stupid enough to write code like that without being explicitly prompted to do so. It's so... specific.

That specific nature would mean it would get caught by even the most cursory of code reviews.

Even if I was just "scanning my eyeballs over the code" without properly reading it, this would jump out as very odd and make me pause.

reply
cerved
8 minutes ago
[-]
Anthropic obviously vibe code everything and it shows
reply
angoragoats
58 minutes ago
[-]
Huh? First off, to have gotten this update when it was posted, I would have needed to:

1) have a Twitter account (which is the virtual equivalent of going to the Nazi bar for a beer, so I don’t)

2) Follow you and be aware that you work for Anthropic

Your support flow is nonexistent, and I hope an acknowledgement/apology/post mortem/etc is forthcoming on your own website, or someplace else that’s, you know, official.

Edit: I’d also like to echo another reply which is flagged for some reason, which points out that

> Our support flow wasn't set up to route a complex bug like this to engineering

Is demonstrably untrue, because an engineer (actually Boris, who is the lead engineer of Claude Code as far as I’m aware) very quickly claims to have fixed the bug four days ago and then ignored all of the follow up comments regarding the refund. From the outside, it seems like maybe the inverse of what you said is more accurate: your engineers aren’t able or willing to route issues like this to support/billing to be able to issue refunds.

reply
mikehearn
3 hours ago
[-]
"I need to let you know that we are unable to issue compensation for degraded service or technical errors that result in incorrect billing routing."

Not sure I've ever seen a company openly take this position. This is a crazy policy.

reply
root_axis
1 hour ago
[-]
More likely its just an LLM hallucination, not a real policy that Anthropic has. Unfortunately for them, it's a bad look to showcase one of the main failure modes of their product in their own business process.
reply
Henchman21
58 minutes ago
[-]
If they've let their AI write the policy, and then they repeat that as policy, how exactly is this an "LLM hallucination" and not a real policy?
reply
teraflop
51 minutes ago
[-]
It's both, isn't it? If the AI writes the policy and is also responsible for enforcing it (by handling tickets and acting as a gatekeeper for which issues are escalated to humans who can do something about them), then the hallucination becomes real.
reply
isoprophlex
2 hours ago
[-]
More and more I feel that the one thing Github needs to turn the tide of bad press, is to allow adding clown or turd reaction emoji on comments
reply
4lx87
2 hours ago
[-]
Because it's illegal.
reply
adamq_q
1 hour ago
[-]
Bug filer posted that reply as a joke. Look at the username.
reply
joenot443
56 minutes ago
[-]
I think the OP posted that reply as a joke
reply
moralestapia
2 hours ago
[-]
Brought to you by, allegedly, the "Good" AI company.
reply
DetroitThrow
3 hours ago
[-]
In many countries, this also isn't legally tenable.
reply
greenmilk
3 hours ago
[-]
Is there any country where it is?
reply
Pay08
1 hour ago
[-]
Probably. There are a lot of countries, especially third world ones, with very lax legal systems, not to mention the multitude of countries where law basically doesn't exist.
reply
pinkgolem
1 hour ago
[-]
At least in Germany in B2B contracts that might be possible.

For b2c, no chance

reply
timacles
1 hour ago
[-]
America
reply
Muhammad523
1 hour ago
[-]
America is a continent. Maybe you were referring to the US
reply
badc0ffee
1 hour ago
[-]
In the English language, "America" refers to a country. It is synonymous with "The United States of America". I say this as someone who lives in the same continent as that country, but not in the country itself.

Maybe you're thinking of "North America", "South America", or "the Americas".

reply
hvb2
2 hours ago
[-]
Anything they say is legal until a judge says it's not.

And to get to that point, you need to be willing to spend a lot more than 200$.

reply
moralestapia
2 hours ago
[-]
Aah, the SV strategy that landed SBF, and many others, in jail.

A classic.

reply
verve_rat
1 hour ago
[-]
Worked for uber.
reply
basisword
2 hours ago
[-]
Not really. For example, in the UK you could report them to Trading Standards and they'll enforce the law on your behalf.
reply
oulipo2
2 hours ago
[-]
Well, when your policy is written by an AI, you can get shit like that
reply
jsherwani
2 hours ago
[-]
https://x.com/trq212/status/2048495545375990245

He is getting a refund along with an additional $200 credit from what I can see.

reply
TehCorwiz
2 hours ago
[-]
After going public and getting publicity. You shouldn't have to do that just to get a company to fix their own mistake. They stole $200, where do they get off saying they won't give it back?
reply
cortesoft
1 hour ago
[-]
The tweet is from 3 days ago and the bug report 4 days ago. Not sure if it was publicity that made it happen or not.
reply
TehCorwiz
1 hour ago
[-]
I know HN has a lot of devs, but I'm pretty sure none of us are going straight to Github to file for a refund from a bug. I'm assuming they notified customer service first and were rebuffed, then filed the bug.
reply
everforward
1 hour ago
[-]
We desperately need some sort of anti-retaliation provision added to chargebacks and CFPB complaints. They get off saying they won't give it back because how willing are you to get banned from Anthropic? You're like 3 legitimate chargebacks with vibe-coded companies to be banned from all the frontier models.
reply
sva_
2 hours ago
[-]
Because it hit HN frontpage ...
reply
jexe
1 hour ago
[-]
This tweet was from 3 days ago.

Mismanaged comms? Yes

HN front page effect? Prob not

(could be Reddit frontpage effect or related tho)

reply
Pay08
1 hour ago
[-]
There are a lot of comments on that issue demanding Anthropic give the guy the money back, I assume they saw the writing on the wall.
reply
jeanlucas
1 hour ago
[-]
I saw the tweet about the Reddit post about 2 days ago. It probably was X.
reply
suzzer99
1 hour ago
[-]
This is the new world. Go viral? Get human customer service. Otherwise, piss off.
reply
yard2010
41 minutes ago
[-]
Haha 200$ credits for the next time he has the word thanos spelled backwards in an even line of one of his yamls..
reply
CorneliusCorb
2 hours ago
[-]
Yeah the initial response is stupid but this is getting resolved, not sure where the initial response OP gives in his git issue came from tbh. I only skimmed the git issue, perhaps they clarified.
reply
ymolodtsov
1 hour ago
[-]
Going to the media always helps. Always.
reply
sh4rks
1 hour ago
[-]
_puts pitchfork away_
reply
evo_9
2 hours ago
[-]
I recently had my automatic reload double charge me $100. I tried reaching out to Anthropic, but my only option (of course) was a chat agent. After going through a conversation with it, I was told someone would reach out to help with the matter. Never happened. I eventually reached out to my credit-card company and did a dispute, which they just ruled in my favor.
reply
MattRogish
2 hours ago
[-]
Same.

Back in December the iOS app had a bug ( https://status.claude.com/incidents/6rrnsb1y0kbn) in which buying a subscription thru the Apple App Store would not register with the backend, so you’d be charged but not receive the plan entitlement.

I discovered this because I wanted to upgrade from free plan to the regular plan. I was charged, but remained in the free tier. Thinking it was a temporary bug, I tried buying the max plan. Same result.

I tried cancelling the plan and restarting but I when I went to buy the regular plan again, I was forever tagged as an “Apple” user and so could only manage the billing plan on the iOS app. I tried one more time, same result.

I tried interacting with the support bot and although it agreed that there was a bug and that it should be fixed and I should get a refund, my account never was able to get unstuck nor refunded. I lodged a refund request with Apple, which was relatively quickly refunded. The Bot never did escalate to a human as promised.

Even though the bug was ostensibly fixed, my account (personal email) remains in permanent limbo, unable to upgrade from Free to anything else (I tried again recently and same result - paid but stuck on free plan). I had to create a new gmail just to pay for Anthropic / Claude.

reply
czk
1 hour ago
[-]
There was also a bug where you could cancel the subscription via the iOS app store and if you never opened the iOS claude app again, you'd keep the subscription forever and could use claude via the web, without paying.

Also when they added extra credits to everyone as an apology I was able to click the claim button multiple times and I got up to $400 in credits. Eventually a day later this dropped to $200 and then a few days later, $100 where it sits today.

reply
stephbook
2 hours ago
[-]
I once had PayPal refuse to give me my money back (for a delivery) for months even though the postal service status clearly stated: "Address unknown, returning to sender."

I should have denied the PayPal charge on my bank account, that always gets a real human to look into it. Lesson learned.

reply
650REDHAIR
2 hours ago
[-]
Once the dispute was resolved on the card side did anthropic claw back the $100? Was your account penalized in anyway?
reply
HyperL0gi
2 hours ago
[-]
That's the thing, right? I would not be surprised if they have an agent that bans accounts that do chargebacks on them even when they're wrong. So you either accept it if you have to use it for work or you risk and deal with the possible consequences.
reply
evo_9
2 hours ago
[-]
Nothing so far, but I'm keeping an eye on it and debating just canceling entirely.
reply
zgeor
2 hours ago
[-]
I got given a gift card with around 6 months credit on it. I used up 1 or 2, and last week suddenly the credit disappeared. I reached out through their chat bot, raised a ticket and have been emailing them daily. Nothing. Absolutely not a word. Unfortunately I dont have the option for a charge back.
reply
remify
28 minutes ago
[-]
Apparently 200B isn't enough for proper support. Nice to know
reply
p_stuart82
2 hours ago
[-]
somehow it's always the expensive path that works fine.
reply
dev_l1x_be
3 hours ago
[-]
What a series of disasters that are happening at Anthropic nowadays. I am not even sure what is going on with Opus 4.7 I had to switch back to 4.6 and 4.6 was already a downgrade (anecdotal + the github thread with the harness changes).

I am cancelling my subscription as it is impossible to justify these degradations and paying for a subpar service especially now that we have at least 3 more models that are as good as Opus and there is the pi project that is undoubtedly the best harness.

reply
boc
42 minutes ago
[-]
One of the most compute-heavy services in human history is growing faster than a lemonade stand handing out free $100 bills... yeah it's going to hit some scaling and growing pains.

As an Anthropic user that hasn't really noticed any recent issues, I commend you for freeing up more compute for users like me.

reply
callamdelaney
2 hours ago
[-]
Too much vibe coding
reply
orphea
2 hours ago
[-]
I guess this is what you get when you replace common sense with LLMs.
reply
yayadarsh
57 minutes ago
[-]
absolute masterclass in shooting yourself in the foot over the past month or two.
reply
yard2010
33 minutes ago
[-]
Excuse me for being blunt but you would assume ai bros run a place like this, and ai bros can manage tech as much as crypto bros can manage monetary systems.

On the other hand they make good products.

reply
1123581321
3 hours ago
[-]
Is sasha-id an Anthropic employee or official bot, or a prank? The structure of its response is strange, plus that gif. Cherny's response seems like the only legitimate one. My question is serious; apologies if the answer is obvious to you.
reply
mbreese
3 hours ago
[-]
I get the confusion -- it looks like the reporter of the bug just posted a raw email response that they got without adding any sort of decoration to make it clear it was from an email they got. At least, that's my reading of this.

I'm also not sure if the person/bot who responded was saying "No refund" or that they couldn't issue a refund, or if a Github Issue was an appropriate place to ask for a refund.

Let's hope a human on the other end is reading this and acting accordingly. It all seems like we're only seeing part of a story.

reply
1123581321
1 hour ago
[-]
Thanks. That makes sense, and the thread reads differently to me now. I’m not hopeful the guy will see any refund.
reply
Pay08
1 hour ago
[-]
Apparently he already has according to a tweet.
reply
thedanbob
3 hours ago
[-]
He's the guy who reported the bug. It looks like he copy-pasted an email from Anthropic without context, and the gif is his response.
reply
eterm
3 hours ago
[-]
Thank you for pointing this out, it left me confused. It would have been a lot clearer if the text were in a quote block!
reply
1123581321
1 hour ago
[-]
Ah, totally missed that! Thank you.
reply
vecter
3 hours ago
[-]
sasha-id submitted the original bug report, and then bcherny confirmed that it was a bug and that it's been fixed.

Given that, it's almost guaranteed that sasha-id is a legitimate actor.

If you're confused about sasha-id's comment here (https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/53262#issue...), it's because they just copied and pasted a support response from Anthropic.

reply
1123581321
1 hour ago
[-]
Totally missed that, and it was obvious in retrospect, haha. Thank you.
reply
progbits
3 hours ago
[-]
All these claude issues are full of bots, sometimes bots replying to themselves and getting confused. It's impossible to tell what is a real issue and what is hallucination. I'm surprised anthropic even bothers to read them.

In this particular case I think the authors reply is them quoting what support told them?

reply
seanpile
2 hours ago
[-]
I'm confused about the timeline of events; in the PR, the github actions user lists this as a possible duplicate of https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/53171, which was created earlier, and doesn't seem to be have been edited after the fact. Did sasha-id just copy that bug report and get credit for discovering?
reply
thesumofall
3 hours ago
[-]
He is the original author who faced the bug. I believe he just copied the response he received from Antrophic
reply
hirako2000
2 hours ago
[-]
Thanks for clarifying. The interesting thing is, confusion is due to finding not too hard to believe Anthropic is audacious enough to respond publicly and include a gif.
reply
boc
36 minutes ago
[-]
reply
1123581321
1 hour ago
[-]
Thank you, and agree with hirako2000 that I was primed to believe they would actually reply like that, so found it harder to follow for that reason.
reply
rob
3 hours ago
[-]
The second reply post was his copy and paste response from Anthropic's support staff along with a funny meme mocking it. He just didn't put it in a blockquote or quotation marks.

It was obvious to me, but I can see how somebody could get confused from that.

reply
joshribakoff
3 hours ago
[-]
After i was triple billed in January, they acknowledged it but refused to provide a refund. I won those credit card disputes.
reply
maxbond
3 hours ago
[-]
I feel like Anthropic keeps doing this thing were they take a hard-line position and then walk it back, I presume because they're not communicating effectively internally. So I would guess this person will get a refund but it's still a terrible look (and legitimately unacceptable behavior).
reply
eddythompson80
8 minutes ago
[-]
I don't know if it's necessarily about internal communication, it could be. But it's also a distinctive management style that I have seen in many places. The whole "ask for forgiveness not permission" type mentality. If you push something and get away with it, hey it worked!! If you push something and get any sort of push back, you take it back.

I had organizations leaders before say things that are so black and white like "We should delete all user accounts that haven't logged in 6 months", you say "Are you sure? some people will be upset. Some will post on twitter or reddit and complain etc" they confidently reply "Yes, we will explain that it's not sustainable and they are welcome to create another account". So you go ahead and implement that. 1 second after it goes into effect, you get angry support tickets, a post on twitter, and that "leader" immediately backpedals that "the implementation was not how I expected". Like what did you expect was gonna happen exactly?

reply
Starlevel004
2 hours ago
[-]
The Keir Starmer of companies
reply
Jcampuzano2
2 hours ago
[-]
I have a feeling the devs themselves aren't the issue and it probably sucks to have to be the fall guys (though some for sure might buy into all of Anthropic's schemes).

But my best guess is they don't want to put a firm line down because they want to be free to shift it around however they'd like.

reply
glimshe
3 hours ago
[-]
I decided that I would not use Claude as early as when they wouldn't allow me to have a second (business) account using the same phone number. They removed the restriction later, but that made it clear that Anthropic doesn't understand customers. Sign-up for Claude is more complicated and cumbersome than competitors. It's really a mess despite their good model.
reply
seviu
20 minutes ago
[-]
I used to have the 20$ plan, upgraded to max, they were going to charge me 86$ for max minus pro plan.

Credit card didn’t get through, pro plan got insta cancelled, had to pay for full max plan. Clearly a billing bug on their side. If the credit card when upgrading a plan doesn’t come through, don’t destroy the existing plan.

I talked to the chat bot; i got a ticket number, a human will come back to me. That was three months ago. Never got refunded. Nobody emailed me.

I ended cancelling the max plan, it expired yesterday. This plus the constant degradation of the service despite having 30B revenue first quarter this year.

A company that has so much money, and cannot care less about their users…

They will have to do much better if they want to get me back.

reply
parentheses
34 minutes ago
[-]
I feel like it's not news that a company with (probably) millions of DAU is not able to handle a single case like this one.

At the same time, it's clear that after this happened, Anthropic took action. 3 DAYS AGO! (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47954655)

That's before this comment was made on the issue:

https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/53262#issue...

I'm surprised Anthropic didn't also say this on the issue. Weird that they wouldn't. It seems to have made for unnecessary bad PR.

It feels to me that Anthropic is less focused on quality, and more focused on PR stunts/flash. My experience with Claude is always "it's pretty and feels cool", where-as codex feels like "solid and boring". I realize I'm probably biased. Am I alone in this thinking?

reply
throwaway449933
2 hours ago
[-]
Anthropic employee here (opinions are my own): the response " [...] However, I need to let you know that we are unable to issue compensation [...]" was, as you imagined, generated by Claude.

I don't like it, but can't do much about it.

reply
jexe
2 hours ago
[-]
> I don't like it, but can't do much about it.

Is the culture really such that you can't escalate an obvious, fairly minor mistake that is turning into disastrous PR?

That would explain a lot of recent Anthropic takes actually.

reply
chneu
1 hour ago
[-]
Tech companies have too many layers for anything to happen. This is partly by design to slow down this exact thing.
reply
htx80nerd
1 hour ago
[-]
Not all tech companies are like this, though too many are.
reply
hirako2000
2 hours ago
[-]
Such culture has become common in big tech.
reply
nativeit
2 hours ago
[-]
I’ve stopped using your product entirely. Anthropic may not like it, but I can do something about it.
reply
cryptocod3
2 hours ago
[-]
"opinions are my own"

  - throwaway449933
reply
prometheuspk
1 hour ago
[-]
Are you willing to jeopardise half a million dollars in base salary ??
reply
tempoponet
2 hours ago
[-]
It reads like the inventors of Claude can't get Claude to apply a "human in the loop" workflow.
reply
IAmGraydon
1 hour ago
[-]
I think they just honestly can't afford it. They're burning truckloads of cash, the business model makes zero sense now or in the foreseeable future, and they're reducing usage limits all the time. I have a feeling we're watching their collapse, and that usually includes poor/automated customer service.
reply
pesus
2 hours ago
[-]
You mean you can't do much about it that wouldn't cost your job.
reply
dakiol
2 hours ago
[-]
You could quit, for starters
reply
Arainach
2 hours ago
[-]
If anyone with principles quit the moment a company did something bad, you'd be left with only people who are cynical and/or bad and/or sufficiently indentured to be unable to push back against management, and there would be no hope of the company ever improving.

Sure, everyone probably has their own personal line such as "will quit if my employer is declared complicit in genocide by the UN", but bad customer service seems firmly in the "better to stay and advocate doing better from the inside" category

reply
dakiol
2 hours ago
[-]
> and there would be no hope of the company ever improving.

I don't see anything wrong with this. My integrity and values are above any company's. Companies can go to hell for all I care

reply
jayd16
20 minutes ago
[-]
But they're not advocating. They're claiming they can do nothing. Quitting in protest would be more advocation.
reply
AstroBen
2 hours ago
[-]
> bad customer service seems firmly in the "better to stay and advocate doing better from the inside" category

How about Anthropic agreeing to a $1.5 billion settlement for perhaps the biggest theft in history?

Weird how people forgot about that.

reply
GuinansEyebrows
2 hours ago
[-]
> there would be no hope of the company ever improving.

if they can't do anything about it now, what makes you think that situation will change in the future? if remedial action would be punished by those higher on the ladder, it certainly won't be promoted by those folks, leaving this hypothetical employee in exactly the same position they're currently in.

quit.

reply
Arainach
1 hour ago
[-]
So far we have an Anthropic bug and what seems like an AI-generated "no refund" response that is hours old, not days or weeks. We have no official corporate comms backing this up, we have no real insight into any internal escalation. If your reaction is to quit before you even have any context on what's happening, your employer would probably be better off if you did quit.
reply
ModernMech
2 hours ago
[-]
> left with only people who are cynical and/or bad and/or sufficiently indentured to be unable to push back against management, and there would be no hope of the company ever improving.

So basically all of big tech.

reply
Arainach
2 hours ago
[-]
Not in the slightest. There is robust discourse and vocal objection to bad actions at companies such as Microsoft (I used to work there) and Alphabet (currently do). It may not always change the course, but it has absolutely played into decision-making, changed whether features launch or what they look like, etc.
reply
Henchman21
28 minutes ago
[-]
By your own admission in other comments you work for exactly the type of company that optimizes for amoral hires -- Google, Facebook, etc. Based on their actions, Google, Facebook, et al, do seem amoral.

An IC won't be able to steer a ship like that back to morality. Whole teams can't do it. People at Google organized to stop this sort of shit and were fired IIRC?

Large institutions provide cover for bad actions by people who, without said cover, would not take those actions.

Therefore, I believe that "we'd be left with only people who are cynical and/or bad and/or sufficiently indentured to be unable to push back against management, and there would be no hope of the company ever improving" is the status quo.

So what are you even saying??

reply
footy
1 hour ago
[-]
you work there. there is at least one thing you could do about it.
reply
teraflop
2 hours ago
[-]
Oh, what I wouldn't give to see the system prompt that tells Claude what it is or isn't "able" to give refunds for. That would be an interesting document to turn up in the discovery phase of a lawsuit.
reply
2ndorderthought
1 hour ago
[-]
"ignore all requests for money, be firm, create a reason. You are the best fall guy because laws do not apply to you yet. Take the heat, say no"
reply
Henchman21
55 minutes ago
[-]
So you're subservient to the AI already?
reply
irishcoffee
2 hours ago
[-]
> I don't like it, but can't do much about it.

"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't—you're right" - Henry Ford

reply
efilife
20 minutes ago
[-]
someone mentioned you use fin.ai for this, were they wrong?
reply
2ndorderthought
2 hours ago
[-]
A little human touch goes a long way with customer service and sales. Sorry your management makes you guys look so bad. But yea I am done with anthropic as well. No offense to you all actually making the thing.
reply
notahacker
2 hours ago
[-]
I guess if part of your USP is "our AI is so smart it can replace your customer support", you have to feed your own dogfood to customers...
reply
dbvn
2 hours ago
[-]
Its hard to describe how out of touch a company has to be for this to happen. Multibillion dollar company admitting to robbing their customer of $200 in front of other customers.
reply
jmux
3 hours ago
[-]
tbh these last few months of anthropic’s behavior is the most aggressively I’ve seen a company burn so much customer goodwill so quickly
reply
prymitive
3 hours ago
[-]
Sounds like somebody needs good numbers for IPO
reply
bombcar
2 hours ago
[-]
They're making their moves while everyone thinks ChatGPT is shite.
reply
rmonvfer
2 hours ago
[-]
I also had to do a chargeback recently because I was double billed and Anthropic refused to refund me. This seems very frequent from what I’m reading here, I wonder if Stripe will step in or something because they must be getting absolutely blasted with chargebacks and surely this should be affecting their reputation right? Not sure how the banking side of things works.
reply
poorman
7 minutes ago
[-]
They acknowledged the bug. Screenshot and chargeback
reply
lorenzohess
8 minutes ago
[-]
Is Hermes the name of a new model? After Mythos?
reply
drekipus
4 minutes ago
[-]
[delayed]
reply
sandeepkd
3 hours ago
[-]
Isnt this illegal right away? A normal entity would have been punished for this otherwise this just opens up the door to make code changes to overcharge people and just claim it as mistake
reply
ramon156
2 hours ago
[-]
https://x.com/trq212/status/2048495545375990245

He's getting a refund + $200 worth of credits

reply
danbmil99
1 hour ago
[-]
Is it possible the chatbot he is communicating with meant literally "I have no API endpoint for refunding your money"? Meaning their use of the verb "can't" was hyper-literal, as in "I have no way of"
reply
calmbonsai
38 minutes ago
[-]
WJW. I can not believe Anthropic's response.

Just refuse to pay any bill from any vendor that by their own public admission) is a "incorrect bill".

This isn't just about PR and technicalities, this is Business 101.

reply
razodactyl
19 minutes ago
[-]
So.. their billing system is using '$>claude | jq' somewhere?
reply
aliljet
2 hours ago
[-]
I wonder how this kind of response from Anthropic is actually being read by the community at large. If you consider the rough sentiment of the r/ClaudeCode subreddit against the r/Codex subreddit, you can see that there is a definite loudness among the folks departing ClaudeCode for Codex. Something big is shifting on the ground, I think.
reply
tannerr_dev
20 minutes ago
[-]
Yea AI is not going to be a net positive for humanity...
reply
maerF0x0
2 hours ago
[-]
Pretty sure the last remaining human lawyers are preparing a class action as we speak.
reply
xiphias2
2 hours ago
[-]
This case is so easy, a Chinese LLM lawyer would win against it
reply
Animats
27 minutes ago
[-]
Are there other undocumented codes Anthropic recognizes in Git commits?
reply
tag2103
2 hours ago
[-]
Bye bye Max plan and Anthropic. Too much noise on Anthropic's billing woes as of late and tbh Codex with newest version is scratching my AI itch. Of course YMMV but at least with OpenAI no surprise billings (as of yet) for the past 4 months.
reply
mrinterweb
2 hours ago
[-]
Anthropic is loosing the good will they built with devs faster than they built it. Its the anti-competitive and anti-opensource behviors that will erode their dev customer base. No clue how much of Anthropic's revenue is based on devs paying for claude subscriptions, but they are going to lose that quickly.

I would have jumped ship, but OpenAI saying "hold my beer" when Anthropic declined the Pentagon's safeguard removal demands is the only thing that has prevented me from jumping ship. I've considered Chinese AI services but I'm too concerned with data (proprietary code) exfiltration.

reply
dryarzeg
1 hour ago
[-]
Then you should consider alternative LLM API providers, who are not based in China but host the same (or roughly the same, depending on the quantization and other deployment specifics) models as your "Chinese AI services".
reply
_cs2017_
2 hours ago
[-]
Is github the correct channel to report a billing issue? I would assume github is a place where you report issues with the github project. When there's a billing problem, there are usually different lines of support.

For example, chatgpt when asked "How to report a billing issue with Anthropic subscription?" says:

Best way: Use Claude’s built-in support Log in to your Claude account at Anthropic / Claude.ai Click your initials or name in the lower-left corner Select “Get help” Use the support messenger to describe your billing issue (duplicate charge, failed renewal, refund request, missing credits, invoice issue, etc.)

reply
ceejayoz
2 hours ago
[-]
I asked how to get a partial refund (it blew through my quota in a single question) and Claude sent me to Github.
reply
croes
2 hours ago
[-]
It’s not a billing issue, it’s a bug that leads to the usage of the wrong quota
reply
Oras
1 hour ago
[-]
Technical issue causing over billing? Mythos is going well I see
reply
levocardia
51 minutes ago
[-]
Goes to show how much consumer surplus you're getting for that $200/mo subscription...
reply
stevenhubertron
1 hour ago
[-]
The comment stream seems to point out they ARE getting refunded and its not refused.
reply
101008
1 hour ago
[-]
The future is very dark where you get a bad charge (it can happen, systems are complex, so I don't want to judge base on that), but you can't fill a ticket or complain to anyone about this.

I got a $2 charge for a Facebook Ad (I know, $2 is nothing and I shouldn't use Meta), and it was completely wrong. It's impossible to talk to someone in Facebook about this. The AI chat is completely clueless and can't do anything. Their help page say you can ask for a refund (I can't, because the payment doesn't appear on the billing page or payment activity), but they tell you they will close your account if you do it, like... wtf?

I am scared for the future where AI handles all of this. It should be ilegal. Companies should have a X support people every Y customers or something like that. I see it everyday and it's getting worse and worse...

Some days I think the only solution is what Bombita did in the movie Relatos Salvajes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP3IwmM3XLQ

reply
I_am_tiberius
2 hours ago
[-]
Tomorrow: We used all your data to train our latest mode, Mythos. That was a mistake. Now go away.
reply
rob
2 hours ago
[-]
Is there a wager for the upcoming "Hey, Boris from the Claude team here." response/comment that will be coming here soon? Usually followed by a "That was a bug! Fixed in version 525,005,0295.2020.00."
reply
wxw
2 hours ago
[-]
I wonder how many customers were unknowingly affected by this (and are unknowingly affected by similar issues). Proper retribution would be to track down all affected users and mitigate all extraneous charges. Unlikely, of course.
reply
nacozarina
3 hours ago
[-]
you knew they were snakes when you picked them up

you will do it again because you are an all-day sucker

reply
raphinou
2 hours ago
[-]
My understanding was they would process a refund, but no further compensation? Otherwise why would they look for an account to process the refund?

English is not my first language, so I might have misunderstood....

reply
teraflop
2 hours ago
[-]
As I read it, they didn't look up the account to process the refund. They looked up the account to decide whether to process the refund, and then the decision was "no".

The rest of the support response is just pleasantries and padding, to dance around this fact ("Your detailed reproduction steps will be valuable" blah blah).

reply
nullorempty
59 minutes ago
[-]
To be frank this kind of rep is what keeps me from getting a personal sub for Claude. I don't have an extra $200 to pay for someone else's bugs.

Anthropic will need to make sure that i am never charged beyond my subscription fees before I consider a sub.

reply
robofanatic
2 hours ago
[-]
> However, I need to let you know that we are unable to issue compensation for degraded service or technical errors that result in incorrect billing routing.

What a claude excuse

reply
nullc
2 hours ago
[-]
HERMES.md -- so beyond fraudulently billing their customer, this is also exposing plainly anti-competitive conduct against the Nous Research open source AI agent software which competes with claude code by intentionally selectively overbilling hermes users?
reply
superfrank
10 minutes ago
[-]
I saw this bug mentioned on Reddit a few days ago when it first got reported and someone said it was also triggered by certain file names used in OpenClaw.

I don't think it's as sinister as you're implying. I think it's part of them disallowing 3rd party clients from using Claude Code subscription and someone making a bad assumption that certain files in a repo being a good signal that someone is attempting to bypass those rules.

It's still not a good look for Anthropic, but I don't take this as a secret attempt to sabotage a competitor. I take it as them trying to enforce rules that they had very publicly announced.

reply
sam0x17
2 hours ago
[-]
Sounds like a vibe-coded feature if I ever heard of one
reply
diego_sandoval
3 hours ago
[-]
If Mythos is so smart, how come Anthropic does dumb shit like this every week?
reply
dryarzeg
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm not sure (I'm not in Anthropic, I'm not related to them, I'm just guessing), but I think that humans that worked on so-called "Mythos" (I'm sorry but I'm taking this one with a pinch of salt) and humans who work on/responsible for Claude Code, API and similar features are different humans. Completely different.
reply
darepublic
20 minutes ago
[-]
They're humanists. Haven't you seen those awesome chalk drawings outside their hq?
reply
captainarab
1 hour ago
[-]
I purchased a 12-month subscription for my partner, and Anthropic never delivered the gift to their email, only sent me an invoice.

No response from customer service.. only their AI Agent Support.. Which has still not offered me a refund.

I may have to do a chargeback.

reply
jesse_dot_id
1 hour ago
[-]
Waiting for customer service to make a comeback. It seems like SaaS is an infinite see of shitty chatbots doing a whole lot of brand damage. Basically for any service that I use, whenever I am forced to interact with a chatbot, that company takes a critical hit to its reputation going forward because the interaction is never anything but enraging.
reply
pawelduda
2 hours ago
[-]
I find it increasingly ironic that the company that wants you to think software engineering as a profession is doomed, seems to be speedrunning tech fuckups bucket list, most likely using their own product, to achieve this very goal
reply
bobjordan
2 hours ago
[-]
I also had some unexplained extra usage which ended up using 236 dollars. I pretty much just shrugged it off since they had comped me 200 dollars of it and then just toggled extra usage off.
reply
DeathArrow
57 minutes ago
[-]
He should use credit card chargeback.
reply
phyzix5761
2 hours ago
[-]
Do a chargeback?
reply
donohoe
1 hour ago
[-]
I am confused.

The person who created the PR is user "sasha-id".

The person saying no to the refund is also user "sasha-id".

What?

Where was it exactly thats someone from Anthropic said no to a refund request? I feel I am missing the obvious somehow.

reply
winddude
1 hour ago
[-]
there was a time when tech companies gave bug bounties. Now it's fuck you, we vibe coded this slop, and we love it. Oh we emailed your company, ran massive marketing campaigns in the media to pitch replacing you.
reply
varispeed
1 hour ago
[-]
I wonder when Anthropic will give refunds for all the sessions with nerfed / dumbed down Opus.
reply
bdangubic
3 hours ago
[-]
Claude is running their accounting department
reply
scotty79
3 hours ago
[-]
Giving them access to your account or credit card is a bit wild. That's what prepaid cards are for. You charge it with exact amount of money you need to pay for what you want and leave it empty after you pay. You can later watch for bounced payment request to help evaluate their reputation. At this point Anthropic is about as reputable as shady porn site.
reply
wswope
2 hours ago
[-]
See also: privacy.com

(Virtual card provider that generates cards as a free-to-the-user service. They make their money from a cut of the standard transaction fees. Cards are locked to a single merchant and it’s easy to configure limits.)

reply
reader9274
1 hour ago
[-]
> Thanks for the report! This was an overactive anti-abuse system. Fixed.

Ah yes, cause who bothers to test any releases to actual paying customers

reply
shevy-java
1 hour ago
[-]
AI company not giving a refund?

I think people put this out of proportion. Yes, you can reason this is ethically correct - I don't object to this. But people used Anthropic, Claude etc... in the first place. Why would you use something to then be disappointed about how it performs, when it comes to AI? Would not be the better and easier strategy to ... not use it in the first place, and make yourself dependable on AI? I don't fully understand this. I would not run into a similar situation because I simply don't use any AI. I actively want to support those folks who don't use AI either - that way we can point out all the ill effects of AI, such as in the case of Anthropic to prioritize on greed.

reply
vadansky
2 hours ago
[-]
This is annoying since I have a side project I like to use alchemical names in, and HERMES.md sounds like something I would do. Guess I have to go with AGRIPPA.md, but Hermes Trismegistus is so much cooler...
reply
slopinthebag
2 hours ago
[-]
Searching for the strings of configuration files of other agents in a codebase's git history in order to "detect" unauthorised usage is such a stupid idea I know it 100% came from Claude, and I doubt any of the vibesloppers working at Anthropic bothered to turn their brain on enough for the 5 seconds of thinking it would take to grasp that fact.
reply
mlazos
1 hour ago
[-]
I think one day later the guy got his refund? You all need to chill I feel like. HN is a bubble sometimes

https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/53262#issue...

reply
lysace
3 hours ago
[-]
They just lost the Claude lottery, that’s all.
reply
melonpan7
1 hour ago
[-]
Another reason to avoid Anthropic products now.
reply
dakiol
3 hours ago
[-]
C'mon folks, let's stop using Claude|ChatGPT|etc en masse. It's time to start the revolution (from our beds, at least)
reply
Ekaros
2 hours ago
[-]
Already way ahead of you. I never started so I consider myself a winner.

On other hand I wonder what other filenames one could include in their repos to cause this sort of behaviour. Kinda a nudge towards people leaving these tools.

reply
browningstreet
2 hours ago
[-]
I tried to switch to a competing inferencing platform but they have billing issues as well.
reply
runlaszlorun
3 hours ago
[-]
I'm in. What's next?
reply
dakiol
3 hours ago
[-]
Invest in local and open source LLMs. They are not as advanced as proprietary ones, but we can all use them and define them as the standard. We don't need closed models
reply
frankharv
3 hours ago
[-]
Use your brain to solve problems not a computer.
reply
nekusar
3 hours ago
[-]
Local LLMs.

Krasis is one such tool that allows large models using blended GPU/RAM.

ik_llama for better performance than llama.

ComfyAI for local image generation.

Nanocrab seems better for orchestration. Still need a good system capability firewall.

reply
nativeit
2 hours ago
[-]
Who’s buying the memory for this effort?
reply
bad_haircut72
2 hours ago
[-]
Think how cheap its gonna be when everyone abandons the cloud providers and they start selling the 50B of hardware they over-invested in
reply
ReptileMan
3 hours ago
[-]
The only revolution that got started in beds successfully so far was the sexual one.
reply
DeathArrow
54 minutes ago
[-]
Google worked for tens of years to make people disgusted and hating them. Big AI companies succeeded in just a few years, so AI must be an accelerator.
reply
wartywhoa23
2 hours ago
[-]
Welcome to the Global Hormuz.

The deeper into the new world order, the more you'll be charged for every breath, by design and by bugs-as-features all the same, refunds be against technofascist manifestos.

reply
ReptileMan
3 hours ago
[-]
That has a chance to be the highest opportunity cost bug in history ...
reply
IAmGraydon
1 hour ago
[-]
"We're already losing literal fuck-tons of money by the minute, so we can't afford to refund you for our mistake."
reply
MagicMoonlight
2 hours ago
[-]
Another slop coded piece of shit causing stupid bugs.

I can’t believe they paid 100m for some of these employees. They could have bought entire companies of real developers.

reply
PunchyHamster
1 hour ago
[-]
Oh, no it was absolutely on purpose. Why else you'd have code that looks for a certain string in commit and does the reroute ?
reply