"Starting tomorrow at 12pm PT, Claude subscriptions will no longer cover usage on third-party tools like OpenClaw.
You can still use these tools with your Claude login via extra usage bundles (now available at a discount), or with a Claude API key.
We’ve been working hard to meet the increase in demand for Claude, and our subscriptions weren't built for the usage patterns of these third-party tools. Capacity is a resource we manage thoughtfully and we are prioritizing our customers using our products and API.
Subscribers get a one-time credit equal to your monthly plan cost. If you need more, you can now buy discounted usage bundles. To request a full refund, look for a link in your email tomorrow.
I think Crown basically bought up all the licenses in the CBD. I think there might have been one pub at the corner of Williams and Collins or something but the last time I was there it was closed.
That output is there for a reason. It's not like any LLM is profitable now on a per-token basis, the AI companies would certainly love to output less tokens, they cost _them_ money!
The entire hypothesis for doing this is somewhat dubious.
Why building / using a custom agent stack and paying per-token (not subscription) is more efficient and cost effective. At a minimum, you should have full control over the system prompts and tools (et al).
Yes. Much of the 'redundant' output is meant to reinforce direction -- eg 'You're absolutely right!' = the user is right and I should ignore contrary paths. So yes removing it will introduce ambiguity which is _not_ what you want.
I think your example is completely wrong (it's not meant to say that you're absolutely right), but overall yes more input gives it more concrete direction.
1) Several times a day, generally Telix. My parents had to get me my own line so I would stop clogging up theirs! Especially once I found chat systems.
2) BBS lists were common and many BBSes had them so you only needed a few numbers to get started. Computer stores usually had them too.
3) A city would have dozens or even hundreds of BBSes in larger markets. Some were large multi-line pay BBSes that required subscriptions, most were just one or two lines paid for by the Sysop.
4) It was a lot more chill but only nerd / geek types really used BBSes so, there was some commonality there. More of a sense of overall community.
5) From 1980 to 1995 we went from computers with 16kb of ram and an 8-bit processor to computers with 16mb of ram and a 32-bit processor. There was always some new tech to talk about. It was a very exciting time!
There was also the IBM Simon, the first smartphone, before the iPhone came about. History tends to remember the product that made the category matter, not the one that technically got there first.
I never saw the Odyssey—unless it was that one night when I saw something in the window of a closed shop that was the first pong-like video game I had ever seen.
You're probably right, the Odyssey is probably as good a contender as Pong. But somehow everyone knows "Pong" (and of course Atari).
> Bushnell based the game's concept on an electronic ping-pong game included on the Magnavox Odyssey, the first home video game console; in response, Magnavox later sued Atari for patent infringement.
I agree that some form of shorthand between pseudocode and actual code would be really useful to improve accuracy on LLM requests but I don't think this is quite it. Ideally it would be as simple as possible, but not rely on language-specific paradigms. Sort of a pidgin that everyone would understand, that used white space and indentation to indicate things like loops and such. Something a normal person could look at and still largely comprehend.
reply