frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Caption Game: Multiplayer Meme / Caption Browser Game for 3-7 Players

https://captiongame.com
1•keymash•30s ago•0 comments

CATL claims 6-minute charge and 1,500km range for new electric vehicle batteries

https://www.ft.com/content/1773de37-2595-4d9f-9536-dbe03ff1f8d3
2•scrlk•3m ago•1 comments

Connect 47 tools, query everything in plain English

https://skopx.com
1•skopx•3m ago•0 comments

Claude Code no longer included in Pro tier

https://bsky.app/profile/edzitron.com/post/3mjzxwfx3qs2a
1•johnduhart•4m ago•1 comments

China Did Not Build Its Math Machine from Scratch. It Rewired the Soviet One

https://valeman.medium.com/china-did-not-build-its-math-machine-from-scratch-it-rewired-the-sovie...
1•ibobev•5m ago•0 comments

HyperZHub Browser

https://github.com/hyperzteam456/hyperzhub/
1•HyperZTeam•7m ago•1 comments

SpaceX Said to Agree to Buy Cursor for More Than $50B

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/21/business/spacex-cursor-deal.html
28•markthethomas•13m ago•9 comments

Navy Fires Drone-Frying LOCUST Laser from Supercarrier USS George H.W. Bush

https://www.twz.com/news-features/navy-fires-dronefrying-locust-laser-from-supercarrier-uss-georg...
1•breve•14m ago•0 comments

I built a client-side PDF tool (no uploads, runs in browser)

https://yutools.qzz.io/tools
1•zhiliao000•17m ago•0 comments

Mozilla: Anthropic's Mythos found 271 security vulnerabilities in Firefox 150

https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/04/mozilla-anthropics-mythos-found-271-zero-day-vulnerabilities-i...
2•ndr42•18m ago•0 comments

Escom AG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escom_AG
1•doener•18m ago•0 comments

Flu vaccine no longer mandated for US troops

https://apnews.com/article/hegseth-pentagon-flu-vaccine-mandate-us-military-ce6069bf42de217092f9c...
2•petethomas•19m ago•0 comments

I Put a Full JVM Inside a Browser Tab. It "Works". Technically. Eventually

https://bmarti44.substack.com/p/i-put-a-full-jvm-inside-a-browser
1•SerCe•19m ago•0 comments

Access to knowledge is no longer the limitation

https://idiallo.com/blog/access-to-knowledge-is-no-longer-a-limitation
1•ibudiallo•22m ago•0 comments

What I Learned About Billionaires at Jeff Bezos's Private Retreat

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/05/billionaire-consequence-free-reality/686588/
3•mykowebhn•23m ago•1 comments

Show HN: Should – Expressive Assertions for Go

1•andrey-1201•24m ago•0 comments

Making the illustrations for "Founding is a Snowball"

https://blog.bawolf.com/p/making-the-illustrations-for-founding
1•bryantwolf•26m ago•0 comments

SpaceX and Cursor partnership. Right to acquire Cursor later this year

https://twitter.com/spacex/status/2046713419978453374
18•dmarcos•27m ago•2 comments

Weev, the Neo-Nazi Who Helped Build Peter Thiel's Online Influence Empire

https://bylinetimes.com/2026/04/14/the-neo-nazi-enforcer-who-helped-build-peter-thiels-online-inf...
7•tastyface•27m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Almanac MCP, turn Claude Code into a Deep Research agent

https://www.openalmanac.org/
2•rohans0509•28m ago•0 comments

Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket is grounded after failed satellite launch

https://apnews.com/article/blue-origin-new-glenn-rocket-launch-9498c077799420170960680a04e52f84
1•mpweiher•31m ago•0 comments

The levels of Mong Kok: one of Hong Kong's labyrinthine camera malls

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7475558634/inside-hong-kongs-labyrinthine-camera-malls
2•PaulHoule•31m ago•0 comments

LLM Position Bias Benchmark: Swapped-Order Pairwise Judging

https://github.com/lechmazur/position_bias
1•zone411•32m ago•0 comments

Indeed paid plans notify employers when an employee applies to different jobs

https://old.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/1sru8d6/til_indeed_can_be_paid_to_notify_employers_when/
2•thisislife2•32m ago•2 comments

AI as a Fascist Artifact

https://tante.cc/2026/04/21/ai-as-a-fascist-artifact/
4•vladyslavfox•33m ago•0 comments

New cancer cluster feared in N.J. neighborhood

https://www.nj.com/news/2026/04/new-cancer-cluster-feared-in-nj-neighborhood.html
1•johntfella•33m ago•0 comments

FBI: Catching a Cuban Spy

https://www.fbi.gov/news/podcasts/inside-the-fbi-podcast-catching-a-cuban-spy
1•737min•33m ago•0 comments

Approaches to Tenancy in Postgres

https://planetscale.com/blog/approaches-to-tenancy-in-postgres
2•0xKelsey•34m ago•0 comments

Mesh3d Experiments

https://mesh3d.gallery/experiments
1•memalign•34m ago•0 comments

Impacts of updates in open-source databases

https://www.percona.com/blog/impacts-of-updates-in-open-source-databases/
1•0xKelsey•34m ago•0 comments
Open in hackernews

Claude Code removed from Anthropic's Pro plan

https://claude.com/pricing
239•JamesMcMinn•1h ago

Comments

JamesMcMinn•1h ago
I can't find an announcement yet, however the pricing page now shows it's not included, and various support articles have removed any mention of the the Pro plan including access to claude code.

See [1] and [2] for an example of a support article that's had claude code removed as a Pro feature.

I guess this is the beginning of the end for subsidised model access, at least from Anthropic.

[1] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/8325606-what-is-the-p... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20260420065828/https://support.c...

tmp10423288442•1h ago
5 minutes ago, I was seeing the old version of the page in which Claude Pro included Claude Code. I refreshed and now see that it does not.
_aavaa_•1h ago
It’s now being explicitly shown as unavailable on the pro plan, scroll down to the comparison matrix.
thebiblelover7•1h ago
And this page as well, showing how to use Claude Code on the Max plan: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11145838-using-claude...
UncleOxidant•57m ago
Claude Code is a freely downloadable CLI Agent. Why would they not let you use that anymore?
ezfe•54m ago
You have to login and authorize it? It costs money to process tokens.
foolswisdom•54m ago
Because including it in a plan results in un-metered usage?
UncleOxidant•52m ago
My usage of Claude Code in the pro plan is definitely metered. Every couple hours I have to wait an hour or two and the last few weeks I've hit my weekly limit on Wednesday.
_--__--__•54m ago
Because 'claude -p' is a backdoor for any third party client to use subsidized token pricing, and they've flipped course again to decide they do want the OpenClaw type users as long as they're on the $100 plan.
skeledrew•43m ago
> Because 'claude -p' is a backdoor for any third party client to use subsidized token pricing

Wasn't this obvious from day 1 though? Can't see how anyone could've missed that.

_--__--__•38m ago
It was obvious, which is why their earlier decision to attempt to restrict 3p access was hugely unpopular. They're now trying to walk that back but on the condition that those users need to be on the higher plan.
skeledrew•26m ago
Now they're hurting their popularity with those who actually don't mind using Claude Code. I've been quietly swallowing a lot of performance degradation over the past few weeks as I get the resource crunch, but I'm definitely not going back to copy-pasting between browser and editor. And I have no intention of upgrading to Max or doing per token usage.
riffraff•6m ago
It seems they were losing money on pro subscriptions with code so if people stop using them it's actually ok for them.

They have now moved to be enterprise providers and don't need the cheap pro users as loss leaders anymore.

SpicyLemonZest•22m ago
The question isn't whether anyone could have missed it, but whether Claude Code has release gates that allow people to require that obvious problems should be resolved. From their release velocity it's pretty clear that they do not.
thebiblelover7•1h ago
Previous page, when Claude Code was included:

https://web.archive.org/web/20260421141017/https://claude.co...

Edit: fixed the url thanks to scq

jamietanna•1h ago
> The Wayback Machine has not archived that URL.

Might have been taken down?

scq•1h ago
There seems to be some JS on the page that messes with the URL. Try this one: https://web.archive.org/web/20260421141017/https://claude.co...
hannahstrawbrry•1h ago
Claude Code page still shows it included with Pro/Max. https://claude.com/product/claude-code
lukeasrodgers•1h ago
Claude Design was iterating on the plans page and decided to remove clutter and their review bot LGTM’d it as “minor copy change human review not required” and auto-merged it.
nubinetwork•51m ago
Shits confusing... I'm using the Claude code vscode plugin, yet my account page says I'm not using Claude code... so am I, or aren't I?
ed•1h ago
This makes sense given Anthropic’s recent downtime and resource constraints.

Opus 4.7 consumes tokens at a faster rate and folks were complaining that the Pro plan included too few credits for real work.

And Anthropic now allows `claude -p` (which invokes Claude code) for 3rd party agents like OpenClaw, which consume far more tokens by running autonomously, 24/7.

sama004•56m ago
only if it actually improves the downtime, people were expecting the same when they revoked openclaw access but that didn't change anything
verdverm•1h ago
I just cancelled my plan, but still have access to Pro and Code apparently until my cycle would have renewed. Hopefully they get a clear signal from this, especially if more of us cancel with the intention to sign back up should they reverse this decision.
jryb•57m ago
I’d be surprised if they’re running at less than 100% capacity after this. It’s just too useful to too many people for whom an $80/month increase is immaterial (I speculate)
chewz•1h ago
Makes sense.

It is over for the little guy - home enthusiasts and vibe coders. Too many of them saturating resources for Max users.

IF you cannot afford few hundred dollars subscription go out and breathe fresh air. But if you can, watch where the ball is rolling - few thousand dollars subscriptions and even less programmers.

whattheheckheck•49m ago
Vscode agent mode and github copilot can use Claude models and has feature parity with the .md customization for agents prompts skills etc.

Not too expensive

user34283•14m ago
They slapped a 7.5x “promotional” multiplier on Opus 4.7 and they are removing Opus 4.6 in short order.

I heard they disabled signups for non-business accounts too.

Best forget about using Claude Opus models in Copilot.

rustyhancock•30m ago
Hear HN tell of it, Claude pays for itself 3× over.

Something tells me congitively it's making us misjudge how productive it's making us.

It's clearly massively increasing output, but did the market already soak up all that productivity and now it's not compensated?

If your salary is 50k. And Claude makes you 2x as productive, why aren't you earning 100k?

Why is it anyone can't afford $200/mo if it's truely increasing worker productivity?

There seems to be a paradox here.

Personally I switched to Z.ai and GLM quite some time ago. I've not noticed any decrease in quality or quantity of my work.

zormino•8m ago
Because most people work for someone else and don't decide their own salaries. It's not doubling productivity, but even a 10-20% boost to productivity for a team of engineers means that, as a business, even $1k per month per seat is perfectly acceptable. For consumers and hobbyists that basically kills access.
npunt•3m ago
Agree about psychological impact outpacing likely actual impact, but that’s a relatively temporary phenomena as we are all adapting to the new way things work.

Productivity wise employment is far more than code production productivity in a vacuum, and productivity gains are rarely captured by employees. I wouldn’t expect to see much in the next 1-2 years besides noticing effective teams increasing velocity of features.

I think people in forums like complaining about things and aren’t representative of the broader set of people who are just using the tools, so no real paradox. For vast majority of tech jobs, $200/mo is still an absolute steal in terms of what these tools offer. Only the dullest of companies would not realize this.

Fwiw in the 80s-90s computers also didn’t really register in productivity metrics. Qualitative changes occur long before accurate measurement catches up.

jfrbfbreudh•27m ago
Truly makes no sense. I pay for the $200/month plan and end up using about $3k/month worth of API costs. I imagine that the only reason they haven’t cut me off is because my habits serve as good training data for them.

Guess they’ve decided to move in the direction of allocating compute primarily to power users and enterprise.

But power users are not a sticky customer base. I just bought the ChatGPT Pro plan and would immediately switch over if the model performance is better and/or I get more compute.

poetril•1h ago
I’ve got nearly 10 months left on my yearly subscription, I wonder what that means for my access.
UncleOxidant•56m ago
Same. I hope we're grandfathered in. Otherwise current pro subscribers who signed up with the understanding that they could use it in Claude Code are going to be extremely pissed and go off and sign up for alternatives (or start running local models instead). I mean, I guess they could say too bad, they got your money, but this would destroy their brand among people who are currently their most loyal users.
enedil•52m ago
Or also sue in fact or demand refunds.
skeledrew•40m ago
I don't want to leave, but I'm ready. The entire reason I got a Pro sub was so I can use Claude Code instead of going between browser and editor.
Larrikin•1h ago
Why is management at Anthropic trying so hard to ruin their reputation with developers? I missed the OpenClaw hype but it was something that kept me excited about my yearly subscription.

It makes no sense to do one of the higher tier plans unless they are directly generating you money.

verdverm•1h ago
Also note that they are letting OpenClaw be used again with `claude -p`, so a partial reversal
Xunjin•57m ago
And I thought MS was confused one on how to do pricing and business decisions.
dd8601fn•49m ago
Last I saw they have 21 products or services named Copilot. I think they still win the confusion prize.
Xunjin•34m ago
We should have "The Copilot Award goes to..." Every year for the most confusing product name/lineup
dd8601fn•21m ago
I love it. It’ll be doubly funny when the Xbox marketing team wins the Copilot Confusion Award.
jamietanna•24m ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47853799 for the curious
mrhottakes•56m ago
they don't care about their reputation with devs, they care about their reputation with people that can write them big fat checks
plutokras•41m ago
At my company, devs were the ones pushing for the Claude subscription. Left to management, we would have only had GitHub Copilot – we already have an existing relationship with them and the tool is good enough.

If Anthropic is intent on losing the goodwill of the devs, they might not be happy with the consequences. Their product is quite commoditized at this point – the latest GPT, Gemini or GLM is just as good for most enterprise tasks.

fg137•44m ago
They care about developers from companies that are on their team/enterprise plans or using bedrock.

Individual users barely matter. That's probably also the same group that decides to switch to Codex/Kimi/[whatever the hottest agent on any given day] on a whim, which Anthropic doesn't necessarily want to do business with.

tayo42•34m ago
> Individual users barely matter.

Individuals are the ones that push for new tools at work though.

fg137•20m ago
A fraction of them do. Many just use whatever the employer provides to get their job done. HN users only represent a small sample of the overall software developers which is nowhere nearly enthusiastic about new things.

Source: what I witnessed at my company

papichulo2023•25m ago
Where I work. Medium size, base in Europe company. It is paying over 1800 per dev in AI tools. Home users stand no chance.
werd_eithw•1h ago
Their chat bot claims that pro users still have access to Claude Code.
aenis•54m ago
"You are absolutely right!"
Xunjin•1h ago
Is this confirmed?!
skeledrew•59m ago
This is a joke, right... right??
dv_dt•58m ago
I predict this may get reversed as it would be a huge opening for glm, kimi, and qwen offerings. I'd switch instead of upgrading to Max
dd8601fn•45m ago
Do they have their own cli agents or just the api inference services?
jmcodes•43m ago
I don't think they do but you can always use OpenCode or Pi Agent.
hannahstrawbrry•26m ago
very easy to configure claude code to route to GLM as well.
charcircuit•7m ago
Moonshot AI has Kimi Code and their $20 per month plan had a lot more than Anthropic's (before 4.6 and the other changes to eat up your limit faster).
skeledrew•34m ago
Time to do research.
dallen33•57m ago
They should allow existing Pro plan users to keep using Claude Code.
wilg•56m ago
Related perhaps to GitHub pausing signups for Copilot? https://github.blog/changelog/2026-04-20-changes-to-github-c...
fuomag9•52m ago
I'm asking for a full refund of my plan via amex if this actually happens. Fuck them.
vicchenai•52m ago
Saw this coming eventually. $20/month for autonomous agents running 24/7 was clearly not sustainable at API pricing. The part that's surprising is there's still no official announcement - just a quiet page edit.
boogerbuttcheek•45m ago
Choosing to do it quietly instead of letting everyone know is actually not that surprising.
natrys•26m ago
You are replying to a bot. HN and Reddit is full of these now.
skeledrew•8m ago
And yet they're very aware that Hacker News, etc exists and so the awareness and backlash would be instant. It's like they want to get a lower rating from the community. Maybe that's their solution for the resource issue: make enough people mad so they abandon their subscriptions.
skeledrew•35m ago
> running 24/7

This was never the case though. There's a per week and per 5 hour quota. If you exhaust either you have to wait for the reset. What they're doing makes no sense.

moregrist•35m ago
The $20/mo plan never supported 24/7 autonomous agents. With Opus 4.5 and 4.6 I would hit resource limits after a reasonable amount of work, which corresponded to a variable amount of wall clock time.

This makes me think either they’re severely resource constrained and need to focus on “high value” customers, they’re bleeding money on inference, or their sales and marketing team is incompetent.

Regardless, this feels like a pretty big rug pull. Especially without a phase-out period and a real announcement. As someone using Claude Code on a personal hobby project to get a better feel for its capabilities, I’m not sure what to do now. I can’t justify the $100+/mo plans for a hobby project.

My choices are then:

  - Code this project by hand, which would be fun but defeats the point of this being my agentic coding project.

  - Find another model and use Codex or OpenCode or whatever.

  - Put the project on a shelf till this shakes out.
Fun times.
gozucito•51m ago
If it was removed from the pro plan, then the max plan should list claude code as one of its extras, and it doesn't.

I would not jump to conclusions yet.

thyb23•47m ago
In the “Compare features across plans” section, Claude Code appears to be available only on the Max plan.
civvv•47m ago
If you scroll down, you can clearly see that the Pro plan has an "x" on Claude Code now.
guelo•51m ago
This is more ethical than what they've been doing, trying to keep those subscribers but limiting them to the point it's become unusable. But it's also kneecaping themselves because they'll miss out on any innovation and hype coming out of the hobbyist community.
robertkarl•51m ago
I don't think I've ever been on such a rollercoaster with a company's reputation in the developer space. I started in January on the $20 plan, essentially my first agentic AI programming. I quickly started hitting limits developing several apps at the same time. I went up to the $200 plan after seeing the value.

After seeing my own issues with 4.6 and the mega-post on Github about declining metrics in a decent dataset of claude chats by Stella Laurenzo at AMD (https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/42796), I downgraded to the $100 plan. Hallucinations. Laziness. Lack of thinking. The responses on those mega-threads from Anthropic rubbed me the wrong way in a "you're holding it wrong" kinda way.

In the past week, I downgraded back to the $20 plan because the Codex $20 plan on 5.4 was working so well for me.

Then throw in other oddball events like the source code leak, and the super positive Anthropic events like their interactions with the current administration. It's a wild ride.

I can't understand removing Claude Code from $20. I'm interested to see whether this is confirmed or not.

I'm a career engineer and I went from being one of their most outspoken proponents (at least within my circle) and now.... I'm not.

jmcodes•45m ago
Same loved them, told my team about them, got them to switch off of cursor, now I'm telling them to swap to Codex.

Anthropic really pissed me off with their harness crap. They're well within their rights but their communication over it was enough to get me to swap. I don't need extra hurdles when there's a perfectly valid alternative right there. They don't have the advantage they think they do.

operatingthetan•32m ago
I think we are inevitably heading to using the cheap Chinese models like Kimi, GLM, and Minimax for the bulk of engineering tasks. Within 3-6 months they will be at Opus 4.6 level.
robertkarl•29m ago
This was literally my task today, to try out Qwen 9B locally on my, albeit a bit memory-constrained at 18GB, macbook with pi or opencode. Before reading this update.
operatingthetan•26m ago
Minimax coding plan is $10 a month for roughly 3x the $20 Claude Pro CLI usage allowed. That would be good place to start. 200k context though.
jorjon•14m ago
MiniMax has its own issues. Server overloads, API errors, and failure to adhere to even the system prompt. It can happily work for hours and get no job done.
hank2000•25m ago
how was it? I'm doing this today
robertkarl•12m ago
I will report back... but I have to recommend this comment on a post about Qwen 3.6 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47843466 by daemonologist

it goes into detail about llama-server args; quants to try; and layer/kv cache splits. I plan to try the techniques there.

someuser54541•18m ago
Please report back, would be very interested in your findings.
try-working•13m ago
Kimi K3 in July-September is the big one.
robertkarl•21m ago
One thing I enjoy about Cursor and Codex mac apps is the embedded preview window. I know it's not as hardcore as the terminal/tmux but it's hella convenient. But Cursor bugs me with the opacity around what model I'm using. It seems deliberately to be routing requests based on its perceived complexity. What draws you to codex vs cursor?
elschneider•44m ago
I had a similar ride, but disagree with your conclusion. Opus 4.7 is so incredibly powerful from my experience, that nothing else really matters and I think at Anthropic they know it. People will pay a lot for access to this model.
operatingthetan•43m ago
>Opus 4.7 is so incredibly powerful from my experience,

I'm not challenging your opinion, but this is an outlier in the general current public opinion about it.

elschneider•31m ago
Yea, I've seen a lot of whining online, because its more expensive, but from the interactions I've had I'd say, that it's well worth it. To me it feels like another step change, similar to when 4.5 was introduced. Definitely a different beast.

EDIT: it is also surprising to me that everyone seems to believe the people at Anthropic are simply incompetent and recklessly risking their good reputation, while very few consider the possible good reasons they might have for taking such drastic measures. And I don't think it's because of financial pressures in their case

user34283•21m ago
I can’t say I’ve used it extensively enough to draw a conclusion, but it did seem similar to GPT 5.4 in Codex.

When I threw it at a difficult issue in an iOS app, it like GPT came up with wrongly guessed explanations. It only found the issue after I had it instrument the app and add extensive logs. Usually GPT 5.4 is the same.

Only that with GPT 5.4 it’s at least included in my subscription, while sending 3-4 messages to Opus 4.7 for this blew through my $20 plan limits and consumed $10 of extra usage on top. At that point I can’t help but bring up how much more expensive it is.

adam_th•9m ago
This is one of the most civil disagreements I've ever seen on the internet and I intend to start using this myself
cjbconnor•22m ago
I've had completely the opposite experience. I've asked for it to research things and it's just told me to "paste xyz into google". Just now I revisited a chat that's 5 days old and asked it to check again (because what I was looking for might have changed), and it said "no".
elschneider•6m ago
It's funny how experiences can be so different. I wonder if this comes down to context. My interactions so far were fairly high-level and in some cases it having a strong opinion was actually super beneficial to the outcome. To me it seemed opinionated, but in a very good way. I can see how this could backfire though and have heard similar reports.
cjbconnor•4m ago
Curious to know what plan you're on? I was on the max 5x plan, but downgraded to pro a few days before the opus 4.7 release.
elschneider•2m ago
I'm on max 5x
Oras•20m ago
Incredible, powerful, but I couldn't believe how fast I hit the limits compared to how it was with Opus 4.6. They removed Opus 4.6 completely from CC. I would prefer it with the previous limits.

That's not how you keep your customers. None of these agents have a moat, I moved away from Cursor when they started doing what Anthropic is doing now, and never went back even when I was a paying customer since the start.

sidrag22•13m ago
they need the devs on board for that to matter, i can get whatever i want done with lesser models already. It is quite literally about just who is not gonna give me the shittiest experience, and at anthropic it sure seems they are determined to annoy everyone since they started gaining in popularity.
strangattractor•42m ago
Hmmm.. I don't see even one commenter asking Claude about this

Yes! Claude Code is included with the Pro plan. Claude The free Claude plan does not include it — you need at least a Pro subscription ($20/month) or API credits to access Claude Code. Howdoiuseai A few things worth knowing about Pro + Claude Code:

Claude Code draws from the same token budget as your regular Claude usage on subscription plans. Once you hit your limit, you either wait for the window to reset or pay overage at standard API rates. SSD Nodes The Pro plan works well for development, small projects, and learning, though you may hit usage limits with extensive coding sessions. ClaudeLog If you have an ANTHROPIC_API_KEY environment variable set on your system, Claude Code will use that API key for authentication instead of your Pro subscription, which would result in API usage charges rather than using your plan's included usage. Claude

If you find yourself hitting rate limits frequently on Pro, the Max plans ($100–$200/month) offer significantly higher usage caps.

EstanislaoStan•37m ago
Claude often doesn't know the truth about Claude Code etc. lol
strangattractor•34m ago
I got down voted by 4 people just for pointing that out. lol
civvv•36m ago
Do you understand how LLM's work and that they are always behind in their knowledge? Unless Claude does a network call to check its own website, it will give you outdated information. Its a prediction model, its not magic.
ricardobeat•35m ago
The $20/month, which is now $17, should give you a hint? Models have a knowledge cut-off and will not reflect up to date information unless you trigger a web search.
operatingthetan•34m ago
That's just a billing trick.

>$17 Per month with annual subscription discount ($200 billed up front). $20 if billed monthly.

hannahstrawbrry•31m ago
FWIW their "Fin" agent on their web page tells me: "Claude Code is not included in the standard Pro plan. It's only available with premium seats on Team and Enterprise plans. However, Pro plans do include improved coding capabilities through our GitHub integration, which lets you connect code repositories directly to Claude. You also get access to code execution and file creation features in the Claude apps. For the full Claude Code terminal experience, you'd need to upgrade to a Team or Enterprise plan with premium seats"
strangattractor•22m ago
Even odder. I asked: Are you sure?

Yes, confirmed directly from Anthropic's website. Claude Code is included in the Pro plan, described as perfect for short coding sprints in small codebases with access to both Sonnet 4.6 and Opus 4.7. Claude

You said: Is claude code included with the pro subscription Is claude code included with the pro subscription

3:11 PM Claude responded: Yes, Claude Code is included with the Pro plan ($20/month). Yes, Claude Code is included with the Pro plan ($20/month). You can use it in the terminal, desktop app, VS Code, JetBrains, and on the web.

The main caveat is that Claude Code draws from the same usage limits as your regular Claude chat — so heavy coding sessions can eat into your quota faster. If you find yourself hitting limits often, the Max plans ($100–$200/month) offer significantly more headroom.

Thats a head scratcher:)

eleventen•14m ago
Matches my experience very well. All the goodwill earned from taking a stand against the DoD seemingly forgotten in a month. Coincidentally, I canceled my pro subscription and got set up with OpenCode and OpenRouter last night.
alwillis•12m ago
> I can't understand removing Claude Code from $20

Not according to their webpage: "Claude Code is included in your Pro plan. Perfect for short coding sprints in small codebases with access to both Sonnet 4.6 and Opus 4.7." [1]

[1]: https://claude.com/product/claude-code

eleventen•9m ago
There are clear contradictions across their marketing site. As others have pointed out, it's being removed from some help articles and the pricing chart now shows it revoked. Confusing signals, but they seem to be changing all pages in this direction and haven't updated that one yet.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47854478

zormino•11m ago
I think removing Claude Code from the $20 tier is a terrible idea, I never would've gone from nothing right into the $100/200 tier. The $20 plan let me get my feet wet and see how good it could be, and in less than a week I was on the $100 plan.

I think they need to at least have a 1 month introductory rate for the max plan at $20, or devs that decide to try out agentic coding just won't go to Anthropic.

That leads to downstream impacts, like when a company is deciding which AI coding tools to provide and the feedback management hears everyone is already used to (e.x.) Codex, then Anthropic starts losing the enterprise side of things.

Yizahi•10m ago
LLM monsters are deeply unprofitable, going by the industry hearsay (which is the only thing we have, given ultra secrecy of the LLM corporations). The only two LLM companies which disclosed their finances without lies, were two Chinese corporations and they, unsurprisingly, were deeply in red.

Remember the old saying about boiling a frog? LLM corporations need to make most of their users pay hundreds per month, asap. This is Anthropic increasing temperature regulator under the pot just a tiny little bit. Not the first and not the last time.

civvv•50m ago
Does this mean that for enterprises using per-seat pricing, only the $100 premium seat gets access to claude code?
vict7•22m ago
Team plan shows “Claude code” in a main bullet point still. Which would indicate it is part of the team plan regardless if it has premium seats or not.

But it seems this is all in a state of flux.

And there’s the lovely asterisk at the bottom:

> Prices and plans are subject to change at Anthropic's discretion.

wilg•48m ago
People really have to internalize that these things are expensive to run, and that there isn't enough compute to go around, like actually for real for real, which is likely the source of this. My guess is its a temporary new sign up pause.
nkzd•47m ago
Meh, $20 Codex is better at this moment anyway.
danielspace23•46m ago
With GLM and Kimi getting better and better, with both still providing low-cost coding plans with higher quotas, and with how trivial it is to switch to them even within Claude CLI, I'm not sure what makes Anthropic think their users would rather pay 5x than switch to the competition.
zozbot234•38m ago
Never mind GLM and Kimi, even GPT 5.4 offers a great plan for $20/mo. Even if it gets increased rate limits after May, it's still quite likely that casual users won't be hitting them on a regular basis.
UncleOxidant•35m ago
I signed up for a 3 month plan with Z.ai so I could try out GLM-5.1. That was a few weeks ago when it was still $27 for 3 months, now it's $48 for 3 months. I hit limits at least as much as I do with Claude. I hit a weekly limit at one point and it said I wasn't going be able to get access again for 8 days (more than a week).
mudkipdev•19m ago
The GLM coding plan price increased dramatically
tacker2000•45m ago
Funny, I just signed up for Pro a couple hours ago, to check how Claude Code works using this plan, instead of using my API keys.

I got rate limited after about 30mins of coding and was thinking, who the hell i going to work like this?

So they really seem to be running into extreme capacity issued now.

DeathArrow•45m ago
I'm very happy with GLM 5.1, MiniMax M2.7 and Kimi K2.5. My wallet is happy, too.
gbalduzzi•44m ago
I think that Anthropic has capacity problems. They went all in on acquiring new customers but now they don't have enough capacity to both serve users and train new models, so they are trying to limit user usages.

It is pure speculation of course, but I don't have any other explanations on the stuff they are pulling in the last 2 months.

gAI•6m ago
Yeah, this is pretty clearly what's going on, but I wish they'd be more transparent about it. Funneling compute to Mythos and Design, while auto-setting effort levels lower and removing user control of extended thinking. I don't think the need to shuffle compute around is unique to Anthropic, though. I suspect it's part of why Sora got killed. And everyone's having uptime issues. Are we reaching the limits of the available compute?
quietsegfault•43m ago
Trying to chat with "fin" is like trying to argue with a bowl of congealed oatmeal.

Me: Why is your website saying Claude Code is not included in Claude Pro subscriptions?

"Fin", the slow, dopey AI agent: That’s confusing, but it usually comes down to what “Claude Code” means in that context. Claude Pro does include Claude Code (the Code tab in the desktop app, and Claude Code access for individuals).

What Pro does not include is API access via the Claude Console. Those are separate products: Pro is for chat, and the Console is for building apps with the API.

So if the website is saying “not included,” it’s likely referring to Console/API access, not the Claude Code feature itself.

Did that clear up the confusion?

Me: No. It clearly states on the pricing page that Claude Code is not included.

Fin: That’s frustrating, <NAME>. The key detail is that Claude Code is included in Claude Pro, but API access via the Claude Console is not.

So if the page you’re looking at says “Claude Code is not included,” it’s almost certainly referring to Console/API access (the developer platform), not the Claude Code feature itself.

If you tell me the exact URL or screenshot of the page that says that, I can confirm which “Code” it’s talking about.

Was that explanation helpful?

Me: https://claude.com/pricing

Fin: On https://claude.com/pricing, Pro does include Claude Code. It’s listed right there under Pro’s “Everything in Free, plus” bullets: “Includes Claude Code.” So if you’re seeing “not included” somewhere else on that page, it’s likely referring to something different than the Claude Code feature. The one thing Pro does not include is API access via the Claude Console (that’s a separate product).

Also, the Code tab in the desktop app requires a Pro (or Max/Team/Enterprise) subscription, and it may not show for everyone yet since it’s still rolling out.

Does that clear things up for you?

Me: there is clearly an "x" at this page. escalate to a human immediately.

and then the cycle continues. I'm cancelling my Anthropic subscription, sick of worrying about limits and getting banned and simply awful experience.

UncleOxidant•41m ago
I don't see it mentioned in the Max plan there either.
spprashant•40m ago
I can't believe they are yanking tool access instead of just reducing the token quota. To be fair even that would be shitty, but at least people would have a choice of working within limits. Claude Code is their real winner, and a great ramp for newcomers coming into AI assisted development. They are playing straight into OpenAIs hands.
alxhslm•38m ago
Annoying, signed up for a personal pro account a couple of weeks ago. No way I’m going to spend $200 just for a few personal projects.
dandaka•23m ago
no, most likely you will try codex and get more value (as I did)
tiberius_p•36m ago
It works for me at the moment on the pro plan. Is there a grace period until they enforce the new pricing?
UncleOxidant•29m ago
I would hope that we'd be grandfathered in since we signed up with the expectation that we could use it in Claude Code. I could see where maybe that might lead to problems down the line where they do some kind of update and "forget" that people who signed up before a certain date were supposed to be grandfathered in.
dminik•36m ago
Well, if there's one way to show that you're not profitable on inference, this would be it.
tayo42•36m ago
Vibe coded ui bug?

That sucks, I guess I'll cancel my Claude account. Not paying 100 dollars. That's crazy

wasabinator•34m ago
The enshitification intensifies.
wrxd•34m ago
This is a risky move. I might have paid $20/month for my personal projects but the Max subscription is a bit steep.

Now I'm going to learn more about local models. I don't need to be as good as a frontier model. Good enough and free from all this drama is a win for me

Xunjin•31m ago
"free of this drama" and free is great option for companies, of course most use API billing but let's not forget that there are places that budget is limited and being good enough is just perfect.
peab•22m ago
the cursor 20$ a month plan has been working great for me. You can use most models, and unlimited use of composer 2, which is surprisingly good
sourabhv•33m ago
It's still included here

https://claude.com/product/claude-code

csullivannet•12m ago
Maybe they're putting out a weather balloon to test sentiment. That way when they're caught they can just point at the other page to say it was just a mistake.
cambaceres•32m ago
That’s too bad, I just purchased a one year pro plan for my dad just for him to play around with CC when he retires next week.
pluc•30m ago
I posted this question two weeks ago: "What is your plan when the AI you have implemented throughout your company changes the results you've come to trust?" (https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/06/anthropic_claude_code...).

Since then, I had to add:

"or won't let you log in?": https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/44257

"or makes stuff up?": https://dwyer.co.za/static/claude-mixes-up-who-said-what-and...

"or when it's down?": https://status.claude.com/incidents/6jd2m42f8mld

"or when you get banned?": https://bannedbyanthropic.com/

"or installs spyware?": https://www.thatprivacyguy.com/blog/anthropic-spyware/

And this is all exclusively about Anthropic. It's insane. On any other tech, there would be a consensus to wait until it's stable, but not AI - we go full throttle when it's AI.

Genuinely curious how people who have implemented this in serious companies are answering these questions, because my answer is to keep it the fuck out.

zaptheimpaler•27m ago
This just made me gamble on a yearly subscription for Pro, hoping they will grandfather in existing customers..
angry_octet•10m ago
Please report back if they send you a Dear John email.
ppetty•21m ago
Wonder where this leaves folks who paid the annual rate? Here’s what Claude said:

https://claude.ai/share/1a4293bd-b2d4-41b7-a887-eb42b3ae8b6e

“ The standard answer here is no — Anthropic does not typically refund the unused portion of annual plans , and annual subscribers won’t see prorated refunds, retaining access for the full remaining period instead. That said, your situation is a bit different — you’re not just canceling, you’re canceling because a feature you paid for was removed. That’s worth contacting Anthropic support directly about. Their support team can check your refund eligibility , and this kind of material change to the plan is exactly the case where a support escalation could go differently than a standard cancellation. You can reach them through the in-app support messenger at support.claude.com or via the thumbs-down feedback button. I’d recommend explaining specifically that Claude Code was a factor in your annual plan purchase. ”

0x_rs•20m ago
If true, very strange change when Codex (at both 20 & 100) is a much, much better deal for a model much better at most coding tasks, with way more usage even with the /fast mode enabled. Is losing most non-enterprise customers the right move for them?
mil22•16m ago
Equally, will offering a presumably unprofitably large quota of Codex tokens at $20 to retain non-enterprise customers turn out to be the right move for OpenAI?

Would not be surprised to see OpenAI follow suit.

Or perhaps OpenAI's LLMs are just so more compute efficient that they can actually offer that sustainably...

0x_rs•8m ago
Feels to me it's a battle between who has the most compute. OpenAI does not seem to be struggling with their x2 usage on the new 100 Plan, which is very close to unlimited usage with the best performing model on the highest reasoning setting. Not mentioning the resets every 1 million customers, or the other generous usage multipliers last months. Meanwhile Anthropic seems to be desperately trying to cut down on inference with their changes to reasoning effort and more lately, so they might be focusing on what they consider to be more valuable customers for their long-term strategy. The 20 plan with Opus had gotten so bad on CC they might've just pulled the plug to stop people from complaining about usage limits. If OpenAI can burn money longer and capture the market from the bottom, I think they'd win in the long run.
hannahstrawbrry•16m ago
That's exactly what I fear- that Mythos/Glasswing has made anthropic confident that they can survive by only serving that type of customer. Would be sad to see.
ykl•19m ago
At least for me Claude Code is still working on my Pro plan. I don't know if that's because the change simply hasn't propagated all the way through their systems yet (the change is now up on the main Claude pricing page and on their support pages, but not on the Claude Code landing page yet), or if it's because existing plans are grandfathered in, or what.

In general Anthropic seems to be pretty bad at clearly communicating what is going on. I have both Claude Pro for Claude Code and ChatGPT Plus for Codex, and lately I've been reaching for Codex first more and more often... at least for the hobby stuff I'm using Claude/Codex on, they seem pretty much equivalent in terms of practical capability/usefulness.

barbazoo•11m ago
How long until OpenAI remove Codex from their cheap plan?

Should we instead use a generic coding agent with a particular model and just pay per token?

mmcconnell1618•19m ago
Anthropic clearly doesn't understand that customers see their brand as "Claude", Google's brand as "Gemini" and OpenAI's brand as "ChatGPT." They have so many plans and exclusions that they risk customer confusion. I was surprised when I was pay $200/month for Claude Code, finding it super helpful, and then I had to pay separately to get API access for an experiment. Why are so many parts of "Claude" separate from each other, especially on a $200/month subscription.

Anthropic better get this sorted out with a proper product manager and marketing or they risk customers jumping to easier to understand platforms that are good enough.

robertkarl•5m ago
That also was really opaque to me RE: API access. I initially thought at $200/month I could get whatever I needed. I eventually set up a OpenAI API with a few bucks to try what I wanted to.
numbers•17m ago
does anyone have recommendations on replacing CC with something else for around $20-30 / month?
naet•16m ago
Seems like a pretty bad business move if it's really what they're doing. They should want devs using the product on a cheaper subscription to see the value with profitable limits on usage.

I think the only reason to do this would be that they just can't scale up to service the volume they have and need to cut down significantly on the total number of users. Seems also like a rough business proposition. Most of the pro plan users would probably migrate to a competitor at a similar price point (I know I will).

The only other possibility would be if they are losing too much money on the compute power and just can't offer it at that price anymore. But then upgrading the plan gives you more compute per dollar, so maybe they're just banking on people not actually using all of what they pay for?

I had previously thought that the inference cost of using a trained model was relatively low and that most costs went into training new models, but maybe that is less true with the more powerful newer models.

If it costs a ton more to serve Opus vs serving something like Kimi or Qwen, then I think most people just won't use the more expensive version for most things.

npunt•16m ago
No particular opinion on this change, but generally pricing is a great way to separate dabblers from serious users. There isn’t a great deal of value in dabblers or what they produce, I imagine that training data isn’t worth much relative to the pro users. Similar pricing story with $100 yearly price for Apple developer accounts that people complain a lot about. The reality is if you’re serious about making something, these costs are pretty cheap.

The folks hurt most by this are serious people in developing countries and young people starting out. Occasionally a dabbler turns into a serious user but I imagine that’s far less likely than people wish it were.

The value to companies who make these changes is they don’t have low value users or low value contributions to worry about, which has its own not insignificant overhead. In the age of AI slop everywhere we’re likely to see a lot more attempts to separate the wheat from the chaff.

whythismatters•15m ago
Hey, I'm a pro, and I feel genuinely insulted. I could consider going back to Claude Desktop + MCP, but I'm getting tired of this telenovela, and will probably cancel my sub and take my business elsewhere.
uKER•15m ago
So their minimum workable offer for devs just went from $17 to $100. Also, I don't see how the Pro subscription is relevant anymore. Nobody pays $17 a month just to chat. I just unsubscribed. :) Time to try Chat GPT Codex, which even works with the free subscription (don't expect crazy token allowance, of course).
ryanmcgarvey•5m ago
Everyone that is upset about this should take note: you are not a (coding) customer at $20/mo. Their coding customers spend thousands per month (week!) on claude and it's growing faster than they can keep up with (source: I'm one of them, and I know many other like me. We're budgeting 10-20% of engineering salary spend on tokens). It sucks to no longer be able to code on the cheap anymore, but don't fool yourself into thinking you have any leverage here.
nickthegreek•1m ago
My leverage is i’m canceling my plan. Openai gives me codex+chatgpt for my $20. I use me claude code sparingly, but I enjoyed it and it worked great when I did. Access to it was a reason they got my money a few months ago and it’s been a shit show since.
akucharczyk•1m ago
It cracks me up when I hear takes like - 'if you're not using more than $20, the product isn't for you because you're not a real user.' If you use CC as an assistant rather than a replacement for your own thinking, follow SDD, and use the tool thoughtfully, you deliver a lot more and you don't need the 5x or 20x limit. It's a different story if you're vibe coding, but then we're not really talking about AI-assisted work — your three prompts barely count as doing any work. But apparently Anthropic doesn't need users like me. I've been on Pro for 2 years, but if this is how things are going, I'll look for an alternative. Luckily, there's plenty to choose from.