throwaway2027

"Cheap clients pay the least and complain the most."

I saw some small business owner complain about this behavior on twitter some time ago and he mentioned he only saw non-Americans do this and it made him really mad or something and he didn't provide the service and banned them or something. Funnily enough I do think this happens so sometimes I cancel instantly and sometimes deliberately wait until there are a few days left on the subscription exactly out of paranoia behavior that you'll get a worse service or something, that they must have some database field early cancel and mess with you or something.

Not to dismiss the AI but the important part is that you still need someone able to recognize these solutions in the first place. A lot of things were just hidden in plain sight before AI but no one noticed or didn't have the framework either in maths or any other field they're specialized in to recognize those feats.

Sad. I liked Gemini CLI. I used it a lot and occasionally use it these days. I've never tried Antigravity though.

December 2025 was the breakthrough for me. January Claude was euphoric, ChatGPT was up there. February Gemini cooked for a second there. March amazing. April the big bad nerf. May GPT 5.5 is just pure bliss altough 2x limits temporarily, not sure about Claude it's sort of okay still not as good as it felt before, slowly increasing limits with more compute and rebuilding good will.

That's probably why. You're not allowed to use the subscription with any other coding harness other than Claude Code.

The real danger is AI slop displacing actual good resources for software engineering. Once those are gone they will have to be reverse engineered from the AI it's weights.

I'm thoroughly enjoying using AI to write code, but it paid off by years of doing things the hard way before. I already was a so called "10x developer" if I speak for myself. I'm doing things even faster now with AI.

I already followed those rules mostly with StackOverflow and before AI.

Same. I think one of the issues is that Claude reached a treshold where I could just rely on it being good and having to manually fix it up less and less and other models hadn't reached that point yet so I was aware of that and knew I had to fix things up or do a second pass or more. Other providers also move you to a worse model after you run out which is key in setting expectation as well. Developers knew that that was the trade-off.

I think even with the worse limits people still hated it but when you start to either on purpose or inadvertently make the model dumber that's when there's really no purpose to keep using Claude anymore.

Maybe he didn't know or they were still figuring it out which is fine they're still engineers who can get things wrong sometimes but the communication felt lackluster and being on the receiving end sucks when you had a reliable setup which then degrades. There is a reason people don't upgrade software and why people say if it works don't fix it, but obviously that's not an option for Anthropic when you want to keep improving the product, so they need good measurement tools and quick rollbacks even if properly "benchmarking" LLMs could prove difficult.

You need to send a new message once your limit is up to make the timer start rolling again. It sucks and I hate it when I had no need for Claude during the day but also forgot to use it then it shifted my reset date a day later.

Cool but I switched to Codex for the time being.

Good timing I had just renewed my subscription.

I know people like to dunk on ChatGPT and Gemini and say Claude is or used to be better, but you can still use worse models when you're out of usage AND make use of Nano Banana and and ChatGPT Image generation with separate limits for your subscription. I think it could make it a more package as a whole for some people (non-programmers). I do like having the option and am excited for which improvements they've done to ChatGPT Image generation because in the past it had this yellow piss filter and 1.5 it sort of fixed it but made things really generic with Nano Banana beating it (altough Gemini also had a too aggressively tuned racial bias which they fixed), it seems the images ChatGPT generates have gotten better.

The same people that hyped up Claude will also hype up better alternatives or speak out against it, seems more like you're being disingenuous here.

Gemini and Codex already scored higher on benchmarks than Opus 4.6 and they recently added a $100 tier with limited 2x limits, that's their answer and it seems people have caught on.

Even using Mythos with their own benchmarks as a comparison that isn't available for most people to use, what a joke.

You're better off subscribing to Codex for April and May of 2026.

Already priced in.

Thanks!

I don't want a nudge. I want a clear RED WARNING with "You've gone away from your computer a bit too long and chatted too much at the coffee machine. You're better off starting a new context!"

Some claim that some of the recent smaller local models are as good as Sonnet 4.5 of last year and the bigger high-end models can be as almost as good as Claude, Gemini and Codex today, but some say they're benchmaxed and not representative.

To try things out you can use llama.cpp with Vulkan or even CPU and a small model like Gemma 4 26B-A4B or Gemma 4 31B or Qwen 3.5 35-A3B or Qwen3.5 27B. Some of the smaller quants fit within 16GB of GPU memory. The default people usually go with now is Q4_K_XL, a 4-bit quant for decent performance and size.

https://huggingface.co/unsloth/gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-GGUF

https://huggingface.co/unsloth/gemma-4-31B-it-GGUF

https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-GGUF

https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.5-27B-GGUF

Get a second hand 3090/4090 or buy a new Intel Arc Pro B70. Use MoE models and offload to RAM for best bang for your buck. For speed try to find a model that fits entirely within VRAM. If you want to use multiple GPUs you might want to switch to vLLM or something else.

You can try any of the following models:

High-end: GLM 5.1, MiniMax 2.7

Medium: Gemma 4, Qwen 3.5

https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/minimax-m27

https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/glm-5.1

https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/gemma-4

https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/qwen3.5

https://github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp

They rolled out 1M context then they start doing this shit? I know Pro doesn't have access to the 1M context but what a joke.

Mistral isn't that great. Deepseek was good when they first had thinking. But most people just try something out and if that doesn't work on that model then it's bad and for Claude and Codex and Gemini they just are that much better now, but if they quantize or cut limits they destabilize and you're right you might as well just use something worse but reliable.

Claude is worse, they don't tell you when your experience has degraded and don't even let you use worse models if you run out any.

It's absolutely ridiculous how stupid Claude is now. I sometimes notice it and last year too but it feels like it's just last year before December model.

I also noticed this, just resuming something eats up your entire session. The past two weeks also felt like a substantial downgrade and made me regret renewing my subscription, it sucks because I wish I kept my Codex subscription instead and renewed that.