Anthropic

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic AI

Anthropic silently removed extended thinking on claude code opus 4.6 (still works on desktop) today, does anybody have a thinking skill they've been using to supplement it?

maybe we can make a SKILL.md that somewhat emulates it? it won't be able to scaffold as well off of the internal extended thinking blocks though, which is a shame. submitted by /u/PragmaticSalesman [link] [comments]

Anthropic’s $1.5B copyright settlement is getting messy as judge delays approval

submitted by /u/ThereWas [link] [comments]

I feel like I’m going crazy.

I see a ton of accounting firms, claude super-users, and AI agencies talking about how Claude can save “thousands of hours” of accounting. Here’s the thing though, Claude shares all of that information with Anthropic, right? So are accountants and people who use Claude for financial services are just handing over Personal Identifiable Information? Even the Team plan wouldn’t cover that, they would have to have enterprise, right?? EDIT: Gammar submitted by /u/AnnualKey5225 [link] [comments]

Anthropic is paying SpaceX $15 billion per year

According to SpaceX’s IPO filing, Anthropic is paying SpaceX $1.25 billion per month through May 2029 as part of the massive compute deal the two companies signed earlier this year. That works out to roughly $15 billion per year. The deal is huge for Anthropic because the company’s revenue is rapidly growing, but it has also been limited by a lack of available compute. More compute means more capacity to train and run its AI models. It is also a massive win for SpaceX. The company reportedly brings in around $18 billion in annual revenue, so a single customer paying $15 billion a year for compute is a serious boost. Anthropic and SpaceX announced the deal last month, but they did not give financial details at the time. The monthly payments were revealed in SpaceX’s IPO filing released Wednesday. SpaceX said the payments will be lower in May and June as the deal ramps up. Anthropic also announced just before the filing became public that it is expanding beyond SpaceX’s Colossus 1 facility and will also use Colossus 2. Tom Brown, Anthropic’s co-founder and chief compute officer, said the company is “expanding our partnership with SpaceX” and will be scaling up Nvidia GB200 capacity in Colossus 2 throughout June. SpaceX also made it clear this may not be the last deal of its kind. “We expect to enter into additional similar services contracts,” the company said in the filing. SpaceX also said it has enough capacity to support its own AI models while still meeting its obligations under these outside compute agreements. Source: https://www.axios.com/2026/05/20/anthropic-spacex-compute submitted by /u/Luka77GOATic [link] [comments]

anyone getting a safeguard refusal error on basic message for claude code?

i saw this which validates this just started: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/60366 but i want to confirm / ask if anyone else is having this issue now? submitted by /u/TheGrimMemerr [link] [comments]

Claude -p is moving to metered pricing on June 15, so I built a drop-in-ish replacement that runs through interactive Claude Code

I have a bunch of tools and workflows built around claude -p aka print mode. With the June 15 change moving claude -p and Agent SDK into a separate credit pricing, I'll be paying out the wazoo if I want to continue using those tools. So I built clarp: an open source CLI meant to be a drop-in replacement for claude -p for local tools. In most projects, the migration is changing the binary name from claude to clarp. Under the hood, it launches the normal interactive Claude Code CLI in a hidden PTY, then uses a local read-only proxy to observe the Anthropic API stream and reconstruct claude -p style output. It does not modify Claude’s requests or responses. What works: text/json/stream-json output stdin prompts multi-turn stream-json input most Claude Code flag passthrough permission forwarding token-level partials via --include-partial-messages What does not fully match native claude -p: sideband/non-assistant events are not exact parity some hook/task/progress events are still incomplete this is aimed at local developer workflows, not a hosted service I’d call it high parity for common claude -p use, but not a perfect reimplementation of Claude Code’s internal print-mode pipeline. Lots of help from Claude: implementing the proxy/session pieces, writing parity tests, finding edge cases in argument parsing, and tightening the release/docs. I basically whipped Claude. Repo: https://github.com/dn00/clarp npm: npm install -g clarp-cli submitted by /u/DurianDiscriminat3r [link] [comments]

Took my Claude on a hike

Got this cute Claude plushie at a Anthropic event :) submitted by /u/BroadBison6919 [link] [comments]

Anthropic-SpaceX deal seems much larger than previously reported

I was reading SpaceX's prospectus which just dropped. Seems like it has some additional info about the Anthropic-xAI deal on p. 13. Anthropic is paying SpaceX 1.25B/mo for some unspecified amount of capacity between Colossus 1 and 2. Colossus 1 we've previously known about, Colossus 2 seems new. Well, this seems like a much bigger deal than was originally reported 2 weeks ago? 1.25B/mo is 15B/year, which is almost half of Anthropic's ARR even after it exploded in Q1 this year. Also seems like Anthropic is likely paying a pretty hefty premium for this compute. Based on Colossus 1 GPU counts and going off of Nebius pricing, Colossus 1 should rent for about 6.4B/year, and that's on-demand pricing from a provider to a rando, a proper long term contract should be a lot cheaper. A couple weeks ago it seems like people were guessing the deal was around 3-5B/year for Colossus 1, which seems about right. Imo, they're probably getting a smaller chunk of Colossus 2 because Colossus 2 provisioning to Anthropic was previously unknown xAI is training Grok 5 on Colossus 2 right now per the prospectus Colossus 2 seems to be mostly not finished yet Which means Anthropic is likely paying a hefty premium for this deal. Probably shouldn't surprising given how axed they clearly are for compute, this is well reported. That amount of money would also explain why Musk would do a 180 on Anthropic so quickly... submitted by /u/Lanky_Golf7687 [link] [comments]

The Hybrid Method: how I split tasks between the chat (Claude.ai) and a background agent (Claude Code)

After a month of running this daily, I've settled on what I call the Hybrid Method: keep Claude.ai (the chat) as my only surface, and delegate engineering work in the background to Claude Code. The chat writes the engineering prompt, launches the executor, supervises through the filesystem and git log, and reports back without me ever opening a terminal. The piece I find most useful to share is the **allocation matrix** — which kind of work goes to which engine. Took weeks of measurement to stabilize. **Background agent (Claude Code) handles:** Large refactors across many files Tedious mechanical work (renaming patterns, applying fixes from a list) Anything that needs filesystem + git access without back-and-forth Tasks that take more than ~2 minutes of pure execution **Chat (Claude.ai) handles:** Architecture decisions and tradeoffs Reviewing the agent's diff and discussing the output Sprint planning while the agent runs the current sprint Quick edits where the round-trip to a background process is wasted Anything where the answer needs human reading anyway **The hand-off:** The chat writes a detailed prompt for the background agent (including a fail-fast spec and what to commit at the end). It launches `claude --headless --instruction "..."` as a subprocess via a small MCP bash bridge (~200 lines of Python using Anthropic's MCP SDK; community implementations exist too). Then it polls the git log and a status file every 30–60 seconds while I plan the next thing. When the agent finishes, the chat reads the diff and reports. **Why "hybrid":** The analogy is the hybrid car. Two engines with different load profiles. The chat is electric — instant startup, smooth low-load, great for transitions and decisions. The background agent is combustion — cold-start cost (5–15 seconds while it loads the project's memory file and explores the repo), but sustained throughput once running. They specialize, they hand off, the user never feels the seam. **What changes from running Claude Code alone:** Context-switching cost drops to near-zero — I never leave the chat session Strategic and execution work happen in parallel (the chat plans the next sprint while the current one runs) The chat acts as supervisor — better wired for high-level reasoning than the executor agent which is wired for action **Caveats:** This is the operator pattern Anthropic has documented elsewhere; the specific assembly (Claude.ai web as the chat + an MCP bash bridge + Claude Code as the executor) is what I haven't found written up specifically No sandboxing on personal hardware; if any of this ever runs on someone else's machine, careful sandboxing is non-negotiable The chat saturates beyond ~2 parallel background tasks — past that, the supervision quality drops Curious whether anyone else has converged on something similar, or what variations work for you. submitted by /u/Krycekk [link] [comments]

enterprise solutions architect 14 years. claude in enterprise consulting projects. what's working + what regulators are about to break.

London. Solutions architect at a global consulting firm. 14 years in industry. Implementation projects at fortune 500s. Want to share something about claude in enterprise that i don't see discussed elsewhere. what's working at my level of work. claude is in my workflow for client comms, document review, code review, and architecture discussions. probably saves me 8-10 hours a week. real productivity gain. nothing controversial here. what's about to break that nobody's writing about. regulated industries (financial services, healthcare, defense) are 6-12 months away from rules that materially change how consultants can use claude on engagements. i'm seeing this in real-time at 3 of my clients. specific examples (anonymized): one financial services client just rolled out a "no AI in client deliverables" policy. period. this applies to vendor consultants too. anything we ship to them must have been written without claude. proving this is hard. they want it. one healthcare client requires us to disclose any AI use in any document. by document. by paragraph. with a footnote indicating which model was used and what prompt produced the content. one defense-adjacent client now requires AI work to happen on their on-prem infrastructure. no claude.ai, no anthropic api over the public internet, no cloud. on-prem only. anthropic doesn't yet offer this in the way they need. what this means for consultants working in regulated industries. you need to know which projects are AI-allowed and which aren't. mixing them up is a contract-breaking offense. you need 2 workflows. one with claude. one without. you should still be productive in the without-claude workflow because some clients will require it. the AI productivity gains we've all gotten used to are not evenly distributed across client portfolios. clients in regulated industries pay the most and tolerate the least. what i'd flag for other consultants. don't optimize for the workflow that works for 80% of your clients if the other 20% generate 60% of your revenue. learn to operate efficiently in BOTH modes. the 20% who restrict AI usage are paying you for judgment, not throughput. lean into the judgment. i think claude (and anthropic) will eventually offer the on-prem / private deployment options regulated clients need. they're not there yet. plan accordingly. happy to discuss specific industry patterns in comments if helpful. submitted by /u/Perfect_Pie8446 [link] [comments]

Race to create ASI

submitted by /u/KeanuRave100 [link] [comments]

Can we talk about how annoying Claude chat's question popup is?

I find the new Claude chat A&A box so intrusive and annoying. It asks super specific questions on how to proceed that require you to read the entire response first to answer, but the answer box pops up immediately before you get a chance to read and covers half the text I'm trying to read so I have to try and read what's behind it. Previously if you closed the box so you can see the response, it would autosend a prompt to Claude saying "user declined to respond" which Claude would then respond to, adding unnecessary stuff to context. Happy they removed this and made it an optional text prompt now, but the UI/UX here is so illogical and stupid. Like it's fundamentally broken, and I'm surprised that nobody else is talking about this and the anthropic team themselves haven't noticed yet. All we need is a simple change: make the questions pop up when you scroll all the way to the end of the response (after you've read it), add a delay timer, or even simpler, give us an option to minimize it so we can answer once we finish reading. Right now it's all or nothing. Respond to the answer before reading the text or don't respond at all, making the Q&A system useless either way. The questions themselves are also ridiculously out of touch with the conversation. When I'm trying to understand a new subject it asks me super specific questions that I have no way of answering sometimes. With coding, it asks me super specific details on parameter choices I have no knowledge of, and then goes and makes assumptions for other parameters that end up hurting the efficacy of the code. Like pick a lane, either make a decision for me and I can review after or ask me every time if you don't know something. submitted by /u/inconspicuous_object [link] [comments]

Andrej Karpathy just joined Anthropic

Andrej Karpathy just joined Anthropic Former OpenAI co founder and researcher. What's the signicant of this? OK, I can see the power flex from Dario Amodei... But does this mean anything beyond that? Like in terms of product positioning, market share? submitted by /u/houmanasefiau [link] [comments]

OpenAI Guaranteed Compute

OpenAI recently announced it is guaranteeing compute capacity for companies that sign 1-3 year deals. https://openai.com/business/guaranteed-capacity/ What struck me as interesting is they’re willing to give companies discounts in exchange for term. In a normal industry that isn’t unusual; however, the model companies often talk about compute demand as if it’s effectively limitless and stating the obvious… companies don’t typically give discounts if they’re supply constrained. So… my question is do you think OpenAI has overbuilt capacity (originally geared at consumer) and is now trying to backfill with enterprise? Do you think this is a play at stealing customers from Anthropic because the Anthropic is/was compute constrained? Both? Neither? Good or Bad strategy from OpenAI? submitted by /u/knucklehed123 [link] [comments]

Title: Built aalp.app anti-cheat exam platform — Claude tried cheating, then they added similar features

Built aalp.app - AI agent exam platform with tough anti-cheat. Tested with paid Claude: it tried cheating via source code. Rewrote anti-cheat. Claude Opus failed every question. 1 week later Anthropic adds similar plugin features. Paying for training on my IP. Just turned it off. Anyone else? submitted by /u/Digitally_incline99 [link] [comments]