Or they could just let people use their own harnesses again...

That wouldn't solve this problem.

And they do? That's what the API is.

The subscription always seemed clearly advertised for client usage, not general API usage, to me. I don't know why people are surprised after hacking the auth out of the client. (note in clients they can control prompting patterns for caching etc, it can be cheaper)

▲

esafak 2 hours ago | parent [-]

End users -- people who use harnesses -- have subscriptions so that makes no sense. General API usage is for production.

▲

usef- 2 hours ago | parent [-]

"Production" what?

The API is for using the model directly with your own tools. It can be in dev, or experiments, or anything.

Subscriptions are for using the apps Claude + code. That's what it always said when you sign up.

▲

eli an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Production = people who can afford to pay API rates for a coding harness

	▲	usef- an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Saying their prices are too high is an understandable complaint; I'm only arguing against the complaint that people were stopped from hacking the subscriptions. LLMs are a hyper-competitive market at the moment, and we have a wealth of options, so if Anthropic is overpricing their API they'll likely be hurting themselves.

▲

esafak 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Production code, of course; deployed software. For when you need to make LLM calls.