Is it really an answer to say "network disruption" with a bunch of $10 words? Certainly it doesn't belong here of all places.

Are you able to share if there's a general trend behind the outages? Do you often hit capacity, or do you budget to have headroom?

Github this month is very close to having 0 9s reliability. (unless they want to argue that 89% has a 9 in it)

By now, I'm nearly certain that they'd be down to 0 9s of uptime if they counted it conservatively.

Or as the British would say "9 innit ?"

I also use them per-token (and strongly prefer that due to a lack of lock-in).

However, from a game theory perspective, when there's a subscription, the model makers are incentivized to maximize problem solving in the minimum amount of tokens. With per-token pricing, the incentive is to maximize problem solving while increasing token usage.

We tried this, but the quota for Opus models defaults to 0 on VertexAI and quota increase requests are auto-rejected.

Any tips?

You can use your subscription for Anthropic-hosted Claude models?

I saw a funny skit where if free Claude instance was down for you, you could just ask Rufus, Amazon's shopping AI assistant, your math/coding question phrased as a question about a product, and it would just answer lol.

You mean Google Chaos Services as we call them?

Honestly, downtime has gotten way better as one of the people behind (https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com). Compared to 10 years ago things are so much more redundant and harder to take down.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_c...

'The outage of a single server is a tragedy, the outage of an entire AWS region is a statistic.'

- Stalin probably

I know they tend to get much slower early evenings in the Western US... Not sure if this is everyone on the west coast going home and working on stuff, or the early people in the Asia region coming online.

So tired of seeing this same comment in every thread.

> it's widely believed they are doing something to degrade service quality (quantizing?) in order to stretch resources

God, I wish this inane bullshit would just fucking die already.

Models are not "degrading". They're not being "secretly quantized". And no one is swapping out your 1.2T frontier behemoth for a cheap 120B toy and hoping you wouldn't notice!

It's just that humans are completely full of shit, and can't be trusted to measure LLM performance objectively!

Every time you use an LLM, you learn its capability profile better. You start using it more aggressively at what it's "good" at, until you find the limits and expose the flaws. You start paying attention to the more subtle issues you overlooked at first. Your honeymoon period wears off and you see that "the model got dumber". It didn't. You got better at pushing it to its limits, exposing the ways in which it was always dumb.

Now, will the likes of Anthropic just "API error: overloaded" you on any day of the week that ends in Y? Will they reduce your usage quotas and hope that you don't notice because they never gave you a number anyway? Oh, definitely. But that "they're making the models WORSE" bullshit lives in people's heads way more than in any reality.

>"They're in serious risk of losing their lead with this sort of performance."

Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded.

It can't be worse than gemini-cli using a Pro account.

I can't speak on Gemini but OpenAI is far worse for free accounts at least

  > this sort of performance

i just use gemini 3 flash via api with custom agent.

only people who do not even look at code anymore need anything more than that.

OpenAI managed it way better, but we might have Microsoft to thank for that.

isn't serving Claude embarrassingly parallel tho?

The local grocer that isn't amazing and cost more and actually isn't really that local in the sense that none of the products sold are from local businesses/producers?

I find it's more reliable if you write "you are a highly experienced software engineer".

I start every prompt with "we have been going in circles". It is the shibboleth for anthropic to A/B test you with their secret new model.

If you're concerned about humans anthropomorphizing AI models, you might want to steer well clear of Anthropic, as their entire positioning (starting with the product name and continuing with UX choices and model releases) is built to attract the kind of researchers who are prone to believe in sentient machines.

They are going in the "Claude is alive" direction already and that line of communication is likely going full throttle in the nearby future.

I had my agent set up a "team" of subagents directed to different parts of a big new app (UX Engineer, test lead, etc) . Apparently the Senior SWE had reduced the scope, and my PM came to me trying to argue the side of the SWE that had reduced the scope for time constraint reasons...

It went a bit too deep into the role-playing bit.

You joke, but I think that's a fair summary of why people don't mind one 9 of uptime in a key component of their development workflow.