| ▲ | idiocrat an hour ago | |||||||
Refusal: "Opus 5.5's safeguards flagged this session. You may be seeing this for the first time on an Opus model: Opus 5.5 is more capable and has stronger safeguards as a result, which can sometimes flag non-cybersecurity work. We're improving these safeguards to reduce the amount of incorrectly flagged messages." My appeal: "This is my own code, my TST and PRD environments and I am concerned about the hardening the hand-rolled BasicAuthHttpModule function. I asked DeepSeek V41 Flash to review this code already and worked in his recommendations. Now I want to ask you for a second round of review, a second opinion audit. This is an ASP.NET 4.8 application facing internet and I want to make sure I handle the edge case, HTTP error codes, and have no logic gaps in my code." | ||||||||
| ▲ | cbg0 an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Trying to appeal to the LLM is pointless, everyone would just claim that they're working on their own code. I've found that if you're seeing refusals and you have a more permissive model available, you can use that to find the issues and pass them back to Claude for review and implementation. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | gwd an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
[dead] | ||||||||