4 ms·

I'm well within the 95%. I might lack an imagination here, but... What are you guys doing that you hit or exceed limits so easily, and if you do... Why does it

I'm well within the 95%. I might lack an imagination here, but... What are you guys doing that you hit or exceed limits so easily, and if you do... Why does it matter? Sometimes I'd like to continue exploring ideas with Claude, but once I hit the limit I make a mental note of the time it'll come back and carry on planning and speccing without it. That's fine. If anything, some time away from the slot machine often helps with ensuring I stay on course.

bad_haircut72 1y ago
Im not a formula 1 driver but why do they have those big padel things on the back? looks dumbo IMHO I just dont get it
- steve_adams_86 1y ago
  I respectfully consider this analogy void, but welcome an explanation of why I'm wrong. I haven't yet seen anyone doing anything remarkable with their extensive use of Claude. Without frequent human intervention, all of it looks like rapid regression to the mean, or worse.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
mendor 1y ago
I've found that asking for deep research consumes my quota quite fast, so If I run 2 or 3 and normal use I hit the limit and have to wait to reset
- steve_adams_86 1y ago
  Me too. I've also found that even when trying to restrict models meant for these tasks, they tend to go on tangents and waste tremendous amounts of tokens without providing meaningfully better outputs. I'm not yet sold on these models for anything outside of fuzzy tasks like "does this logic seem sound?". They tend to be good at that (though they often want to elaborate excessively or propose solutions excessively).
throwup238 1y ago
Opus + extended thinking + deep research = 3-5 messages/reports per five hour limit. That’s the fastest way I’ve found to blow through the Pro plan. Some stuff I’ve used it for in the last day: figuring out what a family member needs for FAFSA as a nontraditional student, help identify and authenticate some rare first editions and incunabula for a museum collection I volunteer at, find a list of social events in my area (based on my preferences) that are coming up in the next week (Chatgpt Agent works surprisingly well for this too), adapting Directus and Medusa to my project’s existing schema and writing up everything I need to migrate, and so on. Deep research really hits the Claude limits hard and that’s the best way to avoid hallucinations when asking an important question or making it write complex code. I just switch from Claude to ChatGPT/Gemini until the limits reset but Claude’s deep research seems to handily beat Gemini (and OpenAI isnt even in the running). DR queries take much longer (5-10 min in average) but have much more in depth and accurate answers.
- theshrike79 1y ago
  "find a list of social events in my area" Isn't this something you can do with a simple Google search? Or Perplexity? No need to shove by far the most expensive LLM (Claude Opus 4) at it.
  - throwup238 1y ago
    Not for the Los Angeles metro area. There isn’t a single calendar or event aggregator that covers the entire area and with an LLM I can give it complex schedules (i.e. a dump of my calendar for that week) and preferences to filter the list of events for the stuff I like, including vague stuff like “I like country music in the style of ‘Take Me Home, Country Roads’ but not modern country radio”.
    - tkiolp4 1y ago
      Killing a fly with a cannonball.
      - 1y ago
zarzavat 1y ago
I agree. I'm on the base plan, yet to hit any limits. The bottleneck is my ability to review the code it writes, and to write prompts detailed enough for the output to be useful to me. I assume that the people hitting limits are just letting it cycle, but doesn't that just create garbage if you don't keep it on a tight leash? It's very eager but not always intelligent.
- steve_adams_86 1y ago
  I think this is it. They use it like a slot machine, and when something isn't quite what they wanted, they provide broad instructions to refine and do better. Progress is slow and questionable, but anticipation and (sometimes) reward is increased. The issue could be, in part, that a lot of users don't care to be efficient with token usage and maintaining condensed, efficient, focused contexts to work with.
  - Tokumei-no-hito 1y ago
    i wonder how many are negligent vs ignorant. negligence would be senior engineers that could scope and work with context properly but are lazy or don't care. ignorance would be vibe coders that genuinely can't express anything beyond plain english and superficial descriptions of issues and changes.
- loufe 1y ago
  Switching to Opus is an eye-opening experience. You hit limits often, and need to get creative to avoid burning through limits, but the difference is seriously impressive. You'll waste a lot less time with dead ends and bad code.
  - zarzavat 1y ago
    The issue (with Sonnet, I'm not using Opus), is not always that the code is bad per se, but merely that it doesn't solve the problem in the way I expected. I have two problems with that. Firstly, I want my code to be written a particular way, so if it's doing something out of left field then I have to reject it on stylistic grounds. Secondly, if its solution is too far from my expectation, I have to put more work into review to check that its solution is actually correct. So I give it a "where, what, how" prompt. For example, "In file X add feature Y by writing a function with signature f(x: t), and changing Z to do W..." It's very good at following directions, if you give it the how hints to narrow the solution space.
SaucyWrong 1y ago
One way I've seen personally is that folks are using tools that drive many Claude Code sessions at once via something like git-worktree as a way of multitasking in a single codebase. Even with garden-variety model use, these folks are hitting the existing 5-hourly rate limits routinely.
- steve_adams_86 1y ago
  I use this approach because I like to work on features or logical components in isolation and then bring them together. I still can't limit out most of the time because I need to actually look at the outputs and think about what I'm building. At the moment I have 3 directories in my work tree. Sometimes I prompt in more than one at a time, especially at interfacing code, but that could mean 30–90 minutes of reviewing and implementing things in each directory. Over a work day I apparently send an average of ~40 messages according to `claude --resume`
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

bad_haircut72 1y ago

Im not a formula 1 driver but why do they have those big padel things on the back? looks dumbo IMHO I just dont get it

steve_adams_86 1y ago
I respectfully consider this analogy void, but welcome an explanation of why I'm wrong. I haven't yet seen anyone doing anything remarkable with their extensive use of Claude. Without frequent human intervention, all of it looks like rapid regression to the mean, or worse.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

mendor 1y ago

I've found that asking for deep research consumes my quota quite fast, so If I run 2 or 3 and normal use I hit the limit and have to wait to reset

steve_adams_86 1y ago
Me too. I've also found that even when trying to restrict models meant for these tasks, they tend to go on tangents and waste tremendous amounts of tokens without providing meaningfully better outputs. I'm not yet sold on these models for anything outside of fuzzy tasks like "does this logic seem sound?". They tend to be good at that (though they often want to elaborate excessively or propose solutions excessively).

throwup238 1y ago

Opus + extended thinking + deep research = 3-5 messages/reports per five hour limit. That’s the fastest way I’ve found to blow through the Pro plan. Some stuff I’ve used it for in the last day: figuring out what a family member needs for FAFSA as a nontraditional student, help identify and authenticate some rare first editions and incunabula for a museum collection I volunteer at, find a list of social events in my area (based on my preferences) that are coming up in the next week (Chatgpt Agent works surprisingly well for this too), adapting Directus and Medusa to my project’s existing schema and writing up everything I need to migrate, and so on. Deep research really hits the Claude limits hard and that’s the best way to avoid hallucinations when asking an important question or making it write complex code. I just switch from Claude to ChatGPT/Gemini until the limits reset but Claude’s deep research seems to handily beat Gemini (and OpenAI isnt even in the running). DR queries take much longer (5-10 min in average) but have much more in depth and accurate answers.

theshrike79 1y ago
"find a list of social events in my area" Isn't this something you can do with a simple Google search? Or Perplexity? No need to shove by far the most expensive LLM (Claude Opus 4) at it.
- throwup238 1y ago
  Not for the Los Angeles metro area. There isn’t a single calendar or event aggregator that covers the entire area and with an LLM I can give it complex schedules (i.e. a dump of my calendar for that week) and preferences to filter the list of events for the stuff I like, including vague stuff like “I like country music in the style of ‘Take Me Home, Country Roads’ but not modern country radio”.
  - tkiolp4 1y ago
    Killing a fly with a cannonball.
    - 1y ago

zarzavat 1y ago

I agree. I'm on the base plan, yet to hit any limits. The bottleneck is my ability to review the code it writes, and to write prompts detailed enough for the output to be useful to me. I assume that the people hitting limits are just letting it cycle, but doesn't that just create garbage if you don't keep it on a tight leash? It's very eager but not always intelligent.

steve_adams_86 1y ago
I think this is it. They use it like a slot machine, and when something isn't quite what they wanted, they provide broad instructions to refine and do better. Progress is slow and questionable, but anticipation and (sometimes) reward is increased. The issue could be, in part, that a lot of users don't care to be efficient with token usage and maintaining condensed, efficient, focused contexts to work with.
- Tokumei-no-hito 1y ago
  i wonder how many are negligent vs ignorant. negligence would be senior engineers that could scope and work with context properly but are lazy or don't care. ignorance would be vibe coders that genuinely can't express anything beyond plain english and superficial descriptions of issues and changes.
loufe 1y ago
Switching to Opus is an eye-opening experience. You hit limits often, and need to get creative to avoid burning through limits, but the difference is seriously impressive. You'll waste a lot less time with dead ends and bad code.
- zarzavat 1y ago
  The issue (with Sonnet, I'm not using Opus), is not always that the code is bad per se, but merely that it doesn't solve the problem in the way I expected. I have two problems with that. Firstly, I want my code to be written a particular way, so if it's doing something out of left field then I have to reject it on stylistic grounds. Secondly, if its solution is too far from my expectation, I have to put more work into review to check that its solution is actually correct. So I give it a "where, what, how" prompt. For example, "In file X add feature Y by writing a function with signature f(x: t), and changing Z to do W..." It's very good at following directions, if you give it the how hints to narrow the solution space.

SaucyWrong 1y ago

One way I've seen personally is that folks are using tools that drive many Claude Code sessions at once via something like git-worktree as a way of multitasking in a single codebase. Even with garden-variety model use, these folks are hitting the existing 5-hourly rate limits routinely.

steve_adams_86 1y ago
I use this approach because I like to work on features or logical components in isolation and then bring them together. I still can't limit out most of the time because I need to actually look at the outputs and think about what I'm building. At the moment I have 3 directories in my work tree. Sometimes I prompt in more than one at a time, especially at interfacing code, but that could mean 30–90 minutes of reviewing and implementing things in each directory. Over a work day I apparently send an average of ~40 messages according to `claude --resume`

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]