10 ms·
Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows
- giancarlostoro 6mo agoLooks to be sourced from an outage: https://status.claude.com/ https://status.claude.com/
- nurettin 6mo agoIt started again.
- ajb92 6mo agoThe trend on the status page[1] does not inspire confidence. Beginning to wonder if this might be a daily thing. [1] https://status.claude.com/ https://status.claude.com/
- sh1mmer 6mo agoThey might need to do some vibe refactoring.
- aurareturn 6mo agoThey went from $9b ARR at the end of 2025 to $30b ARR today. That's more than 3x the size in 3 months. I expect growing pains. For some context, they added 2x Palantir or .75x Shopify or .68x Adobe annual revenue in March alone.
- samlinnfer 6mo agoAnd they are early adopters of the vibe coding paradigm, having a 100% Claude generated codebase.
- aurareturn 6mo agoI assume most of their outages is related to this insane scaling and lack of available compute. Vibe coding doesn't automatically mean lower quality. My codebase quality and overall app experience has improved since I started using agents to code. You can leverage AI to test as well as write new code.
- samlinnfer 6mo agoWell if we use Claude Code's code quality as a benchmark ...
- _fat_santa 6mo agoAfter the CC leak last week I took a look at their codebase and my biggest criticism is they seem to never do refactoring passes. Personally I write something like 80-90% of my code with agents now but after they finish up, it's critical that you spin up another agent to clean up the code that the first one wrote. Looking at their code it's clear they do not do this (or do this enough). Like the main file being something like 4000 LOC with 10 different functions all jammed in the same file. And this sort of pattern is all over the place in the code.
- PopePompus 6mo agoHow do you do the cleanup? Just /simplify or something you rolled yourself?
- _fat_santa 6mo agoIt's not an automated process (at least in my case). I primarily use Codex so I will do the initial pass with 5.3 or 5.4 xhigh and then cleanup with spark on medium or low. Spark is great for this kind of cleanup work because the feedback loop is so tight compared to just about anything else. It's quite hampered by a very small context window but in the context of cleanup/refactoring that's more of a feature than a bug IMHO. My suggestion for folks that want to do this is make sure you keep reasoning low. The cleanup should be very much human directed and derived from your "taste", at that point you don't want the model to think at all and just blindly do what you tell it to. You want reasoning to be just high enough so it doesn't eff up the code in the process.
- skippyboxedhero 6mo agoIt has been a daily thing for 2-3 months.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- cube00 6mo agoThey've also stopped reporting on the causes too, just "it's resolved" and they move on.
- HoldOnAMinute 6mo agoI solved this by upgrading Claude Code, closing down all instances, closing my browser, starting claude again, and doing a /login
- reluctant_dev 6mo agoThis resolved it for me as well but not sure if this was just a timing thing.
- csomar 6mo agoYes, an upgraded Claude Code instance telepathically improve Claude back-end servers.
- giwook 6mo agoLOL telepathy! It's actually via quantum entanglement.
- stronglikedan 6mo agoI solved this by upgrading Claude Code, closing down all instances, closing my browser, and starting Codex
- ai_slop_hater 6mo ago[flagged]
- MeetingsBrowser 6mo agoI’m a big fan of Rust, but the frontend being written in Rust doesn’t help a ton with backend issues unfortunately.
- ai_slop_hater 6mo agoMaybe, but you can literally feel the difference as you type. When you type in Codex, it's fast, it feels instant. When you type in Claude Code, it feels like playing a game in 60 fps after you already got used to 144 fps.
- thefourthchime 6mo ago5.4 is smarter than Opus when it comes to really figuring out a problem. Codex agentic stuff takes forever though.
- isatty 6mo agoSomething being written in rust has no bearing to whether it’s good. You can create slop in any language.
- 16bitvoid 6mo agoAt least the slop is fast and jitter-free, and not using React in a terminal.
- ramon156 6mo agoCodex does not go well with my Zellij/Alacritty setup. It does not respect resize events. Opencode is nice, though
- jghn 6mo ago> and it is written in Rust. So?
- mvkel 6mo agoMounting evidence that claude max users are put into one big compute fuel pool. Demand increased dramatically with OpenAI's DoD PR snafu (even though Anth was already working with the DoD? But I digress...). The pool hit a ceiling. Anth has no compute left to give. Hence people maxing out after 1 query. "Working on it" means finding a way to distill Claude Code that isn't enough of a quality degradation to be noticed[0], in order to get the compute pool operational again. The distillation will continue until uptime improves. 0 as of this writing, it's noticeable. Lots of "should I continue?" And "you should run this command if you want to see that information." Roadblocks that I hadn't seen in a year+
- ramon156 6mo agoDistillation is how they're planning to make money? What a poor strategy. This is next level FOMO (Fear Of Not Being The #1 LLM Provider). I have cancelled my subscription last week, I'll see them when they fix this nonesense
- garganzol 6mo agoMakes sense, even plan name seems to agree: "Claude Max".
- bradgessler 6mo agoReminds me of an “all you can eat” buffet I was at once where the owner told me, “that’s it, that’s all you can eat” and cut it off.
- honeycrispy 6mo agoThe solution is clearly more vibe coding at anthropic. I doubt even the core engineers know how to begin debugging that spaghetti code.
- Lionga 6mo agocorrect proompt is:"you are a senior engineer. fix issues. NO hallucinations this time. PRETTY PLEASE"
- mring33621 6mo agoYou forgot the "No Mistakes!" clause
- gedy 6mo agoYou missed: "Simon says:"
- cube00 6mo agoNeeds more bold CRITICAL and some ultra-think
- baq 6mo agoNot sure how Claude and CC has become the defacto best model given gpt 5.3 codex and 5.4 exist. This space moves so fast you should be testing your workflows on different models at least once every quarter, prudently once a month.
- m-schuetz 6mo agoChecking different models once every quarter is exactly what made me move to claude code.
- skippyboxedhero 6mo agoAnthropic models haven't been far ahead for a while. Quite a few months at least. Chinese models are roughly equal at 1/6th the cost. Minimax is roughly equal to Opus. Chinese providers also haven't had the issues with uptime and variable model quality. The gap with OpenAI also isn't huge and GLM is a noticeably more compliant model (unsurprisingly given the hubristic internal culture at Anthropic around safety). CC is a better implementation and seems to be fairly economic with token usage. That is the really the only defining point and, I suspect, Anthropic are going to have a lot of trouble staying relevant with all the product issues. They were far ahead for a brief period in November/December which is driving the hype cycle that now appears to be collapsing the company. You have to test at least every month, things are moving quickly. Stepfun is releasing soon and seems to have an Opus-level model with more efficient architecture.
- nwienert 6mo agoMinimax is nowhere near Opus in my tests, though for me at least oddly 4.6 felt worse than 4.5. I haven't use Minimax extensively, but I have an API driven test suite for a product and even Sonnet 4.6 outperforms it in my testing unless something changed in the last month. One example is I have a multi-stage distillation/knowledge extraction script for taking a Discord channel and answering questions. I have a hardcoded 5k message test set where I set up 20 questions myself based on analyzing it. In my harness Minimax wasn't even getting half of them right, whereas Sonnet was 100%. Granted this isn't code, but my usage on pi felt about the same.
- CapmCrackaWaka 6mo agoIf anthropic‘s reliability becomes a meme, they risk brand death like Microsoft. Go to hand it to them though, they’re really living that “AI writes all of our code and it should write your code too” life.
- love2read 6mo ago> they risk brand death like Microsoft Is Microsoft (one of the largest companies in the world) really a victim of brand death?
- smt88 6mo agoIf Microsoft is your example of "brand death," Anthropic is dreaming of that kind of wild success and shouldn't care about its brand at all
- fleischhauf 6mo agoI'm quite impressed on how far they got while the claude code code looks like it does.
- muyuu 6mo agoVC money magic
- tomasphan 6mo ago98% uptime is not great. Our eng department is thinking about going half half with Codex but of course there’s a switching cost.
- prabal97 6mo agoFYI I use my Codex models with Claude code and they work pretty great. It can even pick up on existing conversations w/ Opus and then resume w/ OAI models.
- tornikeo 6mo agoI'm VERY curious about your case. What kind of switching costs do you guys have? I'm working at a very young startup that is still not locked into either AI provider harnesses -- what causes switching costs, just the subscription leftovers or something else?
- p_stuart82 6mo agosubscription leftovers are noise. the real switching cost is the harness glue. prompts. tool calling quirks. evals. auth. retries. all the weird failure modes your team already paid to learn.
- world2vec 6mo agoI'm getting "Prompt is too long" a lot today
- DiffTheEnder 6mo agoI'm finding queries are taking about 3x as long as they used to regardless of whether I use Sonnet or Opus (Claude Code on Max)
- dude250711 6mo agoHow is coding "solved" then? Unless they meant "all code that needs to be written has already been written" so their mission is to prevent any new code from being written via a kind of a bait and switch?
- whicks 6mo agoIME this isn't just a 'Claude Code' problem, I'm seeing extremely degraded / unresponsive performance using Opus 4.6 in Cursor.
- smt88 6mo agoThe status page indicates issues on almost all services
- arduanika 6mo agoThe eternal return of https://xkcd.com/303/ https://xkcd.com/303/
- mring33621 6mo agoFor a lot of my work, I'm pretty happy with OpenCode + GLM-4.7-Flash-REAP-23B-A3B-Q4_K_M.gguf running in llama.cpp. Free and local.
- nprateem 6mo agoAntigravity has become near unusable too for the last week with Opus. Continual capacity alerts meaning tasks stop running. Not worth the money now, will be canceling unless fixed soon.
- kristjansson 6mo agoNo one is going to like this answer, but there’s a simple solution: pay for API tokens and adjust your use of CC so that the actions you have it take are worth the cost of the tokens. It’s great to buy dollars for a penny, but the guy selling em is going to want to charge a dollar eventually…
- jimkleiber 6mo agoI just want a little predictable insight into how much I get. For example, at a buffet, I know I can only eat so much food and can plan around it. This is like going to a buffet and not knowing how many plates I can take or how big the plates are, and it changes each week, and yet I have to keep paying the same price. Except it's not about eating, it's about my work and deadlines and promises and all that.
- kristjansson 6mo agoIf you need the tokens for real work, that’s what the API and the other providers like Bedrock are for. The subscription product is merely to whet your appetite.
- gowld 6mo agoMissing the point. I don't choose which tokens to buy. I send a request and the server decides how much it costs after its done.
- jimkleiber 6mo agoWell then I would just not use their service. I used extra usage once and just for what I'd consider a low amount of tests and coding, racked up like $300 in an hour or more. For some, that's not a lot of money, for me, I'd just code it manually, especially without knowing almost any way to gauge how much I'll need and how fast it goes. I'm not sure how businesses budget for llm APIs, as they seem wildly unpredictable to me and super expensive, but maybe I'm missing something about it.
- _flux 6mo ago
- totalmarkdown 6mo ago[flagged]
- abroszka33 6mo agoHow are you using it to reach the limit so quickly? I'm 13% at a 10x plan and I have used it for hours every day for the last 5 days. I never hit a limit.
- skerit 6mo agoI have the 20x plan and use it together with my husband. 4 days in to our weekly usage window and we're only at 54% (and we both use it the entire day) I have no idea how people are hitting the limits so fast.
- cvdub 6mo agoHitting limits is more related to how many tokens it’s generating, not necessarily how complex the changes are. Hit the weekly limit on my 20x plan last week trying to do a full front end rewrite of a giant enterprise web app, 600+ html templates, plus validating every single one with playwright.
- abroszka33 6mo agoThat's definitely a lot of work. That consuming a week worth of tokens sounds reasonable.
- vanchor3 6mo agoIt seems like Cowork can easily chew through a few percent at a time, more if it gets lost in the weeds.
- alasano 6mo agoIf you prepare yourself a token with "claude setup-token" (presuming you're not already locked out and had one) you can run "CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN=sk.. claude" to use your account.
- xantronix 6mo agoAs much as people on Hacker News complain about subscription models for productivity and creativity suites, the open arms embrace of subscription development tools (services, really) which seek to offload the very act itself makes me wonder how and why so many people are eager to dive right in. I get it. LLMs are cool technology. Is this a symptom of the same phenomenon behind the deluge of disposable JavaScript frameworks of just ten years ago? Is it peer pressure, fear of missing out? At its root, I suspect so; of course I would imagine it's rare for the C-suite to have ever mandated the usage of a specific language or framework, and LLMs represent an unprecedented lever of power to have an even bigger shot at first mover's advantage, from a business perspective. (Yes, I am aware of how "good enough" local models have become for many.) I don't really have anything useful nor actionable to say here regarding this dialling back of capability to deal with capacity issues. Are there any indications of shops or individual contributors with contingency plans on the table for dialling back LLM usage in kind to mitigate these unknowns? I know the calculus is such that potential (and frequently realised) gains heavily outweigh the risks of going all in, but, in the grander scheme of time and circumstance, long term commitments are starting to be more apparently risky. I am purposefully trying to avoid "begging the question" here; if instead of LLMs, this were some other tool or service, reactions to these events would have been far more pragmatic, with less of a reticence to invest time on in-house solutions when dealing with flaky vendors.
- rurp 6mo agoHN is a big community that has always had a mix of people who value newness as a feature vs those who prioritize simplicity and reliability. Unless you're recognizing the exact same names taking these contradictory opinions it's probably different groups of people for the most part. It seems like every LLM thread for the past couple years is full of posts saying that the latest hot AI tool/approach has made them unbelievably more productive, followed by others saying they found that same thing underwhelming.
- echelon 6mo ago> I get it. LLMs are cool technology. I don't think many of you have legitimately tried Claude Code, or maybe you're holding it wrong. I'm getting 10x the work done. I'm operating at all layers of the stack with a speed and rapidity I've never had before. And before anyone accuses me of being some "vibe coder", I've built five nines active-active money rails that move billions of dollars a day at 50kqps+, amongst lots of other hard hitting platform engineering work. Serious senior engineering for over a decade. This isn't just a "cool technology". We've exited the punch card phase. And that is hard or impossible to come back from. If you're not seeing these same successes, I legitimately think you're using it wrong. I honestly don't like subscription services, hyperscaler concentration of power, or the fact I can't run Opus locally. But it doesn't matter - the tool exists in the shape it does, and I have to consume it in the way that it's presented. I hope for a different offering that is more democratic and open, but right now the market hasn't provided that. It's as if you got access to fiber or broadband and were asked to go back to ISDN/dial up.
- websap 6mo agoIsn't it a little weird that we trust this app to help us build some of the most important parts of our business and the company that vends this app keep breaking it in unique ways. At my workplace we have been sticking with older versions, and now stick to the stable release channel.
- scottyah 6mo agoI like dogfooding. You can use Azure if you want infra that is clearly not being used, tested, and pushed to the limits by its own creators.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- phengze 6mo ago[dead]
- guzfip 6mo agoAnyone played much with Jetbrain’s LLM agent? I’ve been toying around at home with it and I’ve been fine with its output mostly (in a Java project ofc), but I’ve run into a few consistent problems - The thing always trips up validating its work. It consistently tries to use powershell in a WSL environment I don’t have it installed in. It also seems to struggle with relative/absolute paths when running commands. - Pricing makes no sense to me, but Jetbrains offering seems to have its own layer of abstraction in “credits” that just seem so opaque. Then again, I mostly use this stuff for implementing tedious utilities/features. I’m not doing entity agent written and still do a lot of hand tweaks to code, because it’s still faster to just do it myself sometimes. Mostly all from all from the IDE still.
- ivanjermakov 6mo agoWonder what the next AI winter trigger would be. Coding agent client collapsing under its own tech debt?
- bachmeier 6mo agoI think it's been clear from the beginning that the per-token price of usage was far below what it will be when firms have implemented their profit-maximizing price plans. "AI winter" will happen when these firms start maximizing profit. At that point it'll be too expensive for all but certain use cases to use the best technology for work. We'll see AI chat replace Google, we'll see companies adopting AI in high-value areas, and we'll see local models like Gemma 4 get used heavily. AI winter will see a disappearance of the clickbait headlines about everyone losing their jobs. Literally nobody is making those statements taking into account that pricing to this point is way less than the profit maximizing level.
- rvz 6mo agoClaude is now making itself unavailable after it was on vacation yesterday. Maybe you should consider....local models instead?
- maxothex 6mo ago[dead]
- jollymonATX 6mo agoSimply put, Anthropic does not have enough compute.
- jostmey 6mo ago15000 milliseconds! Makes me laugh. I've had the same issue! Usually happens in the morning
- nathell 6mo agoHN’s guidelines say ‘Don’t editorialize’. The original title here is ‘[BUG] Claude Code login fails with OAuth timeout on Windows’, which is more specific and less clickbaity.
- postalcoder 6mo agoI stopped using Claude Code several months ago and I can't say I've missed it. There was constant drama with CC. Degradation, low reliability, harness conspiring against you, and etc – these things are not new. Its burgeoning popularity has only made it worse. Anthropic is always doing something to shoot themselves in the foot. The harness does cool things, don't get me wrong. But it comes with a ton of papercuts that don't belong in a professional product.
- djmips 6mo agoBack to artisan all natural intelligence coding?
- techpulselab 6mo ago[dead]
- fabbbbb 6mo agoIs this really relevant news? Please share more bug reports from popular services and tools. Feels a tiny bit biased. My CC is just fine since at least three weeks.
- mikkupikku 6mo agoI really don't understand the way Claude does rate limiting, particularly the 5 hour limit. I can get on at 11:30, blow through my limit doing some stupid shit like processing a pile of books into my llm-wiki, and then get notified that I've used 90% of my 5 hour session limit and I have to wait for noon (aka wait 10 minutes) for the five hour limit to reset. Baffling.
- SkyPuncher 6mo agoMy biggest frustration right now is the seeming complete loss of background agent functionality. Permissions seem completely botched for background agents right now. When that happens, the foreground agent just takes over the task despite: 1. Me not wanting that for context management reasons 2. It burning tokens on an expensive model. Literally a conversation that I just had: * ME: "Have sonnet background agent do X" * Opus: "Agent failed, I'll do it myself" * Me: "No, have a background agent do it" * Opus: Proceeds to do it in the foreground * Flips keyboard This has completely broken my workflows. I'm stuck waiting for Opus to monitor a basic task and destroy my context.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- JohnMakin 6mo agoThe commenters here don't seem to realize this was posted during the outage yesterday that affected login for most claude code users.
- LoganDark 6mo agoThis was an outage.
- butz 6mo agoRun LLMs locally. Otherwise suffer service disruptions and very likely price hikes in the future.
- jimkleiber 6mo agoThe analogy that recently came to me is like internet itself. Your advice seems to say just do everything locally on my computer without access to the internet, because internet might suffer service disruptions or price hikes in the future. Luckily, ISPs tend to be quite reliable and don't have outrageous price hikes, but maybe that's because of regulation or focused competition, I'm not sure.
- varispeed 6mo agoI found that telling Claude that it is trying to defraud you and making spend money often gets it back on track and return to pervious performance briefly until it agains starts doing nonsense. I think Anthropics model has conflict of interest. They seem to have nerfed the models so that it takes more iterations to get the result (and spend more money) than it used to where e.g. Opus would get something right first time.
- m3kw9 6mo agoHow are they making billions with reliability like that?
- laacz 6mo agoI'm more surprised that OpenAI is extremely subsidising their ChatGPT subscriptions. With Plus you can do a lot more than with Calude's x5 Max. Is it an expense they just can afford, while people have not migrated over from CC?
- nickvec 6mo agoJust trying to win over market share I assume. OpenAI is willing to subsidize to try to get people to switch from CC to Codex, and the best incentive is to offer more tokens at a lower price.
- surcap526 6mo ago[dead]
- Sattyamjjain 6mo ago[flagged]