4 ms·

Looks like this was restored 2 weeks ago[0], 3 days after Anthropic said OpenClaw requires extra usage[1]. At this point, it's hard to take this seriously. No o

by 1una 5mo ago

Looks like this was restored 2 weeks ago[0], 3 days after Anthropic said OpenClaw requires extra usage[1]. At this point, it's hard to take this seriously. No official statement and not even a tweet? [0]: https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/d378a504ac17eab2425a114fed32a217b5702395 https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/d378a504ac17eab2... [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47633396 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47633396

stingraycharles 5mo ago
No, it's just that it's confusing, because there are two ways of using Claude Code credentials: 1. Take the oauth credentials and roll your own agent -- this is NOT allowed 2. Run your agentic application directly in Claude Code -- this IS allowed When OpenClaw says "Open-Claw style CLI usage", it means literally running OpenClaw in an official Claude Code session. Anthropic has no problems with this, this is compliant with their ToS. When you use Claude Code's oauth credentials outside of the claude code cli Anthropic will charge you extra usage (API pricing) within your existing subscription.
- filleokus 5mo ago
  But... Even when running it in mode 2 ("claude -p") they at certain points tried to detect OpenClaw-usage based prompts made, and blocked them [0]. Now OpenClaw says that Antrophic sanctions this as allowable again. I agree with GP that this is hard to take seriously. [0]: https://x.com/steipete/status/2040811558427648357 https://x.com/steipete/status/2040811558427648357
  - stingraycharles 5mo ago
    I have never heard of this, and cannot be reproduced, and is not according to Anthropic's ToS. And there's a lot of FUD being spread around. They don't ban Openclaw prompts, each custom LLM application provides a client application id (this is how e.g. Openrouter can tell you how popular Openclaw is, and which models are used the most). Anthropic just checks for that.
    - filleokus 5mo ago
      Either me or you are misunderstanding the situation. A comment from the GP link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47633867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47633867 > This is slightly different from what OpenCode was banned from doing; they were a separate harness grabbing a user’s Claude Code session and pretending to be Claude Code. > OpenClaw was still using Claude Code as the harness (via claude -p)[0]. I understand why Anthropic is doing this (and they’ve made it clear that building products around claude -p is disallowed) but I fear Conductor will be next.
      - stingraycharles 5mo ago
        If Openclaw was still using Claude Code as the harness, I don't know how to reconcile that with "Openclaw is based on the pi framework", which is decidedly NOT claude code. From what I understand, they still had the Claude Code harness available, but were mostly fully integrated on the pi agent framework, using Claude Code's oauth credentials directly,
        piazz 5mo ago
        Openclaw allows you to effectively “shell out” to another harness for your model calls, while still using Pi as your main agentic harness. This is the claude -p workflow. Tools and skills are injected into Claude and they hack session persistence into it as well. They also absolutely blocked OpenClaw system prompts from this path in the prior weeks, based purely on keyword detection. Seems they’ve undone that now.
    - throwpoaster 5mo ago
      No, if you ran Openclaw using Anthropic API as a provider, or had it use the ‘claude -p’ cli interface, you got an email from Anthropic threatening a ban unless you upgraded billing. This was widely reported, and happened to me. You probably can’t reproduce it or see it in docs because they seem to have changed the policy.
    - holoduke 5mo ago
      Claude -p is using Claude cli. How can you know it's my own claw?
  - Wowfunhappy 5mo ago
    > Even when running it in mode 2 ("claude -p") they at certain points tried to detect OpenClaw-usage based prompts made, and blocked them [0]. But then the Claude Code product manager said: > This is not intentional, likely an overactive abuse classifier. Looking, and working on clarifying the policy going forward. https://xcancel.com/bcherny/status/2041035127430754686#m https://xcancel.com/bcherny/status/2041035127430754686#m
  - zaphar 5mo ago
    I mean, if you are them and trying to detect when people are using your system incorrectly the detection system is going to be a little bit flaky. How do they prove you aren't violating your ToS by using OAuth for a system they didn't approve that usage for? The fault here is not with Anthropic. It lies with cowboy coders creating a system that violates a providers terms of service and creating an adverse relationship.
- ElFitz 5mo ago
  And yet running the Claude Code cli with `-p` in ephemeral VMs gets me the "Third-party apps now draw from extra usage, not plan limits. We've added a credit to your organization to get you started. Ask your workspace admin to claim it and keep going." error. One day you're experimenting just fine. The next, everything breaks. And I'd gladly use their web containerized agents instead (it would pretty much be the same thing), but we happen to do Apple stuff. So unless we want to dive into relying on ever-changing unreliable toolchains that break every time Apple farts, we're stuck with macOS.
WhereIsTheTruth 5mo ago
This is called FUD, amplify negativity, silence positivity
- flagos10 5mo ago
  It's also something super simple to clarify from Anthropic if they want.
  - scottyah 5mo ago
    They have, many times. We're seeing a chain where people are pointing to openclaw's github for information (a tool that was effectively acquired by their #1 competitor) and trying to make it sound so crazy. The actual flow was simple- They said "don't use your claude code membership on tools that burn lots of the subsidized tokens". Then a bunch of people raised a fit (because openclaw is almost useless without claude models), so Anthropic basically said "That's what the API keys are for". Antropic has the info on their website, emailed all users for each step, and I've seen it on X- I'm sure it's in other places as well.
- arcanemachiner 5mo ago
  Considering Anthropic is constantly doing the opposite, I would just call it "balance".
  - embedding-shape 5mo ago
    Not that I'm some paragon when it comes to critical thinking exactly, but if there any sort of proof or evidence of Anthropic "silencing negativity"? Wouldn't surprise me, but also haven't seen anything conclusive about it either, so spreading that they are as fact, is ironically FUD itself.
    - Forgeties79 5mo ago
      Name a startup that isn’t trying to downplay, scrub, or otherwise silence negative press.
jeremyjh 5mo ago
I think this is consistent with the Anthropic announcement. I do not see anything on this page that says it will NOT be charged as extra usage. The most recent Anthropic announcement was not that people would be banned for using subscriptions with OpenClaw, but that it would be charged as extra usage. I think the reason this was changed three days after that announcement is that being charged for extra usage meant people would not be banned for using their subscription OAuth tokens directly against the Anthropic API with a third party harness, as they had been before. But rather both that usage, and the more recent claude -p usage both be charged as extra usage.
ethbr1 5mo ago
> No official statement and not even a tweet? Release notes and announcements are a well-known agentic anti-pattern. If you're doing them, you're doing agentic wrong. /s-ish-also-cry

by 1una 5mo ago

stingraycharles 5mo ago

No, it's just that it's confusing, because there are two ways of using Claude Code credentials: 1. Take the oauth credentials and roll your own agent -- this is NOT allowed 2. Run your agentic application directly in Claude Code -- this IS allowed When OpenClaw says "Open-Claw style CLI usage", it means literally running OpenClaw in an official Claude Code session. Anthropic has no problems with this, this is compliant with their ToS. When you use Claude Code's oauth credentials outside of the claude code cli Anthropic will charge you extra usage (API pricing) within your existing subscription.

filleokus 5mo ago
But... Even when running it in mode 2 ("claude -p") they at certain points tried to detect OpenClaw-usage based prompts made, and blocked them [0]. Now OpenClaw says that Antrophic sanctions this as allowable again. I agree with GP that this is hard to take seriously. [0]: https://x.com/steipete/status/2040811558427648357 https://x.com/steipete/status/2040811558427648357
- stingraycharles 5mo ago
  I have never heard of this, and cannot be reproduced, and is not according to Anthropic's ToS. And there's a lot of FUD being spread around. They don't ban Openclaw prompts, each custom LLM application provides a client application id (this is how e.g. Openrouter can tell you how popular Openclaw is, and which models are used the most). Anthropic just checks for that.
  - filleokus 5mo ago
    Either me or you are misunderstanding the situation. A comment from the GP link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47633867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47633867 > This is slightly different from what OpenCode was banned from doing; they were a separate harness grabbing a user’s Claude Code session and pretending to be Claude Code. > OpenClaw was still using Claude Code as the harness (via claude -p)[0]. I understand why Anthropic is doing this (and they’ve made it clear that building products around claude -p is disallowed) but I fear Conductor will be next.
    - stingraycharles 5mo ago
      If Openclaw was still using Claude Code as the harness, I don't know how to reconcile that with "Openclaw is based on the pi framework", which is decidedly NOT claude code. From what I understand, they still had the Claude Code harness available, but were mostly fully integrated on the pi agent framework, using Claude Code's oauth credentials directly,
      - piazz 5mo ago
        Openclaw allows you to effectively “shell out” to another harness for your model calls, while still using Pi as your main agentic harness. This is the claude -p workflow. Tools and skills are injected into Claude and they hack session persistence into it as well. They also absolutely blocked OpenClaw system prompts from this path in the prior weeks, based purely on keyword detection. Seems they’ve undone that now.
  - throwpoaster 5mo ago
    No, if you ran Openclaw using Anthropic API as a provider, or had it use the ‘claude -p’ cli interface, you got an email from Anthropic threatening a ban unless you upgraded billing. This was widely reported, and happened to me. You probably can’t reproduce it or see it in docs because they seem to have changed the policy.
  - holoduke 5mo ago
    Claude -p is using Claude cli. How can you know it's my own claw?
- Wowfunhappy 5mo ago
  > Even when running it in mode 2 ("claude -p") they at certain points tried to detect OpenClaw-usage based prompts made, and blocked them [0]. But then the Claude Code product manager said: > This is not intentional, likely an overactive abuse classifier. Looking, and working on clarifying the policy going forward. https://xcancel.com/bcherny/status/2041035127430754686#m https://xcancel.com/bcherny/status/2041035127430754686#m
- zaphar 5mo ago
  I mean, if you are them and trying to detect when people are using your system incorrectly the detection system is going to be a little bit flaky. How do they prove you aren't violating your ToS by using OAuth for a system they didn't approve that usage for? The fault here is not with Anthropic. It lies with cowboy coders creating a system that violates a providers terms of service and creating an adverse relationship.
ElFitz 5mo ago
And yet running the Claude Code cli with `-p` in ephemeral VMs gets me the "Third-party apps now draw from extra usage, not plan limits. We've added a credit to your organization to get you started. Ask your workspace admin to claim it and keep going." error. One day you're experimenting just fine. The next, everything breaks. And I'd gladly use their web containerized agents instead (it would pretty much be the same thing), but we happen to do Apple stuff. So unless we want to dive into relying on ever-changing unreliable toolchains that break every time Apple farts, we're stuck with macOS.

WhereIsTheTruth 5mo ago

This is called FUD, amplify negativity, silence positivity

flagos10 5mo ago
It's also something super simple to clarify from Anthropic if they want.
- scottyah 5mo ago
  They have, many times. We're seeing a chain where people are pointing to openclaw's github for information (a tool that was effectively acquired by their #1 competitor) and trying to make it sound so crazy. The actual flow was simple- They said "don't use your claude code membership on tools that burn lots of the subsidized tokens". Then a bunch of people raised a fit (because openclaw is almost useless without claude models), so Anthropic basically said "That's what the API keys are for". Antropic has the info on their website, emailed all users for each step, and I've seen it on X- I'm sure it's in other places as well.
arcanemachiner 5mo ago
Considering Anthropic is constantly doing the opposite, I would just call it "balance".
- embedding-shape 5mo ago
  Not that I'm some paragon when it comes to critical thinking exactly, but if there any sort of proof or evidence of Anthropic "silencing negativity"? Wouldn't surprise me, but also haven't seen anything conclusive about it either, so spreading that they are as fact, is ironically FUD itself.
  - Forgeties79 5mo ago
    Name a startup that isn’t trying to downplay, scrub, or otherwise silence negative press.

jeremyjh 5mo ago

I think this is consistent with the Anthropic announcement. I do not see anything on this page that says it will NOT be charged as extra usage. The most recent Anthropic announcement was not that people would be banned for using subscriptions with OpenClaw, but that it would be charged as extra usage. I think the reason this was changed three days after that announcement is that being charged for extra usage meant people would not be banned for using their subscription OAuth tokens directly against the Anthropic API with a third party harness, as they had been before. But rather both that usage, and the more recent claude -p usage both be charged as extra usage.

ethbr1 5mo ago

> No official statement and not even a tweet? Release notes and announcements are a well-known agentic anti-pattern. If you're doing them, you're doing agentic wrong. /s-ish-also-cry