undefined | Better HN

0 pointsDaviey3mo ago0 comments

Can you help me understand how using Claude Code isn't abusive, but Opencode is?

('because they said so, isn't a good answer)

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

solenoid09373mo ago· 2 in thread

Claude Code is a loss leader, you agree to use it under the terms that you don't hijack the OAuth flow to use other clients.

If you don't like those terms you can use the API.

Using Claude Code's auth flow with OpenCode is no different than using a custom client to abuse Gmail/Google Photos free tier as blob storage.

You get a loss leading product under certain good faith terms, if you break those terms you're abusing the product.

DavieyOP3mo ago

You've still not explained why, you've just reasserted "because they said so".

What is the upside to Anthropic if we use ClaudeCode but not OpenCode? If it is such a loss leader, why would they even offer it? By using it, even within their terms, you are still abusing their good will. No?

(You also said the alternative to not liking the terms is to use their API. There is another alternative, which is to keep using it against their ToS and risk a ban. Or use a different provider. So the situation is more nuanced than "this" or "that")

solenoid09373mo ago

> you've just reasserted "because they said so".

Yes. That is all that matters. That is the contract you've signed with the business, end of story.

They have their reasons (3P clients suck at caching, this is a subsidized tier to create subscription lock in, etc) but that's besides the point. If you sign a contract, you abide by its restrictions or you categorically abusing the offering.

> There is another alternative, which is to keep using it against their ToS and risk a ban.

No one working on a project of value and no sane business would do this. The people doing this are not serious/mature people. Frankly any dev that intentionally does this at a real company would be fired.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse