Community Radar.

“Anthropic is speedrunning a complete collapse of user trust”

At this point, Anthropic seems to be collecting scandals like they're achievements. First, there was the whole Claude watermark situation. Then there's the Max 5x / Max 20x situation. The marketing makes it sound like Max 20 gives you 20x the usage of Pro and Max 5 gives you 5x. Pretty straightforward, right? Except those multipliers apparently apply to a **5-hour session window**, while the weekly limits are a completely different thing. And those weekly limits aren't clearly disclosed. So, according to the numbers being discussed, Max 5x is closer to \~3.5x Pro's weekly usage, while Max 20x is only around \~6–8x. Meaning the $200 plan can end up giving you only around 2x the weekly usage of the $100 plan. That's not what most people would reasonably understand "20x more usage" to mean. And this isn't just some random Twitter complaint. **Anthropic is already facing a proposed class-action lawsuit over the way these subscription plans are marketed.** The lawsuit alleges that the "5x" and "20x" claims are misleading because they refer to five-hour session limits rather than the overall weekly usage customers might reasonably expect from those plans. OpenAI's Tibo basically came out and said that their 20x Codex limits actually mean 20x the weekly usage, and that their Pro plans don't have the same 5-hour restriction. Then this weekend, we get another one of Anthropic's terrible announcements. Anthropic says the current **50% increase** in Claude Code weekly limits is going away. Starting September 14, the "permanent" increase will only be **25%**. And their own wording literally says: > So let me get this straight. You temporarily increase limits by 50%, users get accustomed to those limits, and then you permanently reduce them to 25% above the old baseline...while telling everyone to "hang with us while we figured out what we can sustainably serve." At some point, you have to stop looking at these as isolated incidents. The confusing Max plan marketing. A lawsuit alleging customers were misled about what they were actually buying. The watermark controversy. And now cutting the current Claude Code limits after users have already built their workflows around them. **This isn't just about usage limits anymore. It's about trust.** Anthropic can have the best models in the world, but if paying customers constantly feel like they need to investigate Reddit, Twitter, and court filings to figure out what their subscription actually gets them, something has gone seriously wrong. And honestly, Dario Amodei needs to start answering for this. Because "we're figuring out what we can sustainably serve" is not a great answer after you've already sold people expensive subscriptions based on usage claims they reasonably understood one way, only to have the fine print tell a very different story. What do you guys think? https://preview.redd.it/tvw4i1jx7qmh1.png?width=818&format=png&auto=webp&s=b18a33a71313196deee218f2ef0b051cbace2cd0 https://preview.redd.it/3fis78jz7qmh1.png?width=1015&format=png&auto=webp&s=d2ec02a007a554ba870ab3d134b8221e2824f400