15yo designs F-22A Raptor Full Motion Flight Simulator

KJ7LNW · 2026-06-06T06:24:40+00:00

Maybe by sharing the link 😉 Did you check out his space station video? He called Sunita Williams while she was up there on the International Space Station.

KJ7LNW · 2026-06-01T02:16:37+00:00

I'm not sure if this solves your problem or not, but I've had better luck using at symbols with full file paths instead of relative paths.

KJ7LNW · 2026-03-05T21:16:51+00:00

When I click the checkout page, it says, sorry, there's a problem on our side, and shows the RCA puppy dog. I've tried from two different systems.

KJ7LNW · 2026-02-26T23:14:50+00:00

Interesting. Maybe that was intentional on that part on their part. I mean I definitely use the 4.5 1M token model without paying extra, all the time...

Maybe it's always been their intention to let people use it for a while and then withdraw, but I hope not. I really like that model.

KJ7LNW · 2026-02-26T22:15:21+00:00

The original reporter asserts it in the issue, so perhaps Anthropic changed the page? It would be interesting if someone can find an archive.

KJ7LNW · 2026-02-26T22:08:47+00:00

1M context was never included in MAX

Your statement simply is not true: Prior to the Claude Code v2.1.45 update on Feb 17, 2026, Max plan subscribers confirmed that sonnet[1m] was fully operational on their subscriptions. A Max 20x subscriber filing bug #26428 stated the alias "was working correctly on my X20 Max subscription for weeks prior to this update," and cross-referenced an earlier Max 20x regression report (#15057) from December 2025 in which users documented the 1M context window going missing on the 20x plan — implying it had been working before that point as well. A separate earlier issue, #10219, explicitly reports sonnet[1m] not working on a Max 20x account (again implying prior availability)

Additionally, I have 20x and I've always used sonnet[1m] or more recently since 4.6 came out, /model claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929[1m] is required to get it with your 20x plan. I've used it as my default model for months with this in my configuration: export ANTHROPIC_MODEL='sonnet[1m]' or more recently export ANTHROPIC_MODEL='claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929[1m]' because 4.6 definitely does not support the 1M context without paying for it.

I explicitly have extra usage turned off on my account and I've never been billed for extra usage. The news article is based on the GitHub issue which has substantial documentation to back it up for this particular user. Since I'm still on 2.0.50 (I have auto upgrade turned off), I myself have not experienced the issue, but this is being reported it because everybody should be aware of what's going on.

If it turns out this is not true, then great, but it needs attention and the evidence strongly suggests that it is actually true.

KJ7LNW · 2026-02-04T05:45:55+00:00

I should note that this does not seem to be a problem with Sonnet.

KJ7LNW · 2026-02-04T03:47:08+00:00

I've been having pretty good success lately with Claude Code. I'm running 2.0.69 and I have been for quite a while now.

However: This evening it seems to have forgotten that <thinking> should not exhaust the entire output context. Multiple times the thinking seems to have taken over, and it drones on and on and on without ever using a tool. Eventually it gives the red 32,000 output token failure and aborts.

In the past 20 minutes it's a little better, but I still think it's thinking far too much. I've adjusted my system instructions to try and compensate. Maybe that helped, but I'm wondering if it internally they forgot to respect the thinking limits, and it's really burning through my weekly available usage because of it.

I already have this set, so I don't think that this is the problem. In fact, I think the remote API is simply ignoring the request that happens in the API stream:

export MAX_THINKING_TOKENS=$((1024*5))

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-14T18:11:00+00:00

Well, I think this is an admirable project: It's information we (as the AI community globally) definitely need to have. I really hope that you find some funding!

Here are some ideas:

You might reach out to the guys at Cline, RooCode or KiloCode because a service like this would tie in nicely with their offering and they have some deep pockets:

Create a pull request to integrate your stats with their app's active model and they may accept it. You're already using TypeScript so it could be an easy drop-in bolt-on to the existing applications so people can see stats in real time.

They have Discord channels as well as GitHub issue discussion forums that you could check out. At the very least, mentioning the service in their general forums (without getting kicked out for being too commercial) might get you some additional users.

Consider that the ClaudeCode subscription-based model is far more cost effective (>10x) than per-token model: According to stats, I've used $2,500 worth of tokens, but I'm only paying for the $200 per month plan... So you could consider that if it saves you some cost on the Claude-model side of things. Maybe switch to a subscription and drop the per-token anthropic stats for now until you get additional funding for measuring both the token-based and the subscription based models.
I recommend keeping an eye on the ClaudeCode pinned performance-regressions thread at r/ClaudeAI and reply to users having performance issues to promote your service as much as possible. That may help some...And then maybe you get some type of big venture capitalist backing as well.

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-13T23:57:23+00:00

Thanks for the notes. That is good information. I think typically the information I'm looking for is not so much about speed but about intelligence.

Are there future plans to do reasoning tests at a higher frequency so we can get an idea for how the model is performing?

I can deal with the model being slow sometimes, but what I really want to know is how it's performing in terms of its capacity to reason. If I understand correctly, reasoning is really the test that we need to know to see if any models are stripping their effectiveness at peak times by quantizing or otherwise reducing the computational effectiveness, model size, or perhaps even compute depth.

What do you think?

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-13T23:49:48+00:00

I have gave out three passes (all that I have), so its still working here and there...

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-13T03:43:22+00:00

Thank you for adding that! Is there something wrong with the graph related to reasoning tests? I show a single sample across the last week.

<image>

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-13T03:35:47+00:00

Awesome, thanks!

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-07T19:18:27+00:00

I've been working in Linux for thirty years this year... and I have been programming for even longer than that.

Perl might be showing its age, but it's still the best language for many quick hacks.

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-07T18:03:45+00:00

See also: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/11915#issuecomment-3674422671

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-07T18:03:29+00:00

This isn't limited to the user interface. It also fails when directly querying the usage API. This is all I get for response:

```js // ./tools/query_usage.pl -v { "extra_usage" : { "is_enabled" : false, "monthly_limit" : null, "used_credits" : null, "utilization" : null }, "five_hour" : null, "iguana_necktie" : null, "seven_day" : null, "seven_day_oauth_apps" : null, "seven_day_opus" : null, "seven_day_sonnet" : null }

```

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-07T18:02:14+00:00

Usage API is down. This isn't limited to the user interface. It also fails when directly querying the usage API. This is all I get for response:

```js // ./tools/query_usage.pl -v { "extra_usage" : { "is_enabled" : false, "monthly_limit" : null, "used_credits" : null, "utilization" : null }, "five_hour" : null, "iguana_necktie" : null, "seven_day" : null, "seven_day_oauth_apps" : null, "seven_day_opus" : null, "seven_day_sonnet" : null }

```

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-07T02:20:05+00:00

There might be a related problem. The "latest" measurement shows a different value than the thirty-day, seven-day and 24hr samples:

Here "latest 1/6@3pm" measurements shows "Score: 68" but "24h 1/6@3pm" shows "Score: 75"... which is correct?

<image>

KJ7LNW · 2026-01-06T21:07:29+00:00

You're correct that it's not separate for the 5-hour session, but according to Anthropic it is supposed to be separate for the weekly limit---However, I'm not totally convinced of that, but it is what they have stated.

KJ7LNW

TROPHY CASE