This thread is pretty quiet for what strikes me as a substantial set of changes with, presumably, more substantial changes still to come for anyone not grandfathered into a Pro plan.

I get the impression that the intersection of HN posters and Copilot users is quite small in practice; that Claude Code and Codex suck up all the oxygen in this room. But it seems plausible we’ll see similar “true costs greatly exceed our current subscription pricing” from Anthropic and OpenAI someday soon…

Using Copilot Pro with Pi, way better and smarter than using Claude Code. I haven't gotten a single e-mail and just wanted to use Opus (I use Sonnet 95% of the time with Opus for issues where Sonnet is struggling) and got an error message. No prior warning, nothing, I'm pissed. They just rugpulled all paying customers man. I liked Copilot because I can plan my usage over a whole month and I'm not "forced" to use it for a week before hitting limits unlike Claude and Codex.

Anthropic literally just removed Claude Code from their Pro plan today, so you're even more right than you know.

Do you have a citation on this? I have a Claude Pro subscription and looked at the comparison page and it says this under Pro: Everything in Free and: Claude Code directly in your codebase Power through tasks with Cowork Higher usage limits Deep research and analysis Memory that carries across conversations

It was recently discussed in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47855565

Go to the pricing page: https://claude.com/pricing

As of right now, it says Pro includes Code and Cowork. (At least, for me. There could always be A/B testing going on.)

There is A/B testing going on and for a while several pages on Anthropic's site did remove Code from pro (https://old.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1srzhd7/psa_claud...) if you want a lot more details.

The ux of copilot driving Claude beats Claude Code handily.

I never understood the low visibility.

Expensive ram is annoying. I don't look forward to expensive ai.

> But it seems plausible we’ll see similar "true costs greatly exceed our current subscription pricing" from Anthropic and OpenAI someday soon

Enterprise might stick around, but individually, I reckon the developers will flock to OpenCode + open weights (Qwen/GLM/Codestral). The problem then is, if the open weight models impress these new adopters, they will shout about it from rooftops (conferences, social media, blogs) in unison, which might result in an exodus. Especially troublesome considering developers are a major market for both frontier labs (Anthropic & OpenAI) & its IPO ambitions.

Indeed!

I just found out via other news sources, and was surprised I hadn't seen it on HN already.

> more substantial changes still to come for anyone not grandfathered into a Pro plan

The change applies to existing subscriptions, some paid a year in advance.

You can get a refund, from the article:

> If you hit unexpected limits or these changes just don’t work for you, you can cancel your Pro or Pro+ subscription and you will not be charged for April usage. Please reach out to GitHub support between April 20 and May 20 for a refund.

>and you will not be charged for April usage

They removed this now without notice but Wayback Machine still has it: https://web.archive.org/web/20260420190656/https://github.bl...

They now tacked on an Editor's note to the blog post.

....

Speaking as someone where he only 'real' option we have at work is Copilot Plugin, but I also use Copilot Plugin at home....

This is a shitty shitty shitty move.

As a personal user, I can now only use Opus 4.7 at a 7.5x 'Introductory' multiplier if I upgrade to pro+, but at work I can still apparently do Opus 4.6 at a 3x Multiplier on my work 'enterprise' account.

Honestly it strikes me as though someone at Github Copilot took Palantir's manifesto to heart; Screw the individual, consolidate power to companies on every level.

My parents bought one for the house when I was in elementary school. I still remember the sound of the Speech Synthesizer, discovering 20 GOTO 10, and playing Hunt the Wumpus.

Dohmke never spoke clearly to developers when he was GitHub's CEO.

A CEO is never speaking to developers, he's speaking to other CEOs.

CEOs have many audiences; great CEOs communicate capably with each.

FWIW it's not entirely clear to me who Entire's long-term customer is, but the (interesting!) CLI that shipped today is very much for developers who are busy building with agents.

Watching their public roadmap to see what happens. Right now, it looks about the same as it has for a while: useful new features and expected maintenance, moving along at a reasonable if not blistering clip.

https://github.com/orgs/heroku/projects/130

I made some small contributions to cpython during the 3.14 cycle. The codebase is an interesting mix of modern and “90s style” C code.

I found that agentic coding tools were quite good at answering my architectural questions; even when their answers were only half correct, they usually pointed me in the right direction. (I didn’t use AI to write code and I wonder if agentic tools would struggle with certain aspects of the codebase like, for instance, the Cambrian explosion of utility macros used throughout.)

This was around 2021 so AI code tools had not yet eaten everyone. One of the most interesting challenges was finding the right value judgements when blending multiple type systems. I doubt any agentic coding tool could do it today.

I blended the python type system with a large low-level type system (STEP AIM low level types) and a smaller set of higher-level types (STEP ARM, similar to a database view). I already was familiar with STEP, so I needed to really grok what Python was doing under the covers because I needed to virtualize the STEP ARM and AIM access while making it look like "normal" Python.

Oh, that's very interesting work. And, yes, I'd also be surprised if (today's) agentic tools were at all helpful for that: it's way outside of distribution, and conceptual correctness truly matters.

Per PEP 744, cpython shipped with an experimental JIT (default disabled) in 3.13. It remains experimental in 3.14.

See https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.13.html#an-experimental...

This is self-destructive defeatism. It is also flat wrong on its substantive points.

The only thing congress can do is impeach and convict trump and his administration, thereby stripping him of his authority. Laws have been passed, judges have ruled, but all those are ignored. however, if he has no authority, then we get to find out who's on the side of the constitution and who is with trump and his allies.

There will be many loyalists who will just side with the Trump administration. And then what?

Turns out, when the law has failed, the only solution is a fight to the death. And after such a fight, we do not return to our normal state and live happily ever after, we remain deeply unstable and untrustworthy for decades to come.

Give https://www.paper2audio.com/ a try; it is targeted at just this use case. It’s a Seattle-local startup.

I'm the Paper2Audio founder and I'm thrilled to see you recommending us here. Paper2Audio specializes in narrating complex documents like research papers to you. It is free for personal use.

This PDF exceeds our page limit, so you would have to split it up. We're working on increasing our page limits.

This is great! However, would it be possible to add dark mode support to the PDF view? Otherwise I have to manually follow along using Adobe Reader (which has a night mode), or separately convert PDFs to inverted-color versions. The latter is relatively straightforward, but having it integrated into the viewer would be much more convenient.

If you’re curious about or playing with t-strings, see https://t-strings.help/

I'd never heard of it, alas. Luckily, they live in pretty different language ecosystems.