>
The Question: How can a $200/month AI service: 1. Hallucinate expensive technical features
AI services can charge whatever they want. They're not a regulated good like many utilities. Per CMU, AI agents are correct at most about 30% of the time[1]. That's just the latest result, it's substantially better accuracy than past tests & older models.
> 2. Provide zero human support for 23 days
Human support is not an advertised feature. The only advertised uses of the `[email protected]` email are to notify Anthropic of unauthorized access to your account or to cancel your subscription.
> 3. Lack basic features like session continuity
Session independence is a design feature, to avoid "context poisoning". Once an AI agent makes a mistake, it's important to start a new session without the mistake in the context. Failure to do so will lead to the mistake poisoning the context & getting repeated in future outputs. LLMs are not capable of both session continuity and usable output.
> Is this normal? Are others experiencing similar issues with Claude Pro?
This is entirely normal & expected. LLMs should be treated like gullible teenage interns with access to a very good reference library and an unlimited supply of magic mushrooms. Don't give them any permissions you wouldn't give to an extremely gullible intern on 'shrooms. Don't trust them any more than you would a gullible intern on 'shrooms.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/29/ai_agents_fail_a_lot/
AI services can charge whatever they want. They're not a regulated good like many utilities. Per CMU, AI agents are correct at most about 30% of the time[1]. That's just the latest result, it's substantially better accuracy than past tests & older models.
> 2. Provide zero human support for 23 days
Human support is not an advertised feature. The only advertised uses of the `[email protected]` email are to notify Anthropic of unauthorized access to your account or to cancel your subscription.
> 3. Lack basic features like session continuity
Session independence is a design feature, to avoid "context poisoning". Once an AI agent makes a mistake, it's important to start a new session without the mistake in the context. Failure to do so will lead to the mistake poisoning the context & getting repeated in future outputs. LLMs are not capable of both session continuity and usable output.
> Is this normal? Are others experiencing similar issues with Claude Pro?
This is entirely normal & expected. LLMs should be treated like gullible teenage interns with access to a very good reference library and an unlimited supply of magic mushrooms. Don't give them any permissions you wouldn't give to an extremely gullible intern on 'shrooms. Don't trust them any more than you would a gullible intern on 'shrooms.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/29/ai_agents_fail_a_lot/