MAROKO133 Hot ai: Claude Code costs up to $200 a month. Goose does the same thing for free

📌 MAROKO133 Eksklusif ai: Claude Code costs up to $200 a month. Goose does the sam

The artificial intelligence coding revolution comes with a catch: it's expensive.

Claude Code, Anthropic's terminal-based AI agent that can write, debug, and deploy code autonomously, has captured the imagination of software developers worldwide. But its pricing — ranging from $20 to $200 per month depending on usage — has sparked a growing rebellion among the very programmers it aims to serve.

Now, a free alternative is gaining traction. Goose, an open-source AI agent developed by Block (the financial technology company formerly known as Square), offers nearly identical functionality to Claude Code but runs entirely on a user's local machine. No subscription fees. No cloud dependency. No rate limits that reset every five hours.

"Your data stays with you, period," said Parth Sareen, a software engineer who demonstrated the tool during a recent livestream. The comment captures the core appeal: Goose gives developers complete control over their AI-powered workflow, including the ability to work offline — even on an airplane.

The project has exploded in popularity. Goose now boasts more than 26,100 stars on GitHub, the code-sharing platform, with 362 contributors and 102 releases since its launch. The latest version, 1.20.1, shipped on January 19, 2026, reflecting a development pace that rivals commercial products.

For developers frustrated by Claude Code's pricing structure and usage caps, Goose represents something increasingly rare in the AI industry: a genuinely free, no-strings-attached option for serious work.

Anthropic's new rate limits spark a developer revolt

To understand why Goose matters, you need to understand the Claude Code pricing controversy.

Anthropic, the San Francisco artificial intelligence company founded by former OpenAI executives, offers Claude Code as part of its subscription tiers. The free plan provides no access whatsoever. The Pro plan, at $17 per month with annual billing (or $20 monthly), limits users to just 10 to 40 prompts every five hours — a constraint that serious developers exhaust within minutes of intensive work.

The Max plans, at $100 and $200 per month, offer more headroom: 50 to 200 prompts and 200 to 800 prompts respectively, plus access to Anthropic's most powerful model, Claude 4.5 Opus. But even these premium tiers come with restrictions that have inflamed the developer community.

In late July, Anthropic announced new weekly rate limits. Under the system, Pro users receive 40 to 80 hours of Sonnet 4 usage per week. Max users at the $200 tier get 240 to 480 hours of Sonnet 4, plus 24 to 40 hours of Opus 4. Nearly five months later, the frustration has not subsided.

The problem? Those "hours" are not actual hours. They represent token-based limits that vary wildly depending on codebase size, conversation length, and the complexity of the code being processed. Independent analysis suggests the actual per-session limits translate to roughly 44,000 tokens for Pro users and 220,000 tokens for the $200 Max plan.

"It's confusing and vague," one developer wrote in a widely shared analysis. "When they say '24-40 hours of Opus 4,' that doesn't really tell you anything useful about what you're actually getting."

The backlash on Reddit and developer forums has been fierce. Some users report hitting their daily limits within 30 minutes of intensive coding. Others have canceled their subscriptions entirely, calling the new restrictions "a joke" and "unusable for real work."

Anthropic has defended the changes, stating that the limits affect fewer than five percent of users and target people running Claude Code "continuously in the background, 24/7." But the company has not clarified whether that figure refers to five percent of Max subscribers or five percent of all users — a distinction that matters enormously.

How Block built a free AI coding agent that works offline

Goose takes a radically different approach to the same problem.

Built by Block, the payments company led by Jack Dorsey, Goose is what engineers call an "on-machine AI agent." Unlike Claude Code, which sends your queries to Anthropic's servers for processing, Goose can run entirely on your local computer using open-source language models that you download and control yourself.

The project's documentation describes it as going "beyond code suggestions" to "install, execute, edit, and test with any LLM." That last phrase — "any LLM" — is the key differentiator. Goose is model-agnostic by design.

You can connect Goose to Anthropic's Claude models if you have API access. You can use OpenAI's GPT-5 or Google's Gemini. You can route it through services like Groq or OpenRouter. Or — and this is where things get interesting — you can run it entirely locally using tools like Ollama, which let you download and execute open-source models on your own hardware.

The practical implications are significant. With a local setup, there are no subscription fees, no usage caps, no rate limits, and no concerns about your code being sent to external servers. Your conversations with the AI never leave your machine.

"I use Ollama all the time on planes — it's a lot of fun!" Sareen noted during a demonstration, highlighting how local models free developers from the constraints of internet connectivity.

What Goose can do that traditional code assistants can't

Goose operates as a command-line tool or desktop application that can autonomously perform complex development tasks. It can build entire projects from scratch, write and execute code, debug failures, orchestrate workflows across multiple files, and interact with external APIs — all without constant human oversight.

The architecture relies on what the AI industry calls "tool calling" or "<a href="https://platform.openai…

Konten dipersingkat otomatis.

🔗 Sumber: venturebeat.com

📌 MAROKO133 Breaking ai: NASA Runs Into Trouble Fueling Up Moon Rocket Hari Ini

Late last month, the four daring NASA astronauts who are scheduled to venture around the Moon and back as part of the agency’s historic Artemis 2 mission entered quarantine.

Their ride, a small Orion capsule mounted atop the agency’s enormous Space Launch System rocket, has already been rolled onto Launch Pad 39B at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

But the agency’s remaining checks ahead of the launch — a gauntlet of tests called the “wet dress rehearsal” that involves running through the full launch sequence without a crew on board — didn’t quite go as planned, forcing the agency to officially push back the launch date from its already ambitious early February timeline.

In an official statement this morning, NASA revealed that we may have to wait another four weeks for humanity’s return to the Moon, with the agency now eyeing a second wet dress rehearsal for “March as the earliest possible launch opportunity.”

The crew is officially released from quarantine, the agency said, as it awaits the next launch window.

It may not be the news we wanted to hear — but at least now, NASA’s Artemis 2 mission won’t have to compete with the Super Bowl and the Winter Olympics for media attention.

According to a February 2 statement, NASA found that the rocket’s core stage had sprung a leak and that efforts to correct it “proved unsuccessful.”

“The leak rate at the interface of the tail service mast umbilical continued to exceed the allowable limits,” the update reads. “Liquid hydrogen filling operations on both the core stage and upper stage are paused as the team meets to determines next steps.”

As a result, the tentative February 8 launch date is no longer on the table.

Fortunately, the leak appeared to be the only major hiccup during this week’s test. NASA engineers “pushed through several challenges during the two-day test and met many of the planned objectives,” according to the agency.

However, teams had to battle the elements, as cold winter temperatures “caused a late start to tanking operations.”

Engineers got to roughly five minutes left in the countdown when the ground launch sequencer noticed a “spike in the liquid hydrogen leak rate,” automatically stopping the countdown as a result.

Besides the hydrogen leak, teams also had to troubleshoot “dropouts of audio communication channels across ground teams in the past few weeks leading up to the test.”

The agency will be holding a press release later today to address the latest developments.

It’s an unfortunate development, forcing us to once again be patient to see humanity’s historic return to the Moon. The next launch dates fall in early March. If NASA misses those dates, it could be pushed back to early or late April, according to Space.com — the month NASA was originally targeting before September 2025, when the launch date was pushed up to February.

More on Artemis 2: Moon Astronauts Enter Quarantine for Launch

The post NASA Runs Into Trouble Fueling Up Moon Rocket appeared first on Futurism.

🔗 Sumber: futurism.com