Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

blog.kilocode.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 363 posts

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#201

Post by bee_rider »

NiloCK wrote: post #137
conartist6 wrote: post #32

"I firmly believe that AI will not replace developers, but a developer using AI will replace a developer who does not." Ugh, anyone who says that and really believes it can no longer see common sense through the hype goggles. It's just stupid and completely 100% wrong, like saying all musicians will use autotune in the future because it makes the music better. It's the same as betting that there will be no new invent…

Do the people in this corner use compilers? Would they agree that programmers who don't use them* have been replaced by those that do? *: I'm aware of cases like the recent ffmpg assembly usage that gave a big performance boost. When talking about industrial trend lines, I'm OK with admitting 0.001% exceptions. (Apologies if it comes across as snarky or pat, but I honestly think the comparison is reasonable.)

Compilers were invented pretty early on in things… I wouldn’t be they shocked if the population of assembly programmers has remained constant.

Where would you put the peak? Fortran was invented in the 50’s. The total population of programmers was tiny back then…

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#202

Post by pastor_williams »

apwell23 wrote: post #169
bananapub wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> anthropic bait and switch what was the bait and switch? where in the launch announcement ( https://www.anthropic.com/news/max-plan ) did they suggest it provided unlimited inference?

so where did 'bad users' come from if users were simply doing what they were allowed to? why is anthropic tweeting about 'naughty users that ruined it for everyone' ?

What are the commons? Why would a tragedy just appear there or of the blue?

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#203

Post by chuckadams »

theshrike79 wrote: post #153
bubblyworld wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol, I think making confident claims in either direction is total copium at this point. It's abundantly obvious that LLM-based tools are useful, it's just a question of what we'll settle on using them for and to what degree. Nobody knows how this will play out yet. Reality does not care about your feelings, unfortunately.

Just completely ignoring LLMs is like not wanting to use autocomplete or language servers, preferring to hand-craft everything. But on the other hand there is the other end who think AGI coming in a few months and LLMs are omniscient knowledge machines. There is a sweet spot in the middle.

There's certainly room for debate, but I've taken to just ignoring the people who proclaim that AI is merely a passing fad or a useless parlor trick. I can't predict much, but I can confidently say I won't be the only one ignoring them.

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#204

Post by diabllicseagull »

NiloCK wrote: post #137
conartist6 wrote: post #32

"I firmly believe that AI will not replace developers, but a developer using AI will replace a developer who does not." Ugh, anyone who says that and really believes it can no longer see common sense through the hype goggles. It's just stupid and completely 100% wrong, like saying all musicians will use autotune in the future because it makes the music better. It's the same as betting that there will be no new invent…

Do the people in this corner use compilers? Would they agree that programmers who don't use them* have been replaced by those that do? *: I'm aware of cases like the recent ffmpg assembly usage that gave a big performance boost. When talking about industrial trend lines, I'm OK with admitting 0.001% exceptions. (Apologies if it comes across as snarky or pat, but I honestly think the comparison is reasonable.)

this is kind of a funny example to me because of all the programming language and compiler discourse that's happening. analogies almost always miss the mark by hiding the nuances that need discussing, and this topic is no exception.

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#205

Post by mwigdahl »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #59
MOARDONGZPLZ wrote: post #30

I would absolutely do this if I ran anthropic. Of course unlimited implicitly means “unlimited without abuse.” There are always these “power users” who run it 25/8 and use all the resources, or sell access to others. To Anthropic: of course the “power users” are also going to be the top 5% of extremely online folks who are going to angrily pen long form tweet storms and this whole thing will die down soon for the oth…

> Of course unlimited implicitly means “unlimited without abuse.” So, not unlimited? Like, if the abuse is separate from amount of use (like reselling; it can be against ToS to resell it even in tiny amounts) then sure, but if you're claiming "excessive" use is "abuse", then it is by any reasonable definition not unlimited.

It was never sold as unlimited. Max plans have always had both rate limits and 5-hour usage limits.

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#206

Post by bigstrat2003 »

ygritte wrote: post #87

Does "unlimited" ever mean anything else than "until we change our minds"? Who would expect to get services asymptotically for free forever?

You're right, and one can go even further: every single service is "until we change our minds", unless you have a contract guaranteeing certain terms for some time period. That's not nefarious, that's just how business works. In my experience when people complain about the terms of business changing, what truly bothers them is the specifics of the change, not the fact that it's changing. In this case I don't use any AI tools (because they suck, frankly), so I don't have enough background to judge if the change is reasonable or not. But I don't think one should really hold it against a business that they change the service offering over time.

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#207

Post by tiahura »

jennyholzer wrote: post #67
conartist6 wrote: post #32

"I firmly believe that AI will not replace developers, but a developer using AI will replace a developer who does not." Ugh, anyone who says that and really believes it can no longer see common sense through the hype goggles. It's just stupid and completely 100% wrong, like saying all musicians will use autotune in the future because it makes the music better. It's the same as betting that there will be no new invent…

[flagged]

do you hand compile your code?

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#208

Post by andyferris »

londons_explore wrote: post #56
energy123 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google and OpenAI have done similar things with their LLM offerings. Gemini Advanced offered 2.5 Pro with nearly unlimited rate limits, then nerfed it to 100/day. OpenAI silently nerfed the maximum context window of reasoning models in their Pro plan. Accompanying the nerf is usually a psy op, like nerfing to 50/day then increasing it to 100/day so the anchoring effect reduces the grievance. It's a smart ploy because…

> the user does face provider switching costs (time and effort), which serves as a mini-moat for status quo provider. When a provider gets memory working well, I expect them to use this to be a huge moat - ie. they won't let you migrate the memories, because rather than being human readable words they'll be unintelligible vectors. I imagine they'll do the same via API so that the network has a memory of all previous…

Unintelligible vectors might be hard to transfer from one of their older models to one of their newer models - so I think the human readable words will remain a bit of a narrow waist in this space for the immediate future at least.

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#209

Post by mwigdahl »

redhale wrote: post #176

This is just an ad for Kilo Code with a very dumb take. Claude Max, to my knowledge, was never marketed as "unlimited". Claude Max gives you WAY more tokens then $100/$200 would buy. When you get rate limited, you have the option to just use the API. Overall, you will have gotten more value than just using the API alone. And you always had, and continue to have, the option of just using the API directly. Go nuts. The…

I was going to write much the same thing but just upvoted you instead. Max plans are a super great deal, even with these new limits.

Re: Stop selling “unlimited”, when you mean “until we change our minds”

#210

Post by conartist6 »

infecto wrote: post #165
conartist6 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm one working on novel tech, without AI. I've never been doing more valuable work or been more in command of my craft. Yet the blanket statement is that I will fail and be replaced, and in fact that people like me don't exist! So heck yeah I'll come clap back on that.

Your interpretation of the original quote is so far off that I would question your interpretation of the world. Sure novel stuff is being built but the vast majority of code at all sizes of companies has been written before in some iteration. Even for the novel work being done, it’s being surrounded by layers of code that has probably being written before. Are engineers going anywhere? No. But I also don’t think it’s…

But "more productive" is a wording I also take issue with.

Code is like law. The goal isn't to have a lot of it. Come to me when by "more productive" you actually mean that the person using the LLM deleted more lines of code than anyone else around them while preserving the stability and power of the system

Post reply on HN