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

Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 241 posts

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#101

Post by anabis »

timr wrote: post #70
alexaholic wrote: post #28

I have a GitHub Pro subscription, renewed for the 2nd year, and I just found out I can no longer use Opus with it. Opus was one of the reasons I had a subscription in the first place. Opus 4.6 had a 3x multiplier in Pro. Now the new Opus 4.7 model has 7.5x in Pro+, which offers 5x more requests, but costs 4x more than Pro. So now Opus is essentially 2x the price it used to be. It’s likely that Sonnet 4.7 will be the…

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

AI should decide the level of model needed, and fallback if it fails. It mostly is a UX problem. Why do I need to specify the level of model beforehand? Many problems don't allow decision pre-implementation.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#102

Post by computerex »

timr wrote: post #70
alexaholic wrote: post #28

I have a GitHub Pro subscription, renewed for the 2nd year, and I just found out I can no longer use Opus with it. Opus was one of the reasons I had a subscription in the first place. Opus 4.6 had a 3x multiplier in Pro. Now the new Opus 4.7 model has 7.5x in Pro+, which offers 5x more requests, but costs 4x more than Pro. So now Opus is essentially 2x the price it used to be. It’s likely that Sonnet 4.7 will be the…

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

Model selection for day to day tasks based on vibes is not very scientific. Micromanaging the model doesn't seem like a great idea when doing real professional work with professional goals/deadlines/pressures.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#103

Post by firecall »

hx8 wrote: post #54

I really dislike these AI middleman plans. The value-add that Microsoft brings to Github Copilot is near zero compared to directly buying from Anthropic or OpenAI, where 99% of the value is being delivered from. I don't understand why anyone would want to deal with Microsoft as a vendor if they don't have to. The short period of discounted usage was always the obvious rug pull.

I also just saw:

> Claude Code to be removed from Pro Tier? > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47855565

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#104

Post by timr »

anabis wrote: post #101
timr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

AI should decide the level of model needed, and fallback if it fails. It mostly is a UX problem. Why do I need to specify the level of model beforehand? Many problems don't allow decision pre-implementation.

That’s certainly an opinion. Not one I agree with, but sure, if you entirely outsource all of your thinking to the magic box, then you probably want the box to have the strongest possible magic.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#105

Post by timr »

computerex wrote: post #102
timr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

Model selection for day to day tasks based on vibes is not very scientific. Micromanaging the model doesn't seem like a great idea when doing real professional work with professional goals/deadlines/pressures.

It’s deeply ironic that the folks who want to outsource as much thought to the model as possible are saying that my stance - use your brain to decide the right tool for the job - is tantamount to “vibes”.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#106

Post by esafak »

timr wrote: post #70
alexaholic wrote: post #28

I have a GitHub Pro subscription, renewed for the 2nd year, and I just found out I can no longer use Opus with it. Opus was one of the reasons I had a subscription in the first place. Opus 4.6 had a 3x multiplier in Pro. Now the new Opus 4.7 model has 7.5x in Pro+, which offers 5x more requests, but costs 4x more than Pro. So now Opus is essentially 2x the price it used to be. It’s likely that Sonnet 4.7 will be the…

Reading the comments here drives home an industry wide problem with these tools: people are just using the latest and most expensive models because they can , and because they’re cargo-culting. This is perhaps the first time that software has had this kind of problem, and coders are not exactly demonstrating great discretionary decision making. I’ve been using Anthropic models exclusively for the last month on a larg…

It is not that simple; companies retire old models. I wanted to use 5.1 Codex Max to save money and I could not on my subscription.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#108

Post by arjie »

Oh nuts, I forgot I was on Copilot. I used to use it for auto-complete and so on. I haven't used it in over a year and I'm still paying for it. If you're like me you'll find it here: https://github.com/settings/billing/licensing

And you can then cancel it. I have no idea what a premium request is and it's all just too complicated to use.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#109

Post by andrewjvb »

jimberlage wrote: post #87
plasma_beam wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if you’re a vscode user up until a couple days ago you could hammer Opus 4.6 all day every day and pay nowhere close to the Claude Max plan. Many people exploited this and the subsidy is closing.

Yeah this was me. I just got a message that I hit my limit and now I am looking into what it takes to run Qwen on local hardware.

Been having a ton of fun with copilot cli directed to local qwen 3.6. If you’re willing to increase the amount of specificity in your prompts then delegating from a GPT-5.4 or Opus to local qwen has been great so far.

Re: Changes to GitHub Copilot individual plans

#110

Post by [deleted] »

timr wrote: post #79
selcuka wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most of the time, Haiku is fine. Haiku is most definitely not fine for the code bases that I work on. Sonnet is probably fine for most daily tasks, but Opus is still needed to find that pesky bug you've been chasing, or to thoroughly review your PR.

> Haiku is most definitely not fine for the code bases that I work on. Sonnet is probably fine for most daily tasks, but Opus is still needed to find that pesky bug you've been chasing, or to thoroughly review your PR. Yeah, I hear that a lot, but it never comes with proof. Everyone is special. I’m sure you’d find that Haiku is pretty functional if there were a constraint on your use.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN