Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
1–10 of 74 posts
Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#2Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#3Literally nowhere in the article does Microsoft report AI is more expensive than paying human employees.
Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#4The title seems misleading, and reading the article explains the reason more clearly. There's nonsense OKR's and objectives at these companies to burn as many tokens as possible. It turns out that when you make a metric out of token usage, it unsurprisingly ends up becoming extremely expensive.
Inference is affordable, and you don't need a SOTA proprietary model to get a lot of use out of this technology. While you likely will still need a human engineer for quite a while longer, I don't agree that some number of humans + an LLM is going to be (or will ever remain) more expensive than just hiring more humans.
Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#5For MSFT: Just download DeepSeek locally and use it.
Or train your own power efficient stack.
Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#6Literally nowhere in the article does Microsoft report AI is more expensive than paying human employees.
There may be a word missing in the post title. Should be "Microsoft reports show AI is more expensive...".
The fact that AI is more expensive still comes through, even though Microsoft does not state this explicitly.
Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#7The title seems misleading, and reading the article explains the reason more clearly. There's nonsense OKR's and objectives at these companies to burn as many tokens as possible. It turns out that when you make a metric out of token usage, it unsurprisingly ends up becoming extremely expensive. Inference is affordable, and you don't need a SOTA proprietary model to get a lot of use out of this technology. While you l…
I kind of doubt they ever needed the number of humans they have, but I am genuinely open to being wrong about that.
Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#8The title seems misleading, and reading the article explains the reason more clearly. There's nonsense OKR's and objectives at these companies to burn as many tokens as possible. It turns out that when you make a metric out of token usage, it unsurprisingly ends up becoming extremely expensive. Inference is affordable, and you don't need a SOTA proprietary model to get a lot of use out of this technology. While you l…
They may as well have just said:
Company institutes an OKR that the IT division must spend over $1000/day/developer (fictious number).
Company is surprised when IT division is costing far more than it did before. Company increases this to $1500/day/developer to build a system to identify why this has happened.
I feel like vibe coding is less of an issue than vibe leadership at this point, and vibe leadership has nothing inherently to do with AI. These people are getting a vague feeling in their giblets, and then chasing it to the illogical conclusion no matter the cost or outcome.
Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#9>> Microsoft has reportedly begun canceling most of its direct Claude Code licenses
Hearsay information and click bait.
Re: Microsoft reports AI is more expensive than paying human employees
#10Say AI is very expensive and costs a lot. What happens when no one can or is not willing to actually do the work manually?
What if companies both don't see a large return on investment, and at the same time can't reduce their AI spend?