281–290 of 360 posts
I find it useful that if they cut the use altogether I will pay for it out of pocket.
Would you decide its usefulness based on how high the bill is, or how many things you get done while using it? The former is the issue, and how many companies have been operating. It's like a trucking company ranking driver effectiveness by fuel used instead of by cargo moved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meta does this. Guess what one of the criteria for their recent layoffs was.
Meta tracks token consumption, but has explicitly stated that it is not a primary performance metric. Instead, employees are evaluated on "impact."
You get what you measure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vscode uses undocumented api calls. Right now we are living through the PokémonGo api fiasco. That ended with paid keys and a mostly dead economy.
Sorry, can you fill me in? I don't see the connection.
If any company announces that they use token consumption as an employee performance signal, for me that's close to a red flag to stay away from that company. No company with good engineering leadership should act like this is remotely a good idea.
I'd be interested to know if this is about individual employee AI usage, or use of AI tokens in production features, or both - and assuming both, what the split is. I can see how Uber could burn unbelievable amounts of tokens if they start running internal features that run a bunch of prompts against every completed ride, or every customer profile, for example. Or maybe this is about employee usage, but they introduc…
IMO, it's undoubtedly both. The number of product teams who have shipped expensive-to-operate AI features is wayyyy up there, and for many of the scenarios I've seen, customers simply don't care or are unwilling to pay significant premium for access to it. At the same time I'm starting to see some direction from people in leadership that I should "use the right model for the job" and things along those lines, which i…
isnt this just mcp servers hosted by the saas provider?
There is little new under the big fusion reactor in the sky. I just read a chapter in James Glieck's "The Information" about tokenmaxxing in the telegraphy industry. There used to be a big market for code books to reduce the per-character charges for sending telegrams. Compression was cash in the pocket. The telegraph companies discouraged the practice but were forced to accept it. The telegraph code industry started…
What you were describing would be token-minimizing, not maxxing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, they also said that previous time off for ill health wasn't a reason either. but looking at the number of people who had taken leave, it suggests otherwise.
You can believe whatever conspiracy theories you want, of course, but the most straightforward explanation is that when you lay off X,000 or XX,000 people, some number of them will be on leave.
If any company announces that they use token consumption as an employee performance signal, for me that's close to a red flag to stay away from that company. No company with good engineering leadership should act like this is remotely a good idea.
You'd be surprised, I know a few devs in very big tech companies, not faang but you definitely know them, and they all have some kind of token leaderboards, a few told their dev "we don't want you to write a single line of code manually anymore", etc. I assume the execs perspective is something like: if the top 20% of worker produce 80% of the code with LLMs and the company still works then we can get rid of the bott…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I checked their history and they seem alright ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Here, just a few examples over the last 9 days, in no particular order of exaggeration magnitude: Unsubstantiated claims of 3x-10x productivity at allegedly a FAANG: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48174666 More claims of the same, still unsubstantiated: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48173995 Even more claims of the same, still nothing of substance: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48173975 Outlandish…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they didn’t have human drivers, they’d have one less human to exploit per ride.
That's true, I guess possibly they figured out that humans using their own vehicles turn out to be cheaper than contracting or owning self-driving vehicles.