Live data from Hacker News

Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

simonwillison.net

121–130 of 819 posts

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#121

Uber engineers reported that loading their workspace and pulling recent commits exhausted that AI limit for Claude Code (4.8 x-high) immediately.

I don't think loading up a single context window costs $1,500. Which limit are you talking about?

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#122
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

afaik, enterprise plans are not subsidized. its 20$/seat+api pricing. Unless you are saying api pricing itself is subsidized.

This is market introductory pricing that hasn't factored in cost recovery. Most of it has been run on early investment with the assumption they will recover costs in the long run. The prices are subsidized across the board and they will need to go up signficantly to recover them.

Yeah, that's not going to work if you can get e.g. 80% of value by using 10-20x or more cheaper open models. At some point it would just make sense for large companies to rent compute and deploy their version of DeepSeek or whatever (if they don't trust Chinese providers)

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming this were accurate, then presumably the AI companies would be betting that inference costs come down before the bill is due - I don't see enterprises being willing to absorb another ~10x price increase for tokens (as they've just done going from subscription prices to per-token pricing)

For claude shops this was a huge hit. But lets back this up. There are some companies that haven't even built a break-even model at this price because they are funded by investment. As soon as those investors lose patience the first dominos will fall. For those who have somewhat of a business model, will it survive a price increase? The bigger question is do the base model providers have enough runway and have a way…

It's mostly R&D though, not inference. If LLM's effectively become a commodity then they are screwed anyway.

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#124

> I noted that my own token usage comes to about $1,000/month against each of Anthropic and OpenAI - which currently costs me just $100 per provider thanks to their generous subsidized plans for individual subscribers. Do we know that AI providers are going to keep these per-token prices, or eventually lower them because of competition from China? Many lower-budget individuals are now moving to China open weight mode…

Per token costs will fall, but the harnesses will get more token hungry. Instead of just centering the div it’ll spin up a battery of agents to architect, critique, advise, code, review, refactor and so on.

I wish I could disable most of these. I already hate all the "oh you're actually right, let me fix that" nonsense. Then it proceeds to burn 50k tokens on the git history instead of copying logic A from a different part of the codebase to logic B, where I want that exact logic without having to write the boilerplate myself...

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#125
I wonder what they are doing with $1500 per month. I'm on Claude Pro $20 plan and I'm doing well. That's 3 days per week. On the other 2 days I'm using a customer's Claude Max, I don't know if it's the $100 or the $200 plan, but I'm sharing it with some of its other developers.

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#126
post #80

It's also a useful signal for AI value. Looks like it's a max value add of $18,000 per engineer per year.

Not really. There are clearly diminishing marginal returns, so it's likely that the first $2,400/engineer/year adds >>$2,400 of value, even if 18,001st $/engineer/year adds <$1 of value.

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#127

I wonder what they are doing with $1500 per month. I'm on Claude Pro $20 plan and I'm doing well. That's 3 days per week. On the other 2 days I'm using a customer's Claude Max, I don't know if it's the $100 or the $200 plan, but I'm sharing it with some of its other developers.

$1500/mth is token pricing.

Your other plans are fixed price with rate limits where you get more tokens than the dollar equivalent you pay monthly. These plans are economical only if majority of users spend less tokens in $ than the plan's costs. This subsidizes the gap vs. power users who spend multiple k$ monthly in API tokens.

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#128
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real answer? Software engineer quality of life. There can be an increase in productivity without a corresponding increase in total output. The gains could be captured by software engineers doing a days work in an hour then fucking off in a variety of ways.

> doing a days work in an hour then fucking off in a variety of ways Until companies start hiring 5x less engineers than they did before and well.. we are clearly moving towards that direction

Quite possibly. Doubftul it will happen all at once. If you can get 8 hours of work done in 1 they'd need to ramp up demand 8x. Would be interesting to see that happen over night. Happy monday. Here, take these 30 tickets.

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#129

> I noted that my own token usage comes to about $1,000/month against each of Anthropic and OpenAI - which currently costs me just $100 per provider thanks to their generous subsidized plans for individual subscribers. Do we know that AI providers are going to keep these per-token prices, or eventually lower them because of competition from China? Many lower-budget individuals are now moving to China open weight mode…

id be amazed any american business will aend data to china

Re: Uber's $1,500/month AI limit is a useful signal for AI tool pricing

#130
post #80

It's also a useful signal for AI value. Looks like it's a max value add of $18,000 per engineer per year.

No, that's not what it means at all even if just doing it purely in math terms. Really it is just a reasonable amount to cap at to stop the long tail of super spenders (tokenmaxxers). You could also call it "the amount of AI spend after which Uber has decided there is diminishing returns for the average engineer".
Post reply on HN