121–130 of 214 posts
> 5 days ago: 7M users > 4 days ago: 8M users > 3 days ago: 9M users That's some incredible growth.
One person using the app on two computers and a phone? That's obviously 3 users.
Growth Hackers and SEO types have done so much to make the world an insufferable place. I congradulate them on the OpenClaw psyop, that was some very inspired bullshit that did fuck all and is now irrelevant.
I stopped paying for Codex because of this shit. "Whoops we burned a week of 20x usage in minutes because we fucked up the cache again. You can keep paying money to get more resets to fix it" nah, I'll use open models. Only way I'd use codex now is if it was free, and I don't mean someone else paying for it. I would rather have them pay for DSv4P or Kimi
I stopped paying for Codex because of this shit. "Whoops we burned a week of 20x usage in minutes because we fucked up the cache again. You can keep paying money to get more resets to fix it" nah, I'll use open models. Only way I'd use codex now is if it was free, and I don't mean someone else paying for it. I would rather have them pay for DSv4P or Kimi
Retroactive refunds are certainly better, but I think OpenAI is much more customer-focused in this regard than Anthropic.
Crazy value for money now with the banked resets. At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible. On my codex pro plan, I am 5.6 sol'ing my way everyday with the odd ultra mode. Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You hit the nail on the head. It's a race to the bottom.
Everyone is raising the bottom. Kimi got 60% more expensive during the 2.x cycle despite staying the exact same size. Now K3 is almost 6x the cost of the original K2 checkpoint, and while the parameter count finally jumped, it's still an extremely sparse MoE and definitely does not cost 6x what the original K2 checkpoint did to host at scale. Race to the bottom only takes real effect when there's a cap to the capabil…
How long is this gonna last? OpenAI obviously is doing it to gain mindshare but they're burning money before their IPO and can't sustain these resets. They've bought a lot of dev goodwill tho, which matters I guess.
They're performing the resets when the cluster load goes down and they have sufficient capacity to handle the reset.
> 5 days ago: 7M users > 4 days ago: 8M users > 3 days ago: 9M users That's some incredible growth.
They, like every startup ever, count users in a very stupid way. One person using the app on two computers and a phone? That's obviously 3 users. Growth Hackers and SEO types have done so much to make the world an insufferable place. I congradulate them on the OpenClaw psyop, that was some very inspired bullshit that did fuck all and is now irrelevant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s less than the fully loaded cost of hiring another engineer. If someone is making the case that it’s helping the team get twice as much work done without hiring more people (which I’m neither agreeing with or disagreeing with) then the bean counters would actually prefer it. Hiring people is messy and expensive. Spending on API costs is a dial that you can turn down later if you need to, without laying anyone o…
Well someone would actually have to make that case. So far nobody has been able to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can anyone explain how you “win” the market of super intelligence? Particularly with open weights models now rivaling the frontier, it seems like a race to the bottom even if the prices don’t yet reflect that.
"race to the bottom" is the negative framing of "competitive market prices". So a company or union might say "this is a race to the bottom" when someone new enters their market, but to people buying their services this might be seen as welcome competition. Do you actually see a negative impact from competition in this area? Or do you just mean competition will further reduce prices?