11–20 of 498 posts
Can these AI-generated articles not be prompted to at least cite the primary sources? How do I know any of this is true? Here's a much better article: https://aimagazine.com/news/why-uber-has-already-burned-thro...
It's very easy to blow through hundreds of dollars a session using API tokens especially with the 1m context if you aren't careful about clearing old context. At the same time the subscription will allow the same usage for hundreds of dollars a month. Either Anthropic is absolutely hosing API users, massively subsidizing subscriptions, or a little bit of both.
They are getting you hooked on cheaper tokens, then raking you in when you get scale. I'm sure Uber gets a break on list price, but I doubt they are anywhere near <150 employee subscription pricing.
They are using it to mean a mechanism that produces prodigious amounts of toxic waste. That does not conform to the historical understanding of the word.
Can these AI-generated articles not be prompted to at least cite the primary sources? How do I know any of this is true? Here's a much better article: https://aimagazine.com/news/why-uber-has-already-burned-thro...
The OP isn't a good article, but this one is about an entirely different subject?
It's very easy to blow through hundreds of dollars a session using API tokens especially with the 1m context if you aren't careful about clearing old context. At the same time the subscription will allow the same usage for hundreds of dollars a month. Either Anthropic is absolutely hosing API users, massively subsidizing subscriptions, or a little bit of both.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/annatong/2026/03/05/cursor-goes... "Cursor estimated last year that a $200-per-month Claude Code subscription could use up to $2,000 in compute, suggesting significant subsidization by Anthropic. Today, that subsidization appears to be even more aggressive, with that $200 plan able to consume about $5,000 in compute"
If 95% of people are using $100 of value a month, the whales may not be hurting them that badly.
I genuinely challenge someone spending $5-$10k a month to demonstrate how that turns into $50-$100k in value. At a corporate level, I'd much rather hire a junior engineer who spends $100-$200/month and becomes productive then try and rationalize $100k/year in token spend.
> 95% of Uber engineers now use AI tools monthly with 70% of committed code originating from AI. Well, that’s to be expected when using AI tools becomes relevant in your performance evaluation.
Edit: y'all are some whiney folk, ain't ya?
I know I'm responding to AI right now, but > which means figuring out if the company can afford this level of productivity at scale. If it was actually productive, then the revenue would increase and affordability wouldn't be a question.
Honest question, does Uber need that much R&D? And do they expect the ROI to be positive?