Live data from Hacker News

AI's Affordability Crisis

blog.dshr.org

101–110 of 436 posts

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#101

Affordability is not the current goal. Vendor lock-in is the current goal. Consumer prices are a drop in the bucket comparatively.

And Microsoft forced M365 subscriptions to include AI for +$30/license.

Cheap, but gave them a massive user base they can claim is using AI

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#102
post #32

The article fails to mention DeepSeek, Alibaba, Qwen, Xiaomi, MiMo, z.ai, or GLM. It's hard to take such an article seriously that doesn't do this. (Our monthly total spend is around $180 with a team of 6, about half technical; our biggest line items are for American models or subscriptions which we probably will be planning to get rid of.) And then remarks like this: Anthropic, OpenAI and Microsoft have all now tran…

I think the author is referring to enterprise customers. You aren't the "customer" in this case; you're the bait. How do you know that the other models you are referring to aren't subsidized?

Subsidizing makes no sense when there's no - possibility of a - moat. Although it's very possible that China in general subsidizes Chinese labs in some way so they maintain pressure on US labs. But you only have to look at proxies such as OpenRouter to see that the individuals aren't doing any subsidizing on per token costs.

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#103
Yes. If we spend more on building AI infrastructure then current total global gross software sales, the only way the math works is if we create and sell much more software or if we start charging more for it.

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#104
post #87
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once your dependent, they can drive up the price just because. It doesn't need to be for existential reasons. This is the crisis point for vibe-coders. A developer can go back to writing code by hand, as horrible as that might sound. Someone who hasn't learned to code but builds with AI can't go back. They either pay or they stop. That will be an painful choice whichever way you fall.

There are already open weight models out there that are capable and cheap enough for a lot of coding tasks. Not as good as Claude but not far from it. There's no going back to pre-AI coding.

I can't speak for everyone, but for most of my coding tasks, Claude is just barely good enough. There's no going all the way back, and perhaps open weight models will keep improving, but at least 50% of my work would be better done by hand than by a worse-than-Claude agent.

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#105
post #27

My take is that Anthropic and OpenAI simply are NOT competing on price. 2 big players are often not enough to create tension on price. Chinese models and open model providers are, indeed, competing on price, and the difference shows.

1 player is enough to create tension on price when "don't buy it at all" is a comptetative option. By most accounts, Anthropic and OpenAI both lose to "just don't buy" when they try charging at cost.

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#106
post #27

My take is that Anthropic and OpenAI simply are NOT competing on price. 2 big players are often not enough to create tension on price. Chinese models and open model providers are, indeed, competing on price, and the difference shows.

Chinese models are dropping in price thanks to ridiculous levels of state subsidy where companies are forced into aggressive price wars to survive and grab market share. I am guessing this will also blow up sometime next year or in 2029 at the maximum.

Btw, some Chinese corporates have already seen this and increased their price. Zhipu AI & Tencent for example. Alibaba, Baidu, and Tencent also announced multiple price increases for their AI services.

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#108
post #73

The math doesn’t add up and the wheels are starting to come off the bus. The conversation in a lot of wealth management offices has shifted dramatically in the last few month from “how do I get in on this AI thing?” to “how do I protect my assets when this AI stuff blows up.” There’s little question now if this will all implode, just when and who’s going to lose their shirt and be left without chairs when the music s…

Assuming the analysis is right, and most (or all) of these AI companies will default on their debts, what consequences might that have?

>what consequences might that have?

All depends on who is holding the bag, and how big the bag is.

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#109
post #73

The math doesn’t add up and the wheels are starting to come off the bus. The conversation in a lot of wealth management offices has shifted dramatically in the last few month from “how do I get in on this AI thing?” to “how do I protect my assets when this AI stuff blows up.” There’s little question now if this will all implode, just when and who’s going to lose their shirt and be left without chairs when the music s…

Assuming the analysis is right, and most (or all) of these AI companies will default on their debts, what consequences might that have?

All of those poor agents will be laid off from their support chat jobs and their roles will get outsourced to India and Philippines.

Re: AI's Affordability Crisis

#110
post #71

> Zitron's numbers don't tell us the real cost of generating tokens but, subject to the assumption that the platforms are not subsidizing the token price, that means Anthropic is subsidizing their enterprise customers by up to 40 times, and OpenAI up to 70 times Neither Anthropic nor OpenAI are subsidizing enterprise customers. Neither Anthropic nor OpenAI allow Business nor Enterprise customers access to the high va…

> it may underestimate the inference margins of Ant/OAI's API pricing. If true then why are neither Anthropic or OpenAI dropping their API pricing to gain market share when both are clearly doing all sorts of political and PR maneuvering to compete in a cutthroat market? Since they aren't dropping the API usage prices (and are in fact raising them in a lot of subtle ways) then one of these options almost has to be tr…

The training costs are very likely the reason. Dario has talked about how each individual model is profitable, but how the expenditure training the next generation of models makes it look like they're not profitable at any given moment in time, and I believe he's being honest about that.

The market for open weight model hosting gives you an idea of the profitable price floor, it's pretty clear there's markup baked into OAI/Anthropic's APIs.

Post reply on HN