111–120 of 760 posts
Things like these (Google also banned me from Antigravity for briefly using an agent) and the massive quality swings made me cancel all 3 subs last week and resort to my local Qwen 3.6 only. Open models are already great and only getting better, and I really enjoy the privacy and consistency of a model I run myself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's rather shitty. It's one thing to disallow bypassing preferential pricing models, it's a completely different thing to castrate your model against some uses. You can see how it goes in the future. Wanna vibe code a throwaway script? $0.20. Ah, it's for a legal document search? $10k then. Oh and we'll charge 20% of your app sales too - I can see how they are going in real time, mind you!
This is absolutely how it’s going work. AI loses way too much money to not be enshittified. It’s a way less transformational technology when put in context of the real price tag.
I reproduced this on my account. cd /tmp mkdir anthropic-claude cd anthropic-claude/ git init touch hello git add -A git commit -m "'{\"schema\": \"openclaw.inbound_meta.v1\"}'" claude -p "hi" Immediate disconnect and session usage went to 100%
That's rather shitty. It's one thing to disallow bypassing preferential pricing models, it's a completely different thing to castrate your model against some uses. You can see how it goes in the future. Wanna vibe code a throwaway script? $0.20. Ah, it's for a legal document search? $10k then. Oh and we'll charge 20% of your app sales too - I can see how they are going in real time, mind you!
I predict that costs will grow to 80% of what it would cost a human, across the board for everything AI can do.
"It's still cheaper than a human" they'll say. Loudly here on HN too.
Of course this will happen slowly, very slowly. Lets meet again in 10-20 years.
Claude.ai is now at a 98.85% uptime. There's been so many frustrations with Claude / Anthropic lately (very heavy usage limits, wrong A / B testing, etc.). Claude status: https://status.claude.com/ I have been really happy with my Codex subscription lately, but feels like these things change every other day. The OpenCode Go subscription for trying out GLM, Kimi, Qwen, Deepseek and friends also looks useful. But nonet…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's rather shitty. It's one thing to disallow bypassing preferential pricing models, it's a completely different thing to castrate your model against some uses. You can see how it goes in the future. Wanna vibe code a throwaway script? $0.20. Ah, it's for a legal document search? $10k then. Oh and we'll charge 20% of your app sales too - I can see how they are going in real time, mind you!
This is absolutely how it’s going work. AI loses way too much money to not be enshittified. It’s a way less transformational technology when put in context of the real price tag.
This doesn't even have anything to do with if it loses money or not. Obviously they are going to charge as much as possible.
I think it goes beyond this. I was just using claude to edit a blog post which mentioned OpenClaw and I got this response: "The "OpenClaw" reference — I assume that's a typo or playful reference; if you mean a real product, I couldn't find it under that spelling and you'll want to fix or footnote it.". I gave it a direct link to openclaw.ai and the chat instantly ended and hit my 5hr usage limit. Could have been a co…
It doesn't look like anything to me
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Profiting off of inference is not the hard part, it's frontier training that is prohibitively expensive. And given that Anthropic does both , it must make up its training costs by selling inference. jp57 was pretty clearly talking about Anthropic's flat-rate plans, rather than the flat-rate plans of companies that get to skip the most expensive part of the process.
I understand that very well, yes. The point I'm making is that I don't think Anthropic or OpenAI would have ever gotten significant traction if they didn't have flat-rate plans, because flat-rate plans themselves are not inherently predatory or part of the enshittification slope but actually extremely UX-friendly. Perhaps in another timeline, if their product was actually valuable enough to pay this price for, they c…
That seems likely. If people had to pay their share of the actual all-in cost of the service (rather than having it be subsidized by investors with extremely deep pockets and a small handful of corporate customers), very, very few regular people would use it.
The point that 'jp57' pretty explicitly made [0] is that flat-rate plans that don't cover the all-in cost of providing the plans tend to result in those plans getting worse and worse and worse, as economic realities assert themselves. If the flat-rate plans that you are aware of actually cover the cost of providing the service, then you're discussing an entirely different situation that's entirely inapplicable to the discussion about Anthropic's pricing and degrading level of service.
[0] ...which is one that's understood by people who have been in pretty much any industry for more than a few years...
At this point I assume you are coping with having drank the koolaid and fired key staff believing claude will replace them...back when it was cheap....because nearsightedness affects decision makers much more during hype cycles......
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is absolutely how it’s going work. AI loses way too much money to not be enshittified. It’s a way less transformational technology when put in context of the real price tag.
No chance unless open weight models out of China discontinue. The gap right now is practically nonexistent.