Live data from Hacker News

AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

thestateofbrand.com

281–290 of 426 posts

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What they charge people says nothing about what it costs them. Off the top of my head, one confounding factor is trying to win back marketshare from Anthropic. We will only know the actually situation once Anthropic goes public and we can look at their books.

I think it's pretty safe to assume they are not losing money on inference.

I think it’s safe to assume that they are bleeding cash.

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#282

[flagged]

I don't think so. AI use is still very limited. For OpenAI and Anthropic and the AI boom to match their valuation, AI adoption needs to increase substantially. The current constraint is data centers. Pricing will be heavily influenced by market dynamics. Plenty of things that should be cheap aren't because of scarcity (simple example: RAM).

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#283
My own interest in LLMs increased exponentially when, around 18 months ago, I saw a post somewhere that had a guy who wrote his own inference engine in Rust and demonstrated it running with downloaded open weight models. I tried it out and was quite amazed that even on my laptop (no GPU) I could get an LLM to write Python programs and engage in discussions about Lewis Carroll poetry. It went from "magic thing that needs a data center of unobtanium GPUs to do questionably useful stuff" to "thing that does useful things even on a regular computer".

There's plenty of sand on the planet and clever people (and AI) figuring out how to do more work with less sand and power, so any argument that AI is going to cost so much that it won't be usable, seems just preposterous.

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there will always be a free tier that they'll be willing to use. Even if it sounds hackneyed, those folks will still use it because many people are not discerning readers anyway.

Despite what I just said, I do hope so, because I'm really not inclined to pay for it, at least not very much. I don't need another $100-200/mo bill in my life, and it doesn't provide that level of value as a chatbot. Google is enough. I'm not sure that free tier will necessarily continue forever though, unless there is a way to monetize it (presumably by advertising, or by selling data they've gleaned about the user…

A free tier will almost always exist. Mostly for the reasons you already describe. That's a training ground for their small models as well as a way to get full access to new training data (and advertisements). As well as funnel new paying users. Why would you ever give that up?

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#285
post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't been following anyone baking models into ASICs, is it not still necessary to pack just as many transistors onto a chip, whether it's an NPU or GPU, ASIC or not you still need to hold hundreds of gigabytes in memory, so how is it cheaper to bake it onto custom silicon than running it on commodity VRAM? (Asking because I don't know!)

Not my area either! But my understanding is that there are more efficient methods of representing static numbers when you can skip the vram lookup. https://taalas.com/ Is an example startup in this area claiming 16k tok/s on an asic for llama 8b. Qwen has a 27b model at opus 4.5 quality.

Neat, thanks for the link

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#286
post #79

Every AI subscription is a ticking time bomb for the frontier provider; within a few years we will be running local models as good as today’s frontier models with almost no cost burden. The floor will fall out of the enterprise market for all the frontier companies.

> within a few years we will be running local models as good as today’s frontier models with almost no cost burden Based on what? The RAM requirements alone are extraordinary. No, running large models on shared, dedicated hosted hardware at full utilization is going to be vastly more cost-efficient for the foreseeable future.

Qwen 3.6 is virtually indistinguishable from Claude on my 5090

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#287
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think hardware prices will come back down once we start seeing more efficiency improvements in models and hardware, and once more people and companies self-host models (which seems to be happening more and more these days). I think the massive infra/hardware expenditures of OpenAI and the like are going to end up unnecessary, leading to hardware price drops.

If companies decide to self-host, wouldn't that drive the demand and therefore prices up? Most companies currently do not have the needed infrastructure.

I think companies will self host (including on rented hardware) even if it's more expensive, and that, along with efficiency improvements, will drop demand for big AI. I think big AI is overspending on hardware/datacenters at the moment.

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It costs OpenAI less money to serve GPT-5.5 than GPT-4." does it though? do you have the numbers? Or you just making stuff up?

We used to not know, but now because open source models are being hosted and served by people whose only incentive is making profit on directly running inference, we have a ballpark idea.

There's no reason to think that the latest frontier models have similar inference costs to open source models.

It would be more surprising if the surrounding architecture hasn't significantly diverged. If it _hasn't_ significantly diverged, then given the performance difference it would imply that the frontier models have significantly greater param counts, which would result in a higher cost.

Re: AI subscriptions are a ticking time bomb for enterprise

#290

[flagged]

This is only true if there is enough competition with equally good SOTA models. Otherwise, the price of the best models will keep increasing until people don't buy them anymore and use humans instead. Regardless of how much it costs to operate in reality. There is a reason why non-profit unnamed company turned to profit company.
Post reply on HN