Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

valmi.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 72 posts

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#31

Post by throwaway__ai »

throwaway__ai wrote: post #30
artembugara wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mean it’s written by AI? Or just my writing style?

Not the writing style, but the fact that the em-dashes and strange ticks make it indistinguishable from something AI-generated. At least take the time to replace them with something you can produce easily on a physical keyboard. Edit: Well, actually - this kind of writing style does feel quite AI-ish: > It really makes sense, and the best part — customers love it

It might be a Windows vs. MacOS/Linux thing, but regardless - it's becoming a similar kind of pattern that I'm subconsciously learning to ignore/filter out, similar to banner blindness and ads/editorials.

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#32

Post by rajvarkala »

andy99 wrote: post #28

Is this actually different from just guaranteeing some metrics? Like if you have a document processing “agent” that extracts fields from forms, you’d have an accuracy threshold and have some checks set up to verify this? Does “outcome billing” amount to anything different?

I think what you described would be a good definition of outcome. But, Who bills customers that way if you think about software providers? The prevailing models are fixed fee , hourly fee or infra-spend fee.

There is an argument to be made that SaaS tools tap the tool budget whereas AI agents can tap the worker budget of companies.

I am looking to understand more nuances here.

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#33

Post by artembugara »

throwaway__ai wrote: post #31
throwaway__ai wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the writing style, but the fact that the em-dashes and strange ticks make it indistinguishable from something AI-generated. At least take the time to replace them with something you can produce easily on a physical keyboard. Edit: Well, actually - this kind of writing style does feel quite AI-ish: > It really makes sense, and the best part — customers love it

It might be a Windows vs. MacOS/Linux thing, but regardless - it's becoming a similar kind of pattern that I'm subconsciously learning to ignore/filter out, similar to banner blindness and ads/editorials.

Chrome on iPhone

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#34

Post by ivanstojic »

I started reading the article and immediately got hit by the incorrect statement in the opening:

> If AI agents help each support employee handle 30% more tickets, that's like adding 30 new hires to a 100-person team, without the cost.

I think this is an oversimplification designed to make LLMs seem more profitable than they actually are.

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#35

Post by sailfast »

The one wrinkle this might have is that it incentivizes the agent developer to over-resolve or “over outcome” to ensure they hit targets.

This is risking the end customer experience for your Agent buyer, which might not be worth the risk to a company that wants to keep customers very happy.

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#36

Post by eiriklv »

throwaway__ai wrote: post #31
throwaway__ai wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the writing style, but the fact that the em-dashes and strange ticks make it indistinguishable from something AI-generated. At least take the time to replace them with something you can produce easily on a physical keyboard. Edit: Well, actually - this kind of writing style does feel quite AI-ish: > It really makes sense, and the best part — customers love it

It might be a Windows vs. MacOS/Linux thing, but regardless - it's becoming a similar kind of pattern that I'm subconsciously learning to ignore/filter out, similar to banner blindness and ads/editorials.

Why does it produce different ticks and em-dashes?

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#37

Post by j45 »

Outcome billing may seem to make sense for AI.

Maybe the pricing model makes sense in the beginning.

Until people will realize the big secret - AI is still just software.

A new category of software.

The price of software generally only goes in one direction, and that’s a race to the bottom.

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#38

Post by rajvarkala »

ivanstojic wrote: post #34

I started reading the article and immediately got hit by the incorrect statement in the opening: > If AI agents help each support employee handle 30% more tickets, that's like adding 30 new hires to a 100-person team, without the cost. I think this is an oversimplification designed to make LLMs seem more profitable than they actually are.

oversimplified surely, sweeping assumptions....

As much as I hate the assumptions, the worst case scenario is that AI is surely affecting some jobs.

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#39

Post by altcognito »

ivanstojic wrote: post #34

I started reading the article and immediately got hit by the incorrect statement in the opening: > If AI agents help each support employee handle 30% more tickets, that's like adding 30 new hires to a 100-person team, without the cost. I think this is an oversimplification designed to make LLMs seem more profitable than they actually are.

This is an article written by a company/llm trying to justify huge increases to the pricing structure.

Oh! Yknow that thing we were charging you $200 a month for now? We're going to start charging you for the value we provide, and it will now be $5,000 a month.

Meanwhile, the metrics for "value" are completely gamed.

Re: Why outcome-billing makes sense for AI Agents

#40

Post by rajvarkala »

j45 wrote: post #37

Outcome billing may seem to make sense for AI. Maybe the pricing model makes sense in the beginning. Until people will realize the big secret - AI is still just software. A new category of software. The price of software generally only goes in one direction, and that’s a race to the bottom.

This is actually what I thought. Although, AI agent developers can capture 1:10 of value delivered - assuming AI agents deliver - but with competiton among Agent builders, the value capture will go down. That is one possibility
Post reply on HN