31–40 of 91 posts
Anecdotal experience - my coworkers will use the "max-think" and the most expensive model on every change they do with Claude, pumping out 100k's of tokens just because they can (and brag about hitting the limits).
I suspect this kind of behaviour will need to change in the very near future.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
I think it is easy to make some ragebait doomer articles with eye catching headlines. There are a lot of people who are ready to eat up AI catastrophism because something about apocalyptic predictions and catastrophism seems to attract certain kind of doomer-pilled people. Here are my concrete predictions 1. Token costs will come down and performance will go up 2. Everyone will spend even more on LLMs not less - the…
but many of the current crop will never return money to investors.
I largely agree with you, but the huge investments currently being made will be very hard to get a return on. Token costs will come down, performance will go up, and you want to be in the business of selling the picks & shovels, not doing the mining.
Which is of course why nvidia, google & TSMC are in pretty good positions, but even their valuations have some bubble in them.
For me it depends on who you listen to If you're following a bunch of people who are from LLM labs, you're going to be more incentivised to tokenmaxx because it's in the Lab's best interest tonget you to behave that way. Practically, many companies aren't labs with endless runway. Companies hopefully follow a PnL model. And when you look at things with that lens, many of the times the LLM use case falls apart. You're…
Eh... this is HN. The goal is precisely to reach BS escape velocity and SpaceX is the model to follow. It's not healthy IMHO (I'm not an economist) but that's definitely the arm race VCs actually fund. Lose for years if not decades, achieve market dominance, squeeze. Very very few winners and for those the path is precisely NOT to follow PnL.
With no details, a bird told me of a project which estimated using several millions of tokens per day to automate a team work which got laid off. The operation is now a mess, there is no one willing to be considered liable and since the cheap model they used is about to be retired the company is going to see a 4x increase in price at least. I have the feeling that the age of 'i can't be blamed by AI stuff' will be a…
Useful context for this is that token usage keeps rising at an exponential pace. I mean, we don't have numbers for the big labs, but Openrouter's numbers are quite telling (can't post link because corporate decided to block all "non-validated AI tools"), and I think they're probably representative of the global trend. +500% year to date, +50% over the month of May alone. It's unsurprising that providers are strugglin…
For me it depends on who you listen to If you're following a bunch of people who are from LLM labs, you're going to be more incentivised to tokenmaxx because it's in the Lab's best interest tonget you to behave that way. Practically, many companies aren't labs with endless runway. Companies hopefully follow a PnL model. And when you look at things with that lens, many of the times the LLM use case falls apart. You're…
This to shall pass. After enough bullshit people will become fed up and enforcement of existing laws will start breaking up the most egregious items. New laws will pass. People will make and lose fortunes, and we will live on.
Perhaps advanced AI isn't cheaper than humans. Assuming the intelligence of a model continuously improves with scale, the token price of the best model will become increasingly expensive. I know that tokens are currently experiencing rapid price drops, but they will eventually encounter physical limitations.
Why? What physical limitation will dictate that we can't have 1B tokens for cheap?
I see at least two potential positives in this: - The frontier AI companies have realized they won't be able to count on gaining ground and earning more in the future through sheer moat. They have to start earning right now. - The playing field on the market got a whole lot more even as a result. Now everyone is competing on cost and quality - while there are still a lot of competition. AI suppliers can't easily get…
The idea probably was to pour billions into technologies powering these LLMs, and gain a moat. It then turns out that this isn't as hard a problem as expected, it's just very expensive. So as long as you have money, you can be an AI company, the money is the moat (unless you take a shortcut, like DeepSeek) and money is running out. I don't think you're missing anything, but I am surprised that the forces behind the A…
Doesn't this just mean price increase ? What is not clear is how much the price needs to increase for AI companies to break even some time. 3x increase ? 10x increase ? Even more ? No one seems willing to give a clear number.