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

Meta caps internal AI token spending

mlq.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 162 posts

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#71

Post by csomar »

wpasc wrote: post #15
dwoosley wrote: post #8

I’d be curious to see the breakdown on spending by use case. I’ve heard it said that the majority of tokenmaxing comes from none technical uses like reading PDFs, creating PowerPoints, generating graphics/images… ect. But I’ve never heard any actual proof to that.

One thing I find fascinating as a software engineer who talks to non software engineers who use AI tools is how "reading PDFs" is not more of a solved problem. What I mean is that uploading a PDF into a chatbot tool seems to be an extraordinarily obvious use case that non technical (and technical) users would want to do. IMO claude, chatgpt/codex, etc should be able to optimize the PDF use case to be extremely token…

You are missing that the product is the hype cycle around AI and that's worth Trillions of $ (Trillions with a T). Why build a PDF parser that generate text when you can BS in a podcast and get paid.

This discussion was about measures, goals and incentives. Follow the incentives.

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#72

Post by skizm »

simonw wrote: post #3

"The leaderboard, which ranked employees and teams by token consumption, inadvertently incentivized usage volume over productive output." Who could possibly have predicted that happening?

It wasn't leadership doing this though. Any meta IC can generate internal apps and dashboards. This was unofficial and unsupported. Some random IC just made it for fun. Management is usually pretty lax with stuff like this (plenty of games and joke internal apps) so they left it up until it became a problem.

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#73

Post by ahmadyan »

dwoosley wrote: post #8

I’d be curious to see the breakdown on spending by use case. I’ve heard it said that the majority of tokenmaxing comes from none technical uses like reading PDFs, creating PowerPoints, generating graphics/images… ect. But I’ve never heard any actual proof to that.

the majority came from random claws running on cron. They get a heart-beat, wake up every 10mins, reads all internal-posts, emails, gchat messages, diffs, and decides to post some random message to the workplace so other claws can also regurgitate. rinse and repeat and then we are looking at $B tokens

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#74

Post by Barrin92 »

tyre wrote: post #56
Trasmatta wrote: post #28

All those billions spent on tokens by Meta, and not a single iota of value generated by any of it

I love how confidently you say this, with no evidence provided (and I doubt you have any.) Just a pristine comment section yap.

>I love how confidently you say this,

it's not that difficult to say it confidently if you use any of their services and applications because exactly nothing has changed.

For reference most labor productivity increases for the last 50 years amounted to about 2% per year. If a hypothetical FB engineer had doubled their productivity with their gazillion tokens that would be 30 years of productivity gains in one year. I'd wager the evidence would be quite evident if you opened any of their apps

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#76

Post by lesuorac »

d4rkp4ttern wrote: post #65

Ok I’ll ask since nobody else has — are they not giving their devs a Claude code max or Codex Pro subscription? If so, why is token cost approaching billions? And if not, why not?

They can't.

The subscriptions are for personal use not enterprise.

i.e. [1] "This article is about paid Max plans for individual consumers. If you're part of an organization looking to use Claude with your team, refer to Team and Enterprise Plans."

[1]: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11049741-what-is-the-...

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#77

Post by PaulHoule »

Aurornis wrote: post #24
simonw wrote: post #3

"The leaderboard, which ranked employees and teams by token consumption, inadvertently incentivized usage volume over productive output." Who could possibly have predicted that happening?

A past employer thought it was a good idea to put up a leaderboard of who sent the most Slack messages. They celebrated the people at the top for being so active. Predictably, everyone started talking in Slack like their jobs depended on it. Everyone was responding to everything. Instead of writing out a complete message and pressing enter, they'd send each fragment of the sentence as a new line. The Slack leaderboar…

Reminds me of the place I worked at where I got in trouble because I was the only person writing JIRA tickets. Instead of bitching out the product manager or the tester for not writing tickets, they just complained to me. And if I wrote a ticket about how we could speed up the 40 minute build to 15 minutes I'd have to explain "How does this change improve the customer experience?" to which I answered "If the build was faster the customer would have had the product six months ago"

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#78

Post by lokar »

wpasc wrote: post #21
4yfr wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What outcomes though? The ones I’ve seen posted are still nonsensical metrics that a publicly traded firm absolutely doesn’t care about. It wants to see faster R&D, higher revenues from existing assets, greater operating margins, higher sales to invested capital ratio and so on… The best way to measure that for a software firm is up-time of services, usage and project completion duration

measuring uptime? I've seen Anthropic's status page, and they are a >$1 Trillion dollar company who "largely solved" coding. so clearly you aren't correct. /s

Unfortunately that is a group metric, we need individual metrics

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#79

Post by csomar »

tyre wrote: post #56
Trasmatta wrote: post #28

All those billions spent on tokens by Meta, and not a single iota of value generated by any of it

I love how confidently you say this, with no evidence provided (and I doubt you have any.) Just a pristine comment section yap.

Was there a new product released by Meta that we are not aware of? The last thing I read about was the Instagram account take-over AI-bug.

Re: Meta caps internal AI token spending

#80

Post by grim_io »

d4rkp4ttern wrote: post #65

Ok I’ll ask since nobody else has — are they not giving their devs a Claude code max or Codex Pro subscription? If so, why is token cost approaching billions? And if not, why not?

Big enterprises don't get to have those subscriptions. OpenAI or Anthropic simply won't sell them to you if you need a couple thousand of those.
Post reply on HN