81–90 of 224 posts
tl;dr Peter Steinberger shared a product demo for CodexBar [0] with a graph of OpenAI token usage. This graph shows one million spent, prefers gpt-5.5 and spent twenty thousand today. [0] https://github.com/steipete/CodexBar However, I do not see a strong reason to believe that this is his actual, personal usage. It could be all openclaw usage or some subset of openai usage, given that he is inside them. I suspect it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it misleading if this would be the consumer's cost? Eventually Codex's subscription subsidization will diminish to near-zero, like the rest of the providers. It's extremely important that people understand how expensive these models currently are. Even $300k in raw API costs is alarming for the output.
> How is it misleading if this would be the consumer's cost? Because it does not say “equivalent of”, it literally says he spent money that he did not spend
What a clown. And Twitter bozos will cheer and clap. As far as money spent, this is still much better than rounding up and/or bombing brown people, but shows insanity of the current market. The saddest part is that bootlickers/temporarily embarrassed AI millionaires will defend this. And of course I'm just yet another envious hater from "the orange website". Your conscience is clear, AI bros. /s
OpenClaw is the fastest growth open source project ever. This isn’t clowning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it misleading if this would be the consumer's cost? Eventually Codex's subscription subsidization will diminish to near-zero, like the rest of the providers. It's extremely important that people understand how expensive these models currently are. Even $300k in raw API costs is alarming for the output.
Peter shows the near-term future. Raw API consumer price cost is arbitrary. (The frontier labs can put a 100x markup to cover other operational expenses.) The true cost of inference with same-capability models keeps dropping at dizzying rates, especially at the data-center batch size. (Due to both NVidia hardware and algorithmic changes.) So the developments that Peter can achieve today with internal support from Ope…
He has agents write shitty code for features other agents think other people want, then has it reviewed by other agents in hopes of catching bugs that the first agent put there, then has some more agents try to find security bugs in the now double-agented code to make it triple-agented and at the end of the day, he spent a shitton of tokens, probably emitted enough carbon to heat our planet by another degree, and has a feature nobody really asked for that might or might not work.
He then has the sense of humor to call this grotesque process "incredibly lean".
What's the point in all of this? What problems is this solving? Who's benefiting?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenClaw is the fastest growth open source project ever. This isn’t clowning.
Ah here he is, the bozo who posts with bluster caught out again
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenClaw is the fastest growth open source project ever. This isn’t clowning.
> OpenClaw is the fastest growth open source project ever. By which metrics? > This isn’t clowning. Why?
Because a solo dev has deployed to millions of people in less than eight months spending I believe zero dollars on marketing.
We should all be so lucky to clown at this scale.
And was he 5x more productive in those 30d than a years worth of a dev making 200k/yr? Doubtful lol, dudes killing the environment just for fun at this point.
If you review the openclaw release schedule and code output you will see that yes, he was. I’m not saying you’ll like what you see, but the openclaw release schedule is well faster than human ability to assess it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you review the openclaw release schedule and code output you will see that yes, he was. I’m not saying you’ll like what you see, but the openclaw release schedule is well faster than human ability to assess it.
> the openclaw release schedule is well faster than human ability to assess it. That doesn't sound very positive to me...