4 ms·
My understanding was that if everyone paid and used AI the companies would go into liquidation on energy bills etc
by catmanjan 7mo ago
My understanding was that if everyone paid and used AI the companies would go into liquidation on energy bills etc
- _heimdall 7mo agoEnergy bills wouldn't be the problem if everyone used AI, energy supply would be.
- catmanjan 7mo agoAre you sure? I thought tokens (or watts) were sold at such a loss that if current supply limits were reached they’d go broke
- mholm 7mo agoThe entire marginal cost to serve AI models is paid for by the API costs of all providers by nearly every estimation. The cost not currently recouped is entirely in the training and net-new infrastructure that they're building.
- catmanjan 7mo agoSo why are they banning people from using it in systems like claw?
- Breza 7mo agoAnd the open source models are only months behind, so the big AI companies need to keep burning money on R&D with no end in sight. If OpenAI took a quarter off from model development, they might fall behind forever.
- nsvd2 7mo agoThese companies are generally profitable for inference but it does not cover the cost of R&D (training).
- catmanjan 7mo agoIf its profitable why are they banning people from using it in systems like claw?
- nsvd2 7mo agoAfter a quick search it looks like Google is banning some people who are using Antigravity OAuth with OpenClaw as opposed to paying for API access. I can't find any instance of an API which charges per-token banning users.