6 ms·

At first I was like "i want to use ai but dont have the money to burn for api tokens" cool. But then I realized the backers are essentially saying "i have money

At first I was like "i want to use ai but dont have the money to burn for api tokens" cool. But then I realized the backers are essentially saying "i have money and could support developers but i choose to give the money directly to a mega corp and skip the human". I recommend you remove the policy of "Whatever the run didn't spend goes straight back to your backers' wallets." and make sure the human behind the wheel gets to eat. Somehow

fragmede 3mo ago
While we're in the token-equivalent of ZIRP, tokens don't cost what they cost, so there's sort of arbitrage to be had. I have tokens I've been given than I'm not using, but that's not the same as me having been given cash in the first place.
- ianm218 3mo ago
  > While we're in the token-equivalent of ZIRP, tokens don't cost what they cost, so there's sort of arbitrage to be had Do you have a source for this? I believe “personal subscription” plans on OpenAI and Anthropic are likely ran at a net loss or close to it, but all indications elsewhere are that API pricing for these companies and likely Google as well are profitable per API call [1][2]. I would definitely believe that the Chinese players are operating at a loss though if that is what you mean. [1] https://newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/anthropic-growth-and-bedrock-mix?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web https://newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/anthropic-growth-and-b... [2] https://martinalderson.com/posts/are-openai-and-anthropic-really-losing-money-on-inference/ https://martinalderson.com/posts/are-openai-and-anthropic-re...