7 ms·

The world doesn't make sense to me. I use 5.6 Luna. Deepseek v4 flash 0731. And kimi k3. Don't even need claude anymore at their insane prices for anything I do

• deleted 1mo ago
  [deleted]
• surajrmal 1mo ago
  What enterprises pay for is all that matters. They pay insane amounts for a lot of things I would never do personally, but I'm not the target demographic in those cases.
  • dmix 1mo ago
    The Chinese companies will need to pay their bills eventually too.
    • XorNot 1mo ago
      Their purchasing costs are much lower proportionally. China has cheaper electricity and a more capable grid for the industrial type usage levels they need to drive.
      • gpt5 1mo ago
        Data centers don't really cost less in China. Perhaps even more due to trade restrictions and the difficulty of smuggling the chips in. Electricity is a small part of the bill.
        • KronisLV 1mo ago
          > difficulty of smuggling the chips in I wonder how long it'll be until they won't need to do that due to domestic options.
    • nicce 1mo ago
      > The Chinese companies will need to pay their bills eventually too. What bills? Deepseek has been profitable for long time.
      • dmix 1mo ago
        Do you have a source I can read? All I see on Google are random blog posts mostly debunking that idea. Profit margins on API tokens isn't the same as running a profitable long term business, or bringing returns on the large amount of funding they got.
        • nicce 1mo ago
          Look information about the parent company High-Flyer which has has been breaking profit records with AI based stock market prediction. They already had the computing before LLM era.
  • formvoltron 1mo ago
    Wouldn't enterprises rather run their own models locally?
    • yen223 1mo ago
      Enterprises don't even want to self-host webservers, and those are about a thousand times easier to do than self-hosting an AI model
    • 4d4m 1mo ago
      While not today, very soon every company, of every complexity will run local models. It's not in a companies interest to hand over its domain expertise, data, and proprietary IP for a increase in productivity. Most will quickly realize it makes sense to run their own weights. This will be commonplace once tooling and training infrastructure is commoditized.
  • orangecat 1mo ago
    Right, and it's often very sane. If you're paying $250k/year for a software engineer, it likely makes sense to have them spend $10k/year on tokens from the best available model rather than trying to save a few thousand with random Chinese models that may or may not be good enough.
    • KronisLV 1mo ago
      > If you're paying $250k/year for a software engineer, it likely makes sense to have them spend $10k/year Would be nice. I feel like the more you go towards the 3rd world (or tbh anywhere not in the US), the more this calculus shifts, probably all the way to underspecced workstations, no IDE licenses (e.g. JetBrains) and also no investment into tokens or whatever. Also, 10k USD per year seems a bit low, I'm not tokenmaxxing but my non-subscription usage equivalent would be around 3000-6000 USD per month, though obviously with models like Kimi K3 and GLM 5.3 it would be way more sensible compared to Anthropic.
• cadamsdotcom 1mo ago
  200usd/mo for Claude gives me tens of thousands of dollars of value. API prices are paid by companies getting tens of millions of dollars of value. In normal life money is the key constraint; buy this don't buy that etc. - whereas in VC funded companies the constraint is time. If you as a founder get funding and don't spend it fast enough you put yourself at serious risk of being replaced. When enough of the world operates on that principle it creates a highly price insensitive market and that then can support a ton of ideas and experiments, some of which turn out to be really really good. It's a wild way to do innovation but it's been working well for decades.
  • formvoltron 1mo ago
    paying for API calls gives you no such deal hack.
  • margalabargala 1mo ago
    It doesn't, though. $200/mo of Claude may give you what would have cost tens of thousands of dollars to create in 2023, but the value of what it creates isn't there anymore. It should be compared against what it would cost to create with other tools, not against the cost of you doing it by hand. Otherwise would be like justifying an obviously overpriced car, because "it saves me so much compared to carrying things thousands of miles by hand!"
    • cadamsdotcom 1mo ago
      Your comparison is wrong It's not an expensive car vs. any car. It's car vs. no car.
      • SV_BubbleTime 1mo ago
        Is it? Because you can just download a car now.
      • margalabargala 1mo ago
        No, you are wrong. Or at least, incomplete. The comment I replied to said "I need Claude because it's better than no AI. That's like saying "I need the Porsche because it's better than no car". Making a "car vs no car" argument is not an argument for an expensive car. Making an argument for an expensive car, requires both car vs no car, and expensive car vs any car. This is what I was pointing out above.
• bossyTeacher 1mo ago
  > Don't even need claude anymore at their insane prices for anything I do. What insane price is that? Pro is $20 per month. Same price as a Netflix ad free sub.
  • mococa 1mo ago
    Until they stop to subsidize.
    • wyre 1mo ago
      They might raise the price, but I don't think they will ever get rid of the $20 tier. It is way too consumer friendly and likely has the highest percentage of users that aren't abusing their quota limits. A layperson will be extremely hard pressed to create an API key, know what to do with it, put money in their account. People want an easy subscription.
    • gruturo 1mo ago
      Let's try a thought experiment. It's not subsidized. It's not "worth" the tens of times it costs if accessed through API. Let's drop the subsidy word, they're selling you a product, and they're trying to sell other people a similar product at 30x the price with some excuses. If either (or both) turns out to be unsustainable, they haven't been subsidizing you, they just had a crap business model (or a perfectly good one, if the goal was an inflated valuation, an IPO and then a crash once the losses are socialized).
  • AnimalMuppet 1mo ago
    Are they going to get to $200B revenue in 2028 at $20/month? That's a billion monthly subscribers. In 2028.
• jrflo 1mo ago
  If you're primarily writing code yourself or meticulously reviewing the output from agents, then you're right. However, if you tried to have any of those models one-shot an app or do some highly agentic work, they would certainly fail. That's the future people are looking towards with these valuations: when its no longer economical for humans to write or even understand code, just let the models drive because they are superhuman at it. Not saying we are there today, but that's when you really start to see the benefit of more expensive models. Luna or Deepseek flash would never find any of the mathematical discoveries or security exploits that the larger models can find.
  • _kulang 1mo ago
    Claude is certainly able to make a superhuman mess. All of its efficacy still hinges upon good architecture and programming principles, which do not seem to be instilled in the model by anything other than luck
    • Incipient 1mo ago
      Two things I've figured out with pretty good certainty 1) on an existing codebase/hand written, even fable absolutely will "make a mess" if you do large changes at once, or don't check the output. 2) with detailed, WELL NUMBERED (Claude is remarkably good at following number references), multi-level design and build documentation Claude absolutely CAN produce moderately complex applications (crud with some lightly branching business workflows). The corollary to (2) however is can you actually get that working code to be production grade, AND maintain it? that far I haven't got yet.
      • _kulang 29d ago
        I have quite a bit of success with Claude on Jira tickets as long as the tasks are scoped well. Put effort into the ticket, and fire Claude at the ticket with MCP. I essentially review the PR. But this is only possible because I have created a completely new python development workflow with fixed formatting, style, and unification of tooling around uv. We’ve also split our projects into smaller repos, some which function as libraries and some which are applications depending on those libraries. I think the key to success here is to limit what context is required to do development. I’d say it’s slightly more on the extreme side of “modular” than a codebase I would write otherwise
• weitendorf 1mo ago
  I walk to work and ride a bicycle in my free time, don’t see why anybody would need a hatchback or semi truck or build rockets. Idiots
  • oblio 1mo ago
    Is the market for the "rockets" enough to justify what these frontier labs are spending yearly?
    • weitendorf 1mo ago
      Anthropic’s revenue run rate just hit $50B, in a market that didn’t exist 5 years ago and was 10% of its current size 1 year ago. They are, by far, the fastest growing company in human history. The demand for “rockets” has been pretty high and growing ever since they started supplying it. Anthropic and its investors/customers don’t need random internet commenter’s permission to decide whether or not something is worth doing or justified. Personally I think when something doesn’t make sense to you, you should try to figure out why it makes sense to other people, and whether they might have different needs/constraints/incentives/skills/knowledge. Why might people spend more on AI as it gets better, rather than less? Could they, perhaps, allow for entirely new kinds of capabilities and products that hacker news commenters have not yet seen? As they have done every year for 3 straight years (hacker news has been wrong in exactly the same way every time, btw)? Might some people prefer to spend $10/day to work with the most capable AI available, due to the amount they use it while doing their job, and its effect on output? Do some people use AI for more than just tinkering with open source harnesses? Could it be that when you don’t understand something, there really is a way to explain it, that isn’t “everybody else must be stupid”?
      • oblio 1mo ago
        > Anthropic and its investors/customers don’t need random internet commenter’s permission to decide whether or not something is worth doing or justified. I'm not the original poster but I find it very disturbing that you guys are SO touchy when confronted. Also, calling people who don't agree "idiots" is very distasteful. I would have banned you. My thesis is very simple. LLMs are useful. LLMs at this point are too expensive. We're in a very frothy tech bubble where the inkling of labor being replaced caused their timelines to be pushed forwarded by at least 5 years. Once the money runs out, subsidization will stop across the industry and we are headed for a VERY hard economic crash. You guys are worse than crypto boosters. I've had to argue against those for at least 3 years, I think I'll have to argue against you for much longer. And when LLMs actually reveal their true prices you'll all disappear into the woodwork and pop back out circa 2032-35 when hardware prices come back to normal and you'll claim "I was right all along".
• Marciplan 1mo ago
  In many things in life it’s wise to think further than just what suits your needs personally