Comment by jacobgold
4 days ago
> Fable-level results at 1/3 the cost using open-weight models
But we get ~$2500/mo worth of Fable credits for $200/mo on Anthropic pan? I'm still confused why people (who don't have to use API billing) are chasing open weight models based on cost.
Because that is a short term solution, it won’t be offered forever. Large organisations have to purchase credits at $/tokens. Eventually everyone else will too.
This is what OpenAI and Anthropic are trying to make everyone believe. Most accountants will flinch at this (they already are).
The $200 odd plans are already out of reach of many, many people.
The attrition of customers if they were to get rid of these subscriptions plans would be untenable.
I think you are looking at it incorrectly. No business is buying individual accounts, because if they do, they open themselves up to considerable risk.
The $200 plans are priced so that the power-users use them and then advocate about how great the product is. If you're buying a $200 plan, you're not doing it because of the price point but rather because of the amount of work it is doing for you.
2 replies →
You may want to consider the incomes of developers outside the US, students, unemployed. $200/month is a lot to a lot of people.
The point still stands. The chinese labs don't have super discounted plans, so if the price per task benchmarks[1] are correct, and we apply the discount, you'll actually be paying more by using cheaper chinese models and this technique.
https://artificialanalysis.ai/agents/coding-agents#artificia...
The point doesn't stand, and this comment appears to be spam.
They can still write code.
I think most people assume the subsidized plans will go away or get more limited eventually. They are basically a loss leader and a marketing cost that is very flexible and easy to change w/o directly impacting their primary customers.
doesnt exist for enterprise plans
[flagged]
> The good ole American way.
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
> unsubstantive
LOL, seems your only issue is when someone goes against you politically. You allow so much anti-American propaganda on this site, and me calling out capitalistic tendencies is where you want to draw the line?
Do you not think that YC culture, startup culture, is not intertwined with the economy? I could stop, but is that the type of community you want to cultivate?
My contact information is in my bio if you want to seriously talk about this topic, I would be more than happy to get on a call with you. I feel you are being more than disingenuous with your application of the "rules".
5 replies →
> When they are successful at making those illegal/inaccessible
This would be like trying to outlaw Linux or peer-to-peer file sharing. It's technically possible to write and pass a law, but it's basically impossible to enforce it.
Enough to make it a non-started at the organizations that pay their bills. Everyone else isn't big enough to matter.
2 replies →