← Back to context

Comment by byzantinegene

4 days ago

if this is true, the frontier labs are not able to justify their trillion dollar valuations, they are barely making anything on subsidized plans.

6 comments

byzantinegene

Reply
nl  4 days ago

You can bet that most people on those plans do not tokenmax.

  • lelanthran  4 days ago

    I'll bet the other way: the plan is not cost effective unless you are coding, and even the most junior developer, so green they almost need mowing, are going to throw the agents into a loop.

    I can not imagine some shelling out $200/month and then using that product lightly.

    • nl  4 days ago

      > I can not imagine some shelling out $200/month and then using that product lightly.

      The people paying for the plan are not the same people using it.

      Of 6 people I have data on the $200/plan only 2 regularly use more than $400 value.

      > I'll bet the other way: the plan is not cost effective unless you are coding

      The person I've personally seen use the most tokens isn't a coder. They do the "second brain" thing and wow it uses a lot of tokens.

      They believe in the value, and TBH I've seen them do some pretty interesting and impressive things with it.

      > the most junior developer, so green they almost need mowing, are going to throw the agents into a loop

      I think this is also true.

      But loops actually hit the cache a lot and most people who are calculating the value they are getting from a subscription aren't taking this into account.

      SemiAnalysis published a snippet of their analysis, and they believe their tokens are an effective price of $0.99/million, rather than $20/million the naive pricing calculation would give you.

  • monk_grilla  9 hours ago

    Tokenmaxxing is referring to the phenomenon of developers in big tech deliberately trying to use as many tokens as possible because it is a KPI?

    Then yeah, I would say you're right that plan users don't, probably for the best.