returnInfinity

"Our Model", "Our Model", "Our Model"

Brad Gerstner confirmed that tokens aren't being sold at a loss. Whatever the formula, API + Subscription split, the companies are making a profit on net token sale.

They maybe running at loss after all the salaries and stock comp, but tokens are in profit now.

Can this project run for 30 years at loss? Google investors don't like that.

One day an exec will say lets reduce wasteful projects and cut this.

You can use Codex and Claude code for most of the tasks that you would manually do

Filing JIRA tickets, updates. Opening PRs, having AI review PRs. This will all use tokens.

No need to tokenmaxx, you will end up burning tokens with just regular AI usage

But growth stall, because competitors will capture future growth. You need to keep up.

Of course I acknowledge if Hersheys uses AI to make trillions of chocolates a second, there is an upper limit on consumption. And hence a limit on revenue.

Not true after Dec-Feb. Opus 4.6 and Codex 5.4 are real.

If you use AI to ship more features, even your competitors are going to use AI to ship more.

So is this how we increase productivity?

Who captures the value? For now looks like the chip makers and model makers.

I think social media companies don't need that

Enterprise software companies selling definitely need it. Customers ask was this tested? where is the test report?

Management comp is tied to numbers go up

You start slow, then push it the limits

Netflix, never ads to some ads, then eventually its just Adflix, after 20 years.

Each new manager wants that comp up. So ads up by 5% every year.

Lets take the example of Uber. If Uber ships 10x the code and features, I will still not 2x my rides.

Even if Uber makes the cost of travel to 0, I will still not 2x my rides.

And look at what that led to. Democracy is not a panacea.

I don't get the atlassian backlash on HN

JIRA is just fine, gets the job done. Its not slow like the on-prem. Jira cloud version is fine.

Sergey said that Google was able to rapidly respond to ChatGPT because Sundar had already invested a lot into AI.

They have the people, the models and the chips. And Sundar helped achieve that.

That's what he said on some podcast.

This thing makes me really sad.

Whenever I get less sleep, tinnitus gets really bad.

And why should a business do that? Limited chip production capacity be spent on most profitable ventures.

Most regular people, they don't care and will continue to use ChatGPT

ChatGPT has 900 million users now, across continents and they don't care about this DoW deal.

Offtopic - The success of coding agents must be Ed Zitron's nightmare.

He has been a perpetual bear

This could be anthropic's marketing team.

This isn't the usecase that's being criticized. Here you are responsible for the fix. You will validate and ship it and if something goes wrong, you will answer for it. The AI won't answer for it.

The key word from the video is "responsibility".

Who is going to be responsible for the code? AI is definitely not responsible.

look at gold price

Sam and Dario "The society can tolerate a few deaths to AI"

If the role is eliminated, then the responsibility of the verifying and managing the docs will fall on somebody else.

AI does not take responsibility

This is a step to take control and move in a direction that will profit them greatly.

May or may not benefit the community.

They are probably trying to build influence. Why is a startup that is burning cash donating money?

"The society will tolerate some amount of deaths to AI vehicles"

Its not unlimited, the compute allocation was one of the reason for the coup at OpenAI

KEF Q Series Speakers, Q11 Meta, Q6 Meta

This is the right take

Also maintaining a software is pain

Also for perpetually small companies, its now easy to build simple scripts to be achieve some productivity gains.

My thoughts as well, good at somethings and terrible for somethings and you will lose time.

Somethings are best written by yourself.

And this is with the mighty claude opus 4.5