I wanted to say something dismissive. It feels like a lot of doublespeak, which I think undermines trust in them.
But I do understand that it's a little hard to characterize the amount of compute they're selling while obfuscating the business model enough that it still works. Demand, costs, supply, capabilities, competition change wildly week to week.
Selling a standardized "token" via the API with gas-like pricing works a lot better for transparency. But I think there's a world where the ambiguous subscription pricing is net beneficial for users and providers. Allowing some degree of price discrimination should benefit everyone in aggregate, assuming there's real competition and not yet another duopoly..
big_toast•5m ago
I think this is an example of why ailabs should just post to bsky themselves. But anthropic seems pretty chummy with spacexai right now.
jrks11o•59m ago
No one cares, move to open weights. cba to keep up with how idiots keep changing their minds and their plans.
ramoz•52m ago
What does this mean for Fable limits exclusively?
Lockal•42m ago
The title is straightforward lie. Changing +50% to +25% gives -17% in result.
simianwords•40m ago
Anthropic made critical decisions regarding compute and demand predictions which puts OpenAI in a much more healthy place. OpenAI have been reducing prices multiple times and increasing rate limits while also being generous with resets.
Somehow enterprise, Anthropic is still ahead and I genuinely can't tell how or why? The models aren't that great (except Fable but has data retention issues). The prices are not that great. Claude Code is not as good as Codex. What gives?
big_toast•1h ago
The mirror is missing the next post: "Compared to today, this works out to a 17% reduction in weekly limits on Claude Code"
dgellow•50m ago
cassianoleal•46m ago
caxco93•45m ago
zefalt•40m ago
150% -> 125%
25÷150 = .1667
That's how they arrived at 17%.
https://x.com/ClaudeDevs/status/2093742321473065266
big_toast•26m ago
But I do understand that it's a little hard to characterize the amount of compute they're selling while obfuscating the business model enough that it still works. Demand, costs, supply, capabilities, competition change wildly week to week.
Selling a standardized "token" via the API with gas-like pricing works a lot better for transparency. But I think there's a world where the ambiguous subscription pricing is net beneficial for users and providers. Allowing some degree of price discrimination should benefit everyone in aggregate, assuming there's real competition and not yet another duopoly..
big_toast•5m ago