[aitchnyu]

I use Aider with Openrouter and I keep wondering about the pricing of LLMs after providers decide to be profitable. Can we still afford a model which knows Python, Java and how to disrupt snail biology without poisoning mammals?

[JimDabell]

Yes. It’s already profitable to run inference at today’s prices. AWS isn’t subsidising you when you buy compute from them. And inference cost is declining steeply.

> The cost of LLM inference has dropped by a factor of 1,000 in 3 years.

— https://a16z.com/llmflation-llm-inference-cost/

AI startups are not profitable because they are throwing vast sums of money at growth and R&D, not because inference is unaffordable.

[anonzzzies]

But, we need a future where unlimited inference, in parallel is profitable. It is not: even less than cloud compute (where it is terrible also), when I buy 500 flimflams for $50/mo, what did I buy exactly? As currently it seems to depend on the position of the moon: one time 10 prompts make what I want, sometimes 100 prompts keep looping over the same issue unable to fix it (like a typescript type issue which takes me 1 seconds, llms, the flagship ones, can easily burn 100 prompts and not fix it). I do very much NOT want to pay for those 100. I see 'vibecoders' aka people who cannot code, burn through all Tokens for the month without having anything working in a single day.

[JimDabell]

The question that was raised was whether or not current LLM usage will be affordable after providers decide to be profitable.

You are asking if infinite usage is affordable.

[jama211]

A bit of an out of context reply for me to jump in here, but in the abstract, it can be a reasonable question to ask if infinite usage is affordable. Maybe not infinite without constraints… but as an example from the past there are many mobile phone plans that have “infinite” calls and texts for an affordable monthly cost. There would’ve been a time where asking if unlimited calls would be affordable would’ve sounded insane, but now it’s fairly normal.

[ido]

The answer to that depends on when the VC bubble bursts- if it lasts long enough costs will eventually drop far enough. Pets.com was a .com-boom era joke but today I actually buy my pet-food online and I'm pretty sure nobody is subsidising me doing that.

[citizenpaul]

The.global food market is so heavily subsidized that is almoat impossible that your dog food is not subsidized. Animal feed is even more subsidized.

[dotancohen]

Commercial animal feed is subsidized. So are some forms of human food in many countries.

Pet food is not subsidized in my country nor the EU. If any countries do subsidize pet food, they are the exception. Maybe the US? Pet food is often manufactured from the waste of other processes, including the human food industry, but that is not a subsidiary.

[citizenpaul]

I understand that it is not directly subsidized. However the sources it comes from while are the "waste" of a greater product. That greater product is heavily subsidized.

This also goes to a personal issue that why would you feed your pet a waste product. My dog gets food I cook for him just like myself. There are tons of crock pot recipes online for safe cheap high quality dog food.

[johnisgood]

That depends, there are specific diets for, say, cats, and it not only needs to be prescribed (to be able to purchase), but it costs a fuckton of money.

<rant>

Think of it like this: imagine if lactose-free or gluten-free food could be bought only with a prescription. Sadly the prices are already high as it is for gluten-free, but I would rather not get into the reasons here. :)

My girlfriend (LA, US) just left 1k USD on 2 visits to the vet with her cat, for some cheap ass antibiotics, and a "specific prescription-only food". Crazy. All that would have been "free" (not quite, but you know) or at a very low cost for humans around here, in Europe. Not the gluten-free food though!

</rant>

[windward]

All EU countries provide income support to farmers.

[dotancohen]

That's what I said )) It's not "pet food".

[windward]

Not "pet food", just "the only input to pet food"

[KerrAvon]

USA too