[komali2]

I'm starting to think in these conversations we're all often talking about two different things. You're talking about running an LLM service through its provided tooling (codex, Claude, cursor), others seem to be talking token costs because they're integrating LLMs into software or are using harness systems like opencode, pi, or openclaw and balancing tasks across models.

[weird-eye-issue]

Fair enough, I read it quickly and assumed the person they replied to was talking about Claude Code

But I run a AI SaaS and we do offer Opus 4.6, too. Our use case is not nearly as token intensive as something like coding so we are still able to offer it with a good profit margin.

Also you can run OpenClaw with your CC subscription. It's what I do.

[BoorishBears]

I wrap Opus 4.5 in a consumer product with 0 economic utility and people pay for it, I'm sure plenty of end users are willing to pay for it in their software.

Edit: I'm not using the term of art, I mean it literally cannot make them money.

[eru]

> [...] in a consumer product with 0 economic utility and people pay for it, [...]

Sorry, how do these two things go together?

If people pay for it, it has economic utility, doesn't it? I mean, people pay to watch movies or play video games, too.