[trjordan]

> figuring out if the company can afford this level of productivity at scale

This is the thing that boggles my mind. They spent their budget. They have 4 months of data. What do they have to show for it?

I'm not a hater; I'm not a luddite. I have a $200 Max plan and I use it.

But are you saying that Uber made this tool available, urged everybody to use it, and is confused about what happens when it worked? It's one thing if they decide AI isn't productive enough to be worth the cost.

Are they out of ideas on what to build next, or something?

[zeafoamrun]

The personal max and teams plan actually are an amazing bargain compared to the API PAYG cost you get with Enterprise. I guess they really need their Enterprise features though, otherwise they could just tell users to expense a $200 max sub. Enterprises gonna Enterprise.

[Raed667]

Entreprise gets you the written agreement that the data you send to Claude will never be used for model training

[zeafoamrun]

It also gives the plan admins the ability to surveil in automated fashion what the company employees are prompting.

[jmkni]

If I explicitly turn this off in Claude’s settings isn’t it the same thing?

[manquer]

Can they get 5000 people to do the same correctly on every reinstall and enforce it ?.

Small individual tasks become complex at scale , and that is why these enterprise contracts sell

[adeelk93]

You can set these policies at an org level in ChatGPT business and Claude team

[manquer]

- Claude Team plan is limited to 150 now[1]. You can mix between Premium (equivalent of Max 5x) and standard (Pro like)

- ChatGPT business is not user count limited (AFAIK) however business plan only supports the equivalent of Plus there is no Pro equivalent.

For larger organizations it will still come down to usage billing . The ChatGPT plan is quite limiting for most users and the only option is usage/credit billing for more consumption. Claude has the more generous usage in Team but limited to 150 users.

[1] it was only 75 till late Feb.

[phillipcarter]

> What do they have to show for it?

My guess is nothing you can see right now, since it likely takes a lot longer for any substantial external-facing changes to roll out broadly. Internally I'm sure several features have moved faster. I've noticed this at Salesforce where it certainly seems like things that would have taken a few weeks take a few days now. This doesn't translate directly to more money, just more potential to make money.

[KaiserPro]

What I don't understand is there are really good controls for spend, why on earth didn't they put caps on?

Or ask engineers to justify the spend?

Why should we spend that many tokens, what will that get us in return?

If this was AWS we'd all be pointing and going "Ahhhh you twats, didn't you look at your monthly spend?"

[bakugo]

> I'm not a hater; I'm not a luddite. I have a $200 Max plan and I use it.

I'm glad to see we've reached the point of AI discourse at which anything that might be construed as criticism must be prefixed by "I'm also part of the cult, I'm not a non-believer, but" to avoid being dismissed as a heretic.

[woah]

Since AI has become a partisan political football it makes sense

[SoftTalker]

> Are they out of ideas on what to build next, or something?

Well, what is there for Uber to build next? They have their ride hailing platform. It works. They have adapted it for other kinds of delivery (food, groceries, "anything that fits in a car") What else is there in the "someone driving a car" space for them?

[manquer]

Car Fleets, professional freight logistics.

There is a lot of things to do in some driving a vehicle space . The other obvious business (that they exited) is self driving of course .