[doginasuit]

They probably never intended to keep serving cheap models. This is a natural way to introduce the squeeze, now that they have people who built services on their API. It makes a lot of sense to have an abstraction layer where the provider doesn't matter. If you are working in Kotlin, Koog is excellent.

[lanthissa]

switching models is insanely cheap compared to token cost on anything signficant, this is a take so cynical it misses the reality

[Clueed]

in any corporate or half compliance-relevant setting switching isn't trivial. new DPA, subprocessor notifications, TIA, procurement review, security questionnaires, plus re-running your evals because prompts don't transfer 1:1. token cost is just one of the line items.

[lanthissa]

no it really not, even the soggiest bank has multiple api vendors atm.

[alexandre_m]

I agree with parent. I'm not sure where your stance is coming from.

From what I hear, most enterprise AI deployments are seat-based subscriptions with annual commitments.

[p1esk]

Yes, I work at a 50 person startup and even here switching from CC to codex or cursor would be non-trivial for multiple reasons - not just the annual commitment.

[esperent]

I don't doubt you but it's amazing how much easier things get when there's another option at 20% of the price, and that's what's going to happen here if these American companies keep trying to squeeze the prices up.

[opsnooperfax]

50K FTE global firm. We’re still piloting ChatGPT. AI is a four-letter word and there are ridiculous ceremonies and hundreds of hours of overhead for every trivial use case.

Amusingly, Enterprise credits are more expensive than just paying a zero-commitment on-demand API fee. Personal accounts are still the best value.

[lanthissa]

my stance is coming from working at one of the soggiest banks and having access to 3 with 2 more coming, and knowing the same is true at 2 of our large competitors.

[opsnooperfax]

I think the big 3 are cartelizing and starting to ratchet up costs. GPT5.5 is not easily distinguishable from 5.1. I would it be shocked if we hit the ceiling and everyone is quietly positioning for the exit.

[tskj]

I don't understand why everyone thinks there is a ceiling below human-level intelligence, when we have an existence proof that human-level intelligence is possible.

[heyodai]

This is very napkin math, but the human brain has about 100 trillion parameters. Even the biggest models today top out at 10 trillion parameters. I think it's reasonable to assume that models need to be at least an order of magnitude bigger to capture the complexity of human intelligence, and probably a lot more.

[aaronblohowiak]

for LLMs as implemented today?

[hnarn]

> now that they have people who built services on their API

People really can’t wait to be the next Zynga