[mynameisbilly]

I guess I'm just confused by this sentiment. Are you making these conclusions while considering the fact that AI is still heavily subsidized? The economics of AI isn't quite the same as other software/tech.

I don't think it's going anywhere, but I don't know what happens when prices start to rise because these companies need to start turning a profit.

[InsideOutSanta]

I'm happy using GLM 5.2 at API pricing. There will never be a point where essentially unlimited usage (i.e. what I, as a normal developer, can use at peak effort) of extremely good models will become financially unattainable.

[echelon]

> There will never be a point where essentially unlimited usage (i.e. what I, as a normal developer, can use at peak effort) of extremely good models will become financially unattainable.

The way you phrase this prevents refutation. But there will be a point where ordinary individuals cannot participate in the majority of the upside.

In the future, some class of models will require enormous compute that is outside the financial capital capability of ordinary individual contributors, middle class, and upper middle class. This will be sold as a capability to well-funded companies.

[InsideOutSanta]

Yes, I don't disagree with what you're saying. I'm responding to a specific claim: that the capabilities we have now will become much more expensive in the future.