Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. GitHub Copilot AI token charges go up 10×–100×

GitHub Copilot AI token charges go up 10×–100×

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
19 Indlæg 12 Posters 38 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

    GitHub Copilot AI token charges go up 10×–100×

    how Enterprise Software as a Service works

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A9FjHGcFWg&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
    https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20260518-github-copilot-ai-token-charges-go-up-10x-100x - podcast

    time: 7 min 33 sec

    https://pivot-to-ai.com/2026/05/18/github-copilot-ai-token-charges-to-go-up-10x-100x/ - blog post

    david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
    david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
    david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #9

    @davidgerard

    The fun thing here is that training costs are very large, but mostly fixed NRE, whereas inference is OpEx that scales with userbase size. If you keep the prices low, you get more customers and so can amortise the NRE, but you can’t cover your OpEx, so you make a loss. If you put the prices up, you can cover the OpEx, but it pushes customers away and so reduces the amortisation of the NRE and so you can no longer cover it and make a loss.

    Successful products have either low NRE or low OpEx to deliver. High NRE and low OpEx is ideal because it’s hard for competitors to enter the market but the early players can deliver cheaply. Low NRE and moderately high OpEx can work as long as the OpEx is less than customers are willing to pay, but usually precludes mass-market products unless economies of scale let you reduce the OpEx.

    About the only places you find products with both high NRE and high OpEx are in the healthcare and defence sectors where demand is inelastic.

    davidgerard@circumstances.runD 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

      @davidgerard

      The fun thing here is that training costs are very large, but mostly fixed NRE, whereas inference is OpEx that scales with userbase size. If you keep the prices low, you get more customers and so can amortise the NRE, but you can’t cover your OpEx, so you make a loss. If you put the prices up, you can cover the OpEx, but it pushes customers away and so reduces the amortisation of the NRE and so you can no longer cover it and make a loss.

      Successful products have either low NRE or low OpEx to deliver. High NRE and low OpEx is ideal because it’s hard for competitors to enter the market but the early players can deliver cheaply. Low NRE and moderately high OpEx can work as long as the OpEx is less than customers are willing to pay, but usually precludes mass-market products unless economies of scale let you reduce the OpEx.

      About the only places you find products with both high NRE and high OpEx are in the healthcare and defence sectors where demand is inelastic.

      davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
      davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
      davidgerard@circumstances.run
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #10

      @david_chisnall even there, the catch is training has to be ongoing too in practice

      david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

        @david_chisnall even there, the catch is training has to be ongoing too in practice

        david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
        david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
        david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #11

        @davidgerard Right, so you need a constant supply of customers to amortise it.

        If it were a one-off, it wouldn't matter so much because you'll amortise it eventually.

        This is what frustrates me about people to talk about using local models as if they're a viable alternative. Who do they think is going to pay to train an LLM if they can't get revenue from inference? And who wants to use, say, a coding LLM that was trained on an old language standard and a load of deprecated APIs?

        dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

          @davidgerard Right, so you need a constant supply of customers to amortise it.

          If it were a one-off, it wouldn't matter so much because you'll amortise it eventually.

          This is what frustrates me about people to talk about using local models as if they're a viable alternative. Who do they think is going to pay to train an LLM if they can't get revenue from inference? And who wants to use, say, a coding LLM that was trained on an old language standard and a load of deprecated APIs?

          dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD This user is from outside of this forum
          dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD This user is from outside of this forum
          dysfun@social.treehouse.systems
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #12

          @david_chisnall @davidgerard i'm almost 2 weeks into trying to make a local model do the silly thing and i am very very unimpressed.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • koos@mastodon.greenK koos@mastodon.green

            @davidgerard

            “My company is large. We were using GitHub copilot with several thousand users. With the change to token fees we are currently considering dropping ai agentic coding as a whole until at least the market stabilizes.”

            Whyyy do such people get to run companies?! It’s always been public knowledge that LLM SaaS runs at a loss

            etchedpixels@mastodon.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
            etchedpixels@mastodon.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
            etchedpixels@mastodon.social
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #13

            @koos @davidgerard It's also very normal for any other business to run at a loss whilst refining the processes, improving the technology and scaling.

            So for senior mismanagement the fact XYZ is still loss making isn't often a concern so long as there's name and money behind it to assure people that it won't go pop (or you have a backup plan). They'd have to look a lot further behind the curtain to realize.

            davidgerard@circumstances.runD 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
              david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
              david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #14

              @Gaelan @davidgerard

              I think, if LLMs stop being trained, you'll see a short-term split in the industry: those that continue to evolve their languages, frameworks, and other tools and those that end up stuck on old versions. And then we can invert the 'left behind' narrative.

              bms48@mastodon.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
                davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
                davidgerard@circumstances.run
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #15

                @Gaelan @david_chisnall the eternal death of python 2.7

                bms48@mastodon.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • etchedpixels@mastodon.socialE etchedpixels@mastodon.social

                  @koos @davidgerard It's also very normal for any other business to run at a loss whilst refining the processes, improving the technology and scaling.

                  So for senior mismanagement the fact XYZ is still loss making isn't often a concern so long as there's name and money behind it to assure people that it won't go pop (or you have a backup plan). They'd have to look a lot further behind the curtain to realize.

                  davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
                  davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
                  davidgerard@circumstances.run
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #16

                  @etchedpixels @koos yeah this github copilot price rise is a bit of a wakeup call

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

                    @Gaelan @david_chisnall the eternal death of python 2.7

                    bms48@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                    bms48@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                    bms48@mastodon.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #17

                    @davidgerard @Gaelan @david_chisnall It is actually still possible to install Python 2.7 if you fetch the right .debs on certain platforms. Not that I'd recommend that in any way. I nearly had to resort to it for some things. For more trivial things like GraphML conversion, I just hand-ported the script: https://git.sr.ht/~bms/dottoxml

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                      @Gaelan @davidgerard

                      I think, if LLMs stop being trained, you'll see a short-term split in the industry: those that continue to evolve their languages, frameworks, and other tools and those that end up stuck on old versions. And then we can invert the 'left behind' narrative.

                      bms48@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                      bms48@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                      bms48@mastodon.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #18

                      @david_chisnall @Gaelan @davidgerard As far as LLM training goes: "Cripple the motherf**er before it gets *heavy*." -- RA Wilson, "The Illuminatus! Trilogy!" (Fancy naming one of your characters "Markoff Chaney" way back then...) My GitHub status is now malicious compliace only due to the network effect, pretty much. Cloudflare's Content-Signal for robots.txt is a bit weak as I found out yesterday, and German court action with the EU Digital Single Market Directive makes it explicit opt-out.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

                        GitHub Copilot AI token charges go up 10×–100×

                        how Enterprise Software as a Service works

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A9FjHGcFWg&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
                        https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20260518-github-copilot-ai-token-charges-go-up-10x-100x - podcast

                        time: 7 min 33 sec

                        https://pivot-to-ai.com/2026/05/18/github-copilot-ai-token-charges-to-go-up-10x-100x/ - blog post

                        grayrattus@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                        grayrattus@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                        grayrattus@mastodon.social
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #19

                        @davidgerard "Embrace, extend, and extinguish"

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace%2C_extend%2C_and_extinguish

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • bogwitch@social.data.coopB bogwitch@social.data.coop shared this topic
                        Svar
                        • Svar som emne
                        Login for at svare
                        • Ældste til nyeste
                        • Nyeste til ældste
                        • Most Votes


                        • Log ind

                        • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                        • Login or register to search.
                        Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                        Graciously hosted by data.coop
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Hjem
                        • Seneste
                        • Etiketter
                        • Populære
                        • Verden
                        • Bruger
                        • Grupper