I’d love to know how many tokens this burned through.

Did it spend $20? $30? $80? in order to

> debug what was, in the end, a two-line CSS fix

That detail is the difference between somebody having or not having Stockholm syndrome

I updated my post to answer that, it was $12.11 at API prices (I wasn't paying those, I have a $100/month subscription): https://simonwillison.net/2026/Jun/11/fable-is-relentlessly-...

▲

asp_hornet 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The author just wrote an anecdote about how a prompt to fix an issue played out. Their conclusion wasn’t about cost or gushing at its ability but that it’s dangerous:

> Fable is arguably smarter and hence more suspicious of potentially malicious instructions. But that smartness is very much a two-edged sword: if it does get subverted by instructions, the amount of damage it can do given its relentless proactivity is terrifying.

▲

jrflowers 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s a pretty glowing review about a product that costs money with a two-sentence “Watch out!” at the end of it. Seems pretty reasonable to mention how much money it burned through given that “it’ll circumnavigate the globe instead of walking next door” has a direct concrete measurable effect (cost) unlike theoretical damage.

▲

simonw an hour ago | parent | next [-]

In case it's not clear, "relentlessly proactive" is meant to act as both a glowing review and a warning at the same time, even before you get to the bit about safety at the end.

▲

asp_hornet an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Agreed. But I think it’s also important to realise if you sent this article back to 2020 people would say it was pure fantasy that a tool could do this. Hype aside, there’s a bit of cool magic here.

	▲	solenoid0937 30 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		This is why I never understand the AI cynics: we are playing with literal magic. This was the science fiction of our childhoods. I don't understand how anyone with a passion for technology is not in awe (and perhaps some fear) of these things.

▲

rmunn 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

At some point the subscription model is going to become unsustainable for the frontier companies to continue (we just saw that happen with GitHub Copilot), and they will move everyone to a pay-per-token model. And then everyone will suddenly discover that they can get so much more value out of locally-hosted models, and they'll be willing to pay the $50,000 (or whatever) upfront on hardware to host it. (Not most individuals, obviously. But most companies can probably afford to spend that much on hardware if they think they'll benefit long-term). That's going to put a serious crimp in the frontier companies' ability to continue as they have been.

I don't know when that will happen, but I don't think it'll be more than a decade. Maybe 3-5 years. (Though you shouldn't take my word for it, I was predicting the dotcom bubble bursting in 1998 and it lasted at least two years longer than I would have predicted).

EDIT to clarify: I don't mean "in 1998, I was predicting the dotcom bubble would collapse and I was right". I mean "I was predicting that 1998 would be the year the dotcom bubble would collapse, and I was off by at least two years".

	▲	simonw an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		GitHub Copilot's challenge is that they weren't selling access to their own models, they were selling access to models from OpenAI and Anthropic which they presumably had to pay list price for (or maybe a slightly reduced rate that they negotiated). They also had a pricing plan which they had designed pre-coding-agent, when it was rare for a single prompt to burn $10+ of tokens in an agent loop. OpenAI and Anthropic are at least selling their own models directly, so they can discount a whole lot more since there's no-one else getting compensated in the middle.
	▲	ValentineC 38 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> At some point the subscription model is going to become unsustainable for the frontier companies to continue (we just saw that happen with GitHub Copilot), and they will move everyone to a pay-per-token model. From what I understand, Enterprise (above 150 seats, I think?) already has to pay per-token pricing. Subscriptions are the premium "free tier" marketing of the AI world, so that employees can collectively request their large enterprise to subscribe to Claude, Codex, or Cursor, and presumably be billed at per-token prices then.

▲

NiloCK 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

... so the mechanic produced an invoice, itemized.

changing the CSS - $0.05

knowing which CSS to change - $30

	▲	swingboy 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		overflow is CSS 101