At first I was like "i want to use ai but dont have the money to burn for api tokens" cool. But then I realized the backers are essentially saying "i have money and could support developers but i choose to give the money directly to a mega corp and skip the human". I recommend you remove the policy of "Whatever the run didn't spend goes straight back to your backers' wallets." and make sure the human behind the wheel gets to eat. Somehow

▲

fragmede 5 hours ago | parent [-]

While we're in the token-equivalent of ZIRP, tokens don't cost what they cost, so there's sort of arbitrage to be had. I have tokens I've been given than I'm not using, but that's not the same as me having been given cash in the first place.

	▲	ianm218 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> While we're in the token-equivalent of ZIRP, tokens don't cost what they cost, so there's sort of arbitrage to be had Do you have a source for this? I believe “personal subscription” plans on OpenAI and Anthropic are likely ran at a net loss or close to it, but all indications elsewhere are that API pricing for these companies and likely Google as well are profitable per API call [1][2]. I would definitely believe that the Chinese players are operating at a loss though if that is what you mean. [1] https://newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/anthropic-growth-and-b... [2] https://martinalderson.com/posts/are-openai-and-anthropic-re...