Depends on who you ask.

For me it sounds good.

For Anthropic it might increase load and make them less money but give them better KPIs.

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines. (I'm not talking about this comment - I'm just replying to your most recent one.)

If you want to post on HN, we need you to review and follow the rules at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. You've already broken them badly and often, including with many personal attacks. That's not allowed here.

▲

VulgarExigency a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Make them less money? By automating use of their product, that costs money to use?

▲

simlevesque a day ago | parent [-]

Anthropic makes more money when people use 5% of what their subscription offers them. This allows them to sell more subscriptions without paying for more capacity.

	▲	hedgehog a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don't think the current subscription price is intended to be a money maker. It's the loss leader to get people invested in the companies' tooling, and make those people more willing to start paying higher enterprise rates as they grow.
	▲	VulgarExigency a day ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Do we have any concrete numbers of how many of their users are subscription vs enterprise, though? Because enterprise users are paying API prices (or at least my employers are)
	▲	mojosmojo a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Their enterprise customers pay via metered actual use.