> Subscription usage limits are hard to measure as none of the providers tell you directly what it means in terms of tokens or anything else you can easily compare

AI subscription pricing is so goofy. You get some amount of usage that varies by models, is measured by opaque token usage, driven by how many tokens the (usually) vendor-provided interface (or model itself) wants to use. Then your usage is limited by time opaque time windows.

▲

ekidd 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

AI subscription pricing was fine when it was $100/month for some opaque 5 hour token budget I don't think I ever used, not even that one day where I coded for 14 hours non-stop using Fable. But like most people with low token usage, I had a human in the loop and and I didn't use workflows with swarms of agents.

Now, of course, the plan is to remove Fable from the subscription. To paraphrase Darth Vader, they have altered the deal. Pray they do not alter it further.

	▲	steve-atx-7600 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Gpt 5.6 is still like this at least for the $200/month option. It’s also always faster than fabel. Fabel might be able to do some things better but I don’t have time to constantly wait and find out.
	▲	arcanemachiner 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		They're probably not going to remove Fable. They just extended it for another month.

▲

dgellow 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You call it goofy, in a different context we would call that a dark pattern, shady, prone to fraud