| ▲ | anthonypasq 8 hours ago |
| Continued hardware improvements really make it hard for me to believe token prices will not continue to plummet. |
|
| ▲ | jrflo 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| This may just be a classic case of Jevons paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox In short, better hardware will drive down token cost in the near-term, but will drive up the demand for tokens as it gets cheap enough for other sectors to start to use it heavily. It comes from steam engines where economists originally thought that coal demand would plummet with more efficient engines, but it actually just meant that we found more uses for steam engines. |
| |
| ▲ | kilroy123 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is exactly what I see happening now. Codex keeps doing these usage resets. What do I do? Burn even more tokens than ever before. I know I'm not the only one. | |
| ▲ | sobellian 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If we are applying Jevons paradox to this then the unit being consumed is not tokens but the inputs for token production - power, capex, something else. To draw an analogy to the steam engine, coal:electricity::mechanical-work:tokens. Jevons paradox does not talk about mechanical work becoming cheaper in the short term setting up a sort of rubber band of demand creating spiking prices for mechanical work. Compared to the renaissance, mechanical work was much cheaper throughout the industrial revolution and remains cheaper to this day. We can still definitely say that the easier it is to produce tokens, the cheaper they will be. | | |
| ▲ | vlovich123 10 minutes ago | parent [-] | | All Jevon’s paradox says is that as a resource becomes cheaper total consumption of that resource increases. It applies equally well to the inputs of token production as it does to the tokens themselves. The former would describe the effect the sellers into AI companies see (energy, GPU chips, RAM etc - if they lower their prices they’ll have more overall consumption) while the latter describes what the AI companies see with their customers (if they lower token prices consumers will use more tokens overall). |
| |
| ▲ | anthonypasq 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | the total cost spent on tokens may go up, but i just cant imagine per token costs going up | | |
| ▲ | jrflo 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Depends on compute capacity. If we become supply constrained on tokens, then prices will necessarily go up. | | |
| ▲ | anthonypasq 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | no they dont because inference stacks are getting more efficient and models are getting more intelligent per parameter. | | |
| ▲ | vlovich123 9 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I would posit there’s no way in hell they’re getting sufficiently cheaper on a short enough time frame vs how much demand is sky rocketing. AI companies are seeing quarterly doubling of revenue if not more. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | cactusplant7374 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It is incredibly cheap now. What sectors are you thinking of? | |
| ▲ | holoduke 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That's when demand is higher than capacity. Now imagine places like Gigalab and Chinese labs are online and able to produce significant percentage of chips. That could cause real surge in prices. | |
| ▲ | altmanaltman 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think you're reducing a very complex thing (the global economy) into a very simplistic model (Jevons' paradox) and thinking both are the same thing. This has no predictive power or rigor. You're just wishing things would happen as they did before, without considering that conditions and situations change significantly, and instead of Jevon's paradox, we look back at today 50 years from now and talk about Jensen's paradox. This doesn't mean the concept is BS, but one single concept cannot explain away everything in such a system. | |
| ▲ | goodmythical 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | senordevnyc 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There is something counter-intuitive about the idea that making an engine that accomplishes the same amount of work with half the fuel will result in MORE fuel usage overall. You might expect it to be the same, or decline slightly, but the paradoxical element is that overall consumption goes up. And you can say of course, it's so obvious, how could a dumdum not see that! But then there are lots of examples of things where increased efficiency results in less usage overall, because demand is inelastic, etc. Jevon's paradox doesn't apply to everything. I don't think we know yet what is going to happen as software development gets much cheaper. If in ten years we can produce software 1000x more cost effectively, will we need fewer software engineers, the same, or more? Guess we'll see! | | |
| ▲ | Imustaskforhelp 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > I don't think we know yet what is going to happen as software development gets much cheaper. If in ten years we can produce software 1000x more cost effectively, will we need fewer software engineers, the same, or more? Guess we'll see! Adding onto it, I feel as if this relates to some points regarding predictions of future in general. It is easier for us to look from the future to the past and think that it must be very obvious (as you also mention) but its also very counter-intuitive at the same time and there are just so so much nuance about basically any situation within it that its hard to really capture it all, and even then, be prepared for surprises and counter-intuitiveness. I really like the Peter Drucker quote about it. “The only thing we know about the future is that it will surprise us.” — Peter Drucker and, “The future is fundamentally different from the past.”
— Frank Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit (1921) |
| |
| ▲ | theobreuerweil 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
|
|
| ▲ | dgellow 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There is just so much downward pressure on token price, from every direction. We would need a completely new understanding of economics to explain why the price shouldn’t go down. Or market collusion/regulatory manipulation. |
| |
| ▲ | dumberquestions 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The demand for them is growing _per person_, not just across the wider economy, if tokens cost half as much but you want to use 3 times as much you're going to have to pay more. | |
| ▲ | jazzyjackson 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Maybe 1000s of tokens per second unlocks realtime robotic decision making, and now every robot needs to continuously stream tokens to and from the cloud to operate. That could 1000x demand overnight, just to speculate :) | | |
| ▲ | jacquesm 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I would very much like it if anything that moves with appreciable mass is governed locally just in case the link drops and/or latency suddenly goes up. Motion is very unforgiving and accidents will happen if that's not taken into account. | |
| ▲ | dgellow 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think you just found what we will see in the S-1 prospectus of OpenAI | |
| ▲ | HDThoreaun 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Seems unsafe to make locomotive decisions remotely | |
| ▲ | hypfer 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Think about the agents buying computers for their agents. /s |
| |
| ▲ | simianwords 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The price has been going down for ages, its not clear what you are pointing at | | |
| ▲ | phoghed 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Pointing at the nay sayers who say tokens are heavily subsidized and it’s all going to come crashing down soon, surely any moment now | | |
| ▲ | dgellow 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | I mean, it will obviously crash at some point. With so much pressure on token price to go down that means way less opportunity for margin for AI providers. OpenAI is in a pretty bad situation | | |
| ▲ | simianwords 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | What does this have to do with margins? It can remain the same once prices go down |
|
| |
| ▲ | dgellow 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | At the price going down? And that it will continue to go down, even if the hardware improvements stop. Not sure what isn’t clear |
|
|
|
| ▲ | datakan 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Token prices coming down means nothing if the models keep wasting them |
|
| ▲ | m101 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| With the corollary that old hardware valuations will plummet with them. Although given we have marginal pricing we need to push through to those lower prices in the face of increasing demand, so timing of this is uncertain and the key to the AI financial markets |
|
| ▲ | gwerbin 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Hopefully this also means billionaires can stop trying to drop data centers into residential neighborhoods with zero noise control and polluting on-site generators, signing local politicians on with NDAs, calling for eminent domain to seize homes to build power lines to data centers, etc. etc. etc. Not to mention the water use controversy. Token prices plummeting is probably a good thing, but not without the regulatory backstops that prevent these effectively industrial facilities from being operated with no regard for the externalities they impose on people who live near them. |
| |
| ▲ | tmp10423288442 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Nah, Jevon’s Paradox says that cheaper tokens will mean increased overall energy consumption. If we can’t even build data centers, the least disruptive industrial use possible, there’s no hope to reindustrialize the US or anywhere outside of China. | |
| ▲ | vlyan 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >polluting on-site generators how much pollution do you believe modern gas-turbine engines to produce? >Not to mention the water use controversy. what percentage of US water usage do you believe is by AI data centers? |
|
|
| ▲ | ilaksh 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yeah but is it really even as good as Rubin? Seems just competitive. |
|
| ▲ | mathisfun123 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| this is a story about a proprietary accelerator being built/designed by a token provider. and you think they're going to return the efficiency gains to the customer instead of capture the value for themselves? interesting take. |
| |
| ▲ | anthonypasq 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | OpenAI just dropped the price of Luna by 80% and Sol by 20-30% | | |
| ▲ | mathisfun123 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | and amazon shipping used to be free without prime, and uber used to be cheaper than taxis, and airbnb used to be cheaper than hotels. you really don't get it? | | |
| ▲ | simianwords 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | almost every pure tech commodity has gone down in price - gpus - retail computers - laptops - ~gpu~ appliances like washing machines - cloud computing i think you don't get how economy usually works in tech | | |
| ▲ | asveikau 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | GPUs and memory have gone up in price. It's more expensive to buy a 1-2 year old video card than it was at launch, sometimes by a shockingly large factor. Laptop vendors have recently shipped flagship models with less memory than the previous model, because they can't match price expectations for a laptop. | |
| ▲ | zirkonit 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm especially enjoying how RAM and SSDs are going down in price. | |
| ▲ | fer 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I was checking laptops today for an upgrade from the model I bought back in 2019 and it's not gonna happen from how cheap they are. | |
| ▲ | mathisfun123 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | i figured out why this comment is so confusing: this is actually a message from the past, around 2020. either that or simianwords is a time traveler that arrived today and hasn't read the news yet. | |
| ▲ | thefreeman 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | listing gpu's here is crazy considering the current prices | |
| ▲ | fl4regun 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | GPUs and laptops and memory and storage are all crazy expensive |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | spacephysics 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | We should be mindful of the context that many of these providers VERY likely have been selling their subscriptions at a substantial loss So as much as i agree “more profits to stakeholders screw the customer”, i think its more of an emergency to get to profitability before the music stops. | | |
| ▲ | anthonypasq 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | > We should be mindful of the context that many of these providers VERY likely have been selling their subscriptions at a substantial loss. what makes you think this? | | |
| ▲ | RealityVoid 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Because everyone keeps saying this so it must be true. Real "it is known" kind of vibe with these statements. | |
| ▲ | polski-g 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | He's a subscription truther. There's loads of them. OpenAI's profit increases with each subscription that is cancelled. Pretty soon they'll have more profit than God. |
|
| |
| ▲ | simianwords 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes, I can bet on this happening. If anything, this is a net gain for consumers as it is a competitive market. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | nimchimpsky 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [dead] |