How on earth you can do 100 dollars in 2-3 days with DeepSeek? I have 7 agents in omp running 24/7 every day. I use maybe 10-15 dollars a day. A rarely see a session going over 2 dollars. My maximum is maybe 3.5 dollars and that session took three days.

What harness you are using?

▲

rapind 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

pi. I wasn't even going that hard. I checked the logs for Sep 18 and I did just shy of 3b input with approx 98.5% cache and 5.8m output, which cost around $35. Most of the was a Rust code review exercise with 1 driving agent and a varying number of subagents (up to 6 some times). I do the same with with Sol med/high driving and Luna x-high reviewing and get at least as much done if not more in a day, but I'd use up two x20 weekly allowances for the week. Worth noting that token cost isn't super meaningfull on it's own, because DS is super token heavy (but also great at caching) compared to Sol. (my stats show DS uses 3x the tokens as Sol)

The shape of my work changes obviously, so it'll vary, sometimes more, sometimes less. For example, fixing all of the bugs and defects I found that week was 2-3 times the effort and chewed through my ChatGPT allowance, but I had banked resets...

Also worth noting that codex models have been kind of all over the place recently with their usage... and it looks like costs are changing again.

▲

ricardobeat an hour ago | parent [-]

You might be overusing subagents. Especially with a chatty model like DS, you’ll be wasting millions of tokens on re-discovering the project and facts instead of actual reasoning.

	▲	rapind 16 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I agree, and I started sending well defined review packages to Luna x-high instead, which is how I have this setup when using Codex (Sol drives, Luna async reviews, and Sol keeps moving). Same process with DS really dropped my DS usage by a lot and I think that might actually be the secret sauce. Especially if you use Luna through a subscription (probably the entry pro level would be enough). I'm not sure what a Luna equivalent open model is though. 5.6 Luna max was catching a lot of issues while my implementer keeps rolling. Last couple of days I had 3-4 Sol Mediums running with Luna x-high reviewers (async reviews) and one Sol medium orchestrator and Astra X-high to plan everything out. Gotta be honest though, I don't love fiddling with this all the time. I would rather be working on my projects than evaluating my usage. Having DS in my back pocket should i need it is a relief. The providers get fiddly though too.

▲

the__alchemist 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What are those agents doing? I am out of the loop. Bitcoin mining? Blogging? Reddit bots?

▲

drewnick 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I have deepseek agents doing email responses, with real tools (think running quotes, gathering info, scheduling things) and running business processes that used to be done by $35/hr administrative type people. And the capabilities are expanding every day as I learn how to build scaffolding around the model.

▲

esperent an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> I have deepseek agents doing email responses

So, spam?

	▲	abustamam 30 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Not all communications done by a non-human is necessarily spam.

▲

ducktoysleftout an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I am a tech lead for a useful but non-essential PaaS my company subscribes to. Their product manager occasionally sends me clearly AI-authored emails. I ignore them. I am a believer in the usefulness of AI, but nothing says I don’t care more clearly than sending me slop.

I can’t overstate how bad of an idea I think using an AI for customer interaction is.

	▲	abustamam 27 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I think it depends on the industry. In my company (insurtech) a large percentage of our sales come from AI engagements (phone and text). The customers know they're talking to an AI and they can elect to talk to a human at any time but many times they don't. But yeah, send me a non solicited AI slop email or worse, political ad, and you dont get the dignity of me saying stop to unsubscribe. Straight to spam for you.

▲

pimeys an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Work for my company. Research, code, analysis.

▲

Mistletoe 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I’m lost when I read these sort of comment chains. Free Gemini works just fine for me. Maybe it’s because I don’t use it for programming? How many programmers really exist out there? Surely it can’t support the weight of investment that exists in AI already. It’s just such a small pool of the human race.

▲

internetter 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

First, they come for the programmers, and next the mathematicians. Then it will be the biologists, lawyers and doctors. Humanities will stake it out a little bit longer because AI isn’t human, but AI companies would be dammed if they don’t try. Eventually, with advancements in robotics, stabs at increasingly more physical sciences will also be attempted. Eventually, AI will have its hand in the pie of all knowledge work, if it is possible. Not to mention all the roles like tech support and customer service. Once they have gotten as far as they think they can go, they will try to turn up the prices. However, they might struggle to do so as models are becoming a commodity. This is why they are arguing for regulation and stating that only they can tame these beasts.

	▲	abustamam 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I think as long as we have open weighted models there will always be competition. Sure Anthropic could raise their prices but it wont take long for someone else to undercut them. The quality may not be as good but people would probably prefer to pay 1% of the cost for 75% of the quality.

▲

ac29 41 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> How many programmers really exist out there? Surely it can’t support the weight of investment that exists in AI already. It’s just such a small pool of the human race

I dont consider myself a programmer but use LLMs almost exclusively for coding.

The number of people able to create useful software today is much much larger than it used to be and arguably a minority of these people are/were "programmers"