Remix.run Logo
▲ buckleyourshoe 8 hours ago

Competition drives prices down. We tried Kimi and GLM models after hitting 'cybersecurity' blocks on OpenAI and Anthropic. We found them to be much cheaper to access and helped us complete our work without 'cybersecurity' refusals blocking us.

▲CalChris 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They just started competing against each other? No.

Anthropic is going public soon. Until September, OpenAI was going public. Neither are remotely profitable.

▲kenhwang 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They're not competing against each other, they're competing against free/local/open weight models that they're also lobbying very hard to regulate/ban.

▲asa123 3 hours ago | parent [-]

As much as I hear this sentiment, and as much as all the smart software people around me echo the desire for this sentiment to be true; it feels like people say these things, but then at the same time say - well, Claude/Chatgpt is still marginally better for me now. But clearly they are catching up so maybe one day!!!

In that sense, I'm really not sure if Kimi/chinese models are really competing against Anthropic/OAI? Not to mention that for individuals, the subscription model is extremely different, and Kimi subs are (I think) worse value, and chinese API's maybe marginally end up cheaper than using american subscriptions.

▲qlte 25 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

The profit comes from the enterprise customers who have to pay for usage at API rates. Not the subsidized subscriptions, which both OpenAI have designed to be unavailable for large enterprises by withholding IAM and auditing features they need except on the usage based entperise plans.

As an individual I'm still paying for a ChatGPT Plus plan since $20/mo gives me a lot of value and I use many multiples of $20 at API rates per month. But in terms of capabilities, I am entirely satisfied when using my Opencode Go plan with open models like Deepseek Flash/Pro, Kimi and MiMo.

At this point keeping my ChatGPT subscription isn't because of a significant capability gap compared to open models. It's 90% about the value of the subscription priced well below API rates (10% the fun of trying latest models).

If OpenAI/Anthropic dropped their cheap subscriptions or drastically undermined the value proposition I'd be happy using open models exclusively and currently barely notice a difference switching back and forth for the vast majority of tasks.

I'm expecting the subs to increasingly provide less value as the US labs IPO and follow the SV pattern of moving from marketshare capture mode to profit extraction mode. Thankfully I'm already comfortable using OpenCode with open models and avoid lock-in to any specific harness so would be a very soft landing.

▲smodo 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Openrouter stats seem to indicate that there is a lot of demand for ‘good enough at a good price.’ After all, not everyone is decompiling PS5 games. In fact, most people are just speedrunning notetaking apps in JavaScript frameworks.

▲mbreese 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

But, Openrouter stats can only measure the usage they see. I'm not sure it is really all that representative of total LLM usage across the market.

I think that's the difference here -- OpenAI and Anthropic are competing more with each other (and Google Gemini) than they are with open weight models. While people on HN are familiar with Kimi and GLM models, I'm not sure how many casual users of LLMs know about them. I think the competitive risk open weight models pose to OpenAI and Anthropic is much further in the future.

There is a lot of usage that's only known by Anthropic or OpenAI that's not visible to the rest of the world.

▲peddling-brink 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> most people are just speedrunning notetaking apps in JavaScript frameworks.

I feel seen. But seriously, my app, with my preferences, written by a semi-trustworthy entity that isn’t trying to shove ads down my throat. That’s really great.

▲NewJazz 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Have you considered you are reading comments from different people?

▲fatata123 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲ 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
▲_heimdall 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If this is mostly competition enduced, I have to assume either their usage has plummeted or they will implode financially in short order.

The frontier labs were already burning money on more expensive price models, and competition wouldn't have reduced their capex proportionately.

▲p0nce 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

How could they do anything but implode financially? Genuinely curious. The numbers are not right.

▲smallmancontrov 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Did the frontier labs take out debt or did they make flimsy unenforceable agreements to neoclouds who took out debt?

▲bunderbunder 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Borrowing money is not the only way to go into debt. They reportedly made binding and non-cancelable commitments. Once those commitments come due then they will be indebted to their counterparties until they pay up or the courts sort it out.

This is comparable to how, if I sign a 12 month non-cancelable lease and then don’t pay the rent, I will be in debt to my landlord.

▲freakynit 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

People heavily underestimate the number of tricks available to corporates for taking on "debt": https://latentstate.net/the-hidden-ledger/

▲webnrrd2k 2 hours ago | parent [-]

[dead]

▲_heimdall 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's effectively borrowing money with a different name though. The only way to go into debt is to sign an agreement to pay someone money in the future, regardless of the terms used to describe it.

▲smallmancontrov 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

No, it's really not. Do you have a war chest to drag out a legal battle and the ability to bankrupt your landlord by withholding payment? The rules are different at this scale, and "you can't enforce a contract if the attempt will bankrupt you" is only one of the possible games.

Here's another one: pay a supplier to cripple their deployment. Suddenly it's the neocloud's fault for failing to deliver, not your fault for failing to pay.

Did we all forget how Sam Altman turned a non-profit into a for-profit? Do we think he'll bring less sociopathy to this battle?

▲eeedda 2 hours ago | parent [-]

You're delusional lmao.

Default is default.

E.g. Capital leases are treated as debt.

Stop posting nonsense.

▲tjwebbnorfolk 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes.

▲rayiner 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Apple is worth more than all the AI companies combined. You think LLMs are less valuable in the global market than slightly updated iPhone models every year?

▲failbuffer 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

LLMs? No. LLM companies? Yes. It's just math, data centers, and mass copyright infringement. The only scarcity is Nvidia, who just passed Apple in market cap, somewhat proving your point but not in the way you meant it.

▲_heimdall 2 hours ago | parent [-]

If you consider Nvidia an LLM company, and I do at this point given how heavily they've invested in frontier labs and where much of their revenue comes from, they alone are worth slightly more than Apple.

▲ an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲jasomill 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe not, but it is probably less likely that Apple will face stiff competition from freely available alternatives, given that AOSP has been a thing for the iPhone’s entire lifespan and nonproprietary Android phones have failed to capture significant market share.

▲daveguy 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't think we have seen an Apple of AI yet. I wouldn't describe the frontier that way, would you?

▲jasomill 3 hours ago | parent [-]

No, and moreover it’s not entirely inconceivable that the Apple of AI may turn out to be Apple itself.

▲jasomill 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Their costs could drop, competition could dry up, or they may only be unprofitable in the first place because they’re choosing to invest more money in growing their business than they’re currently making, a practice which need not and will not continue indefinitely.

It’s not at all unusual for companies to run at a loss for several years before turning a profit.

▲_heimdall 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The government could bail them out, that's the most likely scenario if they don't implode IMO.

They could also continue to grow at the rates they had last year. I don't know where those customers would come from, but if they did pull that off OpenAI and Anthropic could sustain propping up the circular financing going around the AI industry.

▲xlayn 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Goverment bailing they out will be using people tax to rescue the companies that absorbed most of the 801k money so they can get people out of work... it's the ultimate slap to the face... I would strongly resist this, I would vote if they implode to give to whoever owned shares via 801k their money, to people and let them (openai, anthropic, et al) eat shit... I would love to buy one of those gpus to run an open model at discount price...

▲_heimdall 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Completely agree it will be a huge slap in the face to the public, unfortunately that's a common solution.

When everyone is afraid the market will collapse, or more likely distracted because the market collapsed just enough to hurt the average person, the government will bail them out and either people won't notice or will welcome it as a solution to huge levels of fear.

Voting isn't usually much of a solution after the fact, the political machine doesn't allow for candidates that would fix anything to have a chance at any office that matters. There's a reason our politicians today all seem to have roughly the same goals and all seem to become extremely wealthy while in office.

▲velcrovan 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

A bailout would be a slap in the face when the correct solution is to nationalize them. If they are too big to fail then the government gets a controlling share of equity and we finally start the sovereign wealth fund we should have started decades ago.

▲fourthark 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe you should try voting harder.

▲_heimdall 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Meaning what? Cast more than one ballot?

I live in a state that votes heavily in one direction, most states are the same. Its fine for me to vote, but the winner of a majority of states is pretty well decided before a ballot is cast (by strong majority, I'm not claiming fraud).

▲daveguy 3 hours ago | parent [-]

If everyone who threw up their hands actually voted, the outcome would change. See also, the elections musk tried to buy in the last 18 months or so since he doged up the place.

▲_heimdall 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Sure, and I hope that (a) everyone votes and (b) most of them agree with me. Bit what is your point exactly?

▲SlightlyLeftPad 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Stuff like this that defies all logic happens all the time. Amazon operated at a massive loss first it’s first decade and still IPO’d years before they posted a profit.

▲kshacker 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's why Anthropic are rushing the IPO. You can explain a single quarter slowdown, you can not explain a multi quarter one.

▲stingraycharles 6 hours ago | parent [-]

What makes you say that Anthropic has multi quarter slowdowns?

▲flowerthoughts 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

My reason is their revenue chart is flattening.

https://techstartups.com/2026/10/15/anthropics-q3-revenue-hi...

▲kshacker 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I am technically not saying that. I am taking off from the parent comment and speculating.

Their data from September is leaked via IPO preview, and October is not yet complete, so how can someone even project that?

// I am a techie, not a finance guy, so apart from public chatter, no inside knowledge.

And I do feel their IPO is being rushed before anyone has enough information to make up their mind. The VCs or private equity have given them a lot of money and want to cash out. When the revenue does slow down, any investor should pause to take a look at whether they can right the ship, or has the landscape itself changed.

▲eeedda 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Have more confidence - you are correct.

Their revenue taps, product releases and marketing campaigns were all strategic: to be able to show nice numbers in the financials.

Once they stop playing games with quality of output of these models and revenue's shrink - they will be in deep deep trouble. They are hoping they will conjure up a break through with the IPO proceeds.

Let's see.

▲_heimdall 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't have the numbers in front of me but could have sworn I had seen quarterly revenue growth rates dropping drastically over the last year or so. Still a strong growth rate, but much lower than prior growth rates.

Edit: Data because silent down votes are useless, Anthropic Q2 2026 grew 147% while Q3 grew 45%

▲eeedda 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes but its growth rates with respect to expenditures, and in particular capital expenditures (R&D etc), which we have no idea about.

Gross margins here are irrelevant: if they can't charge a high enough price to cover all expenditures and rely on cash raised via fund-raises, they are not financially healthy.

Could they be one day? Maybe.

▲_heimdall 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I think we agree in a backwards kind of way.

Yes they do need to grow margins to cover expenses, eventually when Amazon had to turn a profit.

My point was only that the numbers we do know clearly show a drop in growth rate of revenue, I can't judge numbers that aren't publicly known.

▲otabdeveloper4 22 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> or they will implode financially

They are too big to implode.

▲ 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲TacticalCoder 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> If this is mostly competition enduced, I have to assume either their usage has plummeted or they will implode financially in short order.

If we assume it's due to competition, then their usage has precisely not plummeted because they cut prices by 80%.

▲D13Fd 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

So much this. I’m using these models primarily for dumb hobby projects and I’ve still hit this a lot - although much less so in Opus 5.5.

▲soupfordummies 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I wouldn’t be surprised if US “bans” access to the Chinese models by the end of the year

▲bethekidyouwant 8 hours ago | parent [-]

How?

▲xscott 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think your question is rhetorical, in which case I agree with the sentiment.

The US absolutely could (and very well might) make Chinese models illegal, possibly open weight models in general, but all that will do is keep them out of the hands of law abiding US citizens.

Law breakers in the US and the entire rest of the world would still have access, and nothing in the US will be any safer. People who think regulation will solve the problem should be embarrassed by their ignorance.

▲aktenlage 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It may solve the problem of anthropic and open ai going out of business with all major consequences that would have for the rest of the US.

▲xscott 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Lol, that's funny in an awful way. Choose between popping the AI bubble or creating a duopoly, and still have all the cybersecurity and other risks.

▲holoduke 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't get why people think Chinese models could bring openai and anthropic to their knees. There are zero signs of such a scenario. In fact the market is still growing at a gigantic pace. Quality of American models is still AAA. Chinese will have their place. But they are unmatched by their American rivals.

▲bryanlarsen 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"Bring them to their knees" is highly unlikely.

"Puncture expectations of a multi-trillion dollar valuation" OTOH seems quite likely to me.

▲xscott 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If the capability keeps growing significantly, then I agree it's possible the US could hold their significant lead indefinitely.

However, capability could plateau or reach a point where most of the market can't tell the difference and isn't willing to pay a premium.

▲verdverm 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> But they are unmatched by their American rivals.

Kimi K3.1 is top 5 on AA and half the price of Opus 5.5, Qwen4 is coming soon. There is near zero difference for most tasks, so it matters less today and even less as time goes on. Price is now the top concern for a reason.

https://artificialanalysis.ai/#intelligence

▲bethekidyouwant 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

“Ban open weight models” Lol how. How do you even prove a model that I’m hosting is open weights?

▲oefrha 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

OpenRouter and other inference providers won’t be able to openly host the models, for starters. That should cut most (or at least a significant share of) non-local inference, and local inference only works with smaller, less capable models, plus the hardware is hella expensive when you don’t have scale to saturate.

In addition, most companies don’t want to be in a position where a disgruntled employee can report them to authorities and rack up massive fines or worse, even if it’s hard to tell from the outside.

▲xscott 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's a difference between something being illegal and being able to enforce that law.

▲eddythompson80 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't know man. Marijuana is/was banned in most of the US. LOL, how do you ban a plant?

▲cwillu 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Given the general availability, the answer appears to be “you mostly don't.”

▲jonathanstrange 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Banning open weight models in the US would provide the rest of the world with a huge business advantage since these models are much more cost-effective than US models.

▲ApolloFortyNine 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you are a legally operating company in the US just saying it's banned is enough, the threat of enforcement is enough pressure.

You and I obviously can just use a VPN, but 99% of usage is likely as part of a company.

▲xscott 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Presumably, legally operating companies aren't the dominant threat though. So banning open weight models doesn't solve anything.

▲oefrha 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Not if you realize the real threat to be solved is threat to shareholder value.

▲teolandon an hour ago | parent [-]

ding ding ding

▲SahAssar 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> If you are a legally operating company in the US just saying it's banned is enough, the threat of enforcement is enough pressure.

Is there precedent for the US actually "banning" software? I know for example the Kaspersky ban and tiktok ban, but both of those were either banning the sales or banning the service. IIRC neither made the actual software illegal.

What is an example of a specific software being illegal to possess? What is an example of a specific software being illegal to use if it is not used to break other laws (copyright, etc.) or talks to banned service providers?

Closest thing I can think of is restricting the export of cryptography in the 90's, but that was not even close to what you are suggesting.

▲bethekidyouwant 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Correct it’s 7% chance on kalshi, and those 7% of people are just wrong. I know everyone likes to larp that the US is some kind of dictatorship, but lol, lmao as they say. Also on the “how” side so far we have “they will just announce that “they” are banned, hilarious.

▲whoanoway 6 hours ago | parent [-]

[dead]

▲ipsum2 32 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> much cheaper to access

I'm calling BS. I use Kimi, chatGPT (Astra/Sol), and Claude (Opus 5.5), and Kimi is by far the most expensive in terms of tokens and $/work done. Using OpenCode harness.

▲rcstank 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What harness are you all using? OpenCode?

▲largbae 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I have a harness for my harnesses now. My Hermes manages Codex, CC or Cursor now and interact with me via Slack and PRs on GitHub.

It's nice because I can keep going from anywhere, other team members can see and interject in my Slack threads, and Hermes auto updates its skills with any adjustments that we make so we don't have to ask twice.

▲mr_mitm 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I found Claude Code to work best. You can use it with any compatible API.

▲schaefer 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Pi.dev at home.

And I’m slowly writing my own. But it’s garbage at the moment.

▲pizlonator 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I wrote one and kept iterating by using it to fix bugs in itself

I still also use other harnesses, but mine is already at the point where I prefer it more often than not

You should totally keep working on yours. It’s a cool learning experience. And you might stumble on some good ideas that nobody else has had

▲ylrd91 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Don’t write your own. Fork maki.sh and customize it like I did. It’s built in Rust and is absolutely amazing.

▲schaefer 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Thanks for the suggestion, but that’s not a fit for me.

I’m writing my own harness to learn. And I’m writing it in zig.

But, I’ll absolutely add maki.sh to my reading list. So, that’s a win.

▲leereeves 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What kind of hardware do you need to run a useful LLM at home? To train one?

▲schaefer 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> "What kind of hardware... "

At home, I mostly use openrouter.

A few bucks will realistically last you forever. I also bought a DGX Spark at launch. I've learned a ton. but it's not usually my daily driver. I do run overnight tasks on it, like "read this book and write up notes on each chapter..."

In retrospect, given the dirt cheap prices of apis and or renting hardware, buying hardware for inference was likely a mistake (but not enough of a mistake to sell it now).

▲margalabargala 3 hours ago | parent [-]

There are a lot of tasks I have, e.g. integration with homeassistant, that I absolutely will not trust a cloud provider for. On prem or nothing.

I'm not willing to spend thousands for those features, so my house will remain dumber than it could be until prices come down in a year or two.

▲CamperBob2 33 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Take a look at the docs for https://github.com/niko1221/strata for some ideas, particularly https://github.com/Niko1221/Strata/blob/main/docs/MODELS.md#... .

▲mynegation 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Schaefer says they write their own harness, not necessarily training or running a local model.

▲minimaxir 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For me, I used Zed Agent with Codex as it has native integration with Zed's ACP so it's pretty convenient.

However, Anthropic is pickier about the harnesses you can use with Claude Code and I noticed discrepancies when using Zed's External Agent feature with Claude Code, so I just use the Claude app. It's fine.

▲smlx 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Crush is great and easy to hack on: https://github.com/charmbracelet/crush

▲denkmoon 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Personally I've found Zed's agent to be much superior to OpenCode. IDK why but it gets better results from the same model on the same task. Using with GLM 5.3 and DeepSeek 4.1.

▲hgoel 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I've been pretty satisfied with OpenCode 2

▲tjwebbnorfolk 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

yea but I thought they had a massive compute shortage. Something doesn't add up. Imagine there being a beef shortage and the beef producers cut prices because "competition". why?

▲hattmall 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If the beef producers don't believe beef is a commodity and they want to get you addicted to their specific beef then it makes sense. Right now in these companies life cycles profit doesn't actually matter. The only thing that matters is how much of their beef is being consumed. They want to give people so much free beef they can't even imagine the idea of having a meal that doesn't contain beef.

▲neuronexmachina an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Massive increases in efficiency and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox