I'm curious if they have any data showing whether it benefits productivity. I get by on the free tier of ChatGPT, and do 100% of the coding myself. It has never been a bottleneck, and I like to keep my skills sharp. AI helps in analyzing problems, getting quick answers to technical queries, reviewing code, etc. But running my own business I'm incredibly careful about expenses.

The whole world is working on this right now, but in some cases it can be extremely money saving. We had a couple of engineers who build a web portal to control some IoT devices because there wasn't one in the market. We've done similar things like that in the past, where we'd buy development from the outside. I can't give you exact costs, but getting it developed is around 5% of the price in AI and HUMAN hours, and then another 10% (bringing it to around 15%) for human hours rewriting it to run securely (and maintainable) in our cloud.

We're working on bringing the last 10% down by giving non-developers various AI skills such as a compliance module that can be pushed to specific Entra groups which will make sure their vibe code madness will stick to external dependencies we've approved. (There are still hard checks later).

For other tasks it's running on guesses, and sometimes you can save help people €1000 a week by teaching them how to use the AI better.

Yes, that sounds like a reasonable use case. But very different to the 100k a month by meta and microsoft.

We have some data and hard numbers.

The question is does it scale properly? Answer: it depends.

What is the value of a project going from six months to six hours? You can look at saving the man hours but how long can that go?

What about a project that takes $100k in tokens and generates $200MM? The difficult part is determining how much was AI is the multiplier.

We are finding both to be true while quantifying requires new accounting.

Does six hours factor in maintenance? Also, I think it depends on the project. I was able to get a a number of quantum computing programs knocked up in braket with the help of various AI tools to run some simulations It would have taken me months on my own, but I got knocked out in a few prompts with free AI tools. It's a real eye opener.

However, that's very different from building and maintaining a product that will be used for live customers, where you have to consider security implications. This is what we're talking about here for Meta and Microsoft, and it's what I do for my actual coding job.

The daily work has been accelerated by AI about 5-26x between individuals and teams. The security implications are real and we are at the same time finding old gaps only discovered using the tooling.

There is a level of trust on the model, the harnesses, and the operators that is required to move quickly.

To build that trust we are building systems and processes and getting the mindset that trust is the speed limit.

This is so ridiculous lol. not paying 20 bucks for a sub has to be a handicap

Not for me. I end up using chatgpt about once a week for my actual work, and maybe once a day for non work related things. Certainly if you need the subscription it's worth $20/month or whatever for a personal sub, but I don't seem to need that at the moment. I'm more curious about the $10k or $100k/month being value for money with people using it to do their entire coding.

the $100 and $200 plans can basically give you enough usage you can never write code by hand again. If you cant save yourself 25% of your time at least isnt worth $200 then maybe you should rethink this business

Coding is much less than 25% of my time, and as i said above I want as much coding as I can get. I do very well thank you.

We have projects that would burn through a subscription in a matter of hours. The scale of some people are doing is impressive.

It's unclear how much OP's company was spending. The article gives a figure of $100k/month per employee.

But even $200/month is worth shaving if it doesn't generate value.

$100k/month per employee?

um.

It is called paying per token.

even at API rates, that's an absolute insane amount

Anyone can decide to put their spare cash or retirement funds into oil stocks, but I don't think that it's a recipe for getting rich. Renewable energy is rapidly replacing oil, and if the Strait of Hormuz opened and the Ukraine war ended, oil prices would sink and you would end up with huge losses.

Nobody really gets rich by playing the market. You get rich by working hard and/or starting your own business, and investing in a diversified portfolio of index funds and dividend paying blue chips.

> You get rich by working hard

Yeah, right

> You get rich by working hard

Come on now

Hard and smart, with good negotiating skills, in the right industry.

Let’s assume you work longer and harder and smarter than 99% of people in the USA at $450k a year.

Let’s also assume you save every penny, you don’t buy a single thing, from food to shelter.

Let’s assume that inflation is zero, and you work for 50 years at this level from 20 to 70.

You will have earned $22.5 million.

Not bad. Remember this is without spending a single cent.

Now how do you think you get to a net worth of $220m? Or $2200 million? By working ten or one hundred times harder

You don’t get rich from working hard. You get rich by being rich and letting it snowball. $40k a year in an 8% return for 50 years gets you about the same.

>You will have earned $22.5 million

Which is rich.

It is kind of on the low end of rich though.

Don't get me wrong. I would love to have that kind of money. I would retire immediately if that was in my bank account.

But we're comparing to people who have 100x that. Or nowadays apparently literal trillionaires.

Like there's rich and then there's rich

Keep in mind that the situation that the OP suggested is a sort of spherical cow. Substantially more people earn <40k per year than earn 450k per year. It is extremely unlikely to earn that kind of money over that kind of timeframe, nevermind being able to save every single cent of it

Not compared to trillionaires. How much harder do you have to work to become a trillionaire?

This is someone who managed to work in one to the highest paid jobs in the country for 50 years straight without spending a penny on food, education, travel, rent, medical bills, etc, and somehow avoid paying any taxes.

And there are people 1000 times richer.

The way to may 22m isn’t working this crazy way, it’s to invest in the stock market and try to have a larger slice of everyone else’s work.

are you sure you understand what rich is?

“Having money: Owning a large amount of cash, property, or valuable items (wealthy)”

the large in the "owning a large amount of..." is relative. you could think you're rich and i could think you're poor, or i could think you're rich and you could think you're poor.

Rich is just a word that is over-used to push political agendas. It is a relative term. I am rich compared to a huge segment of the world's population. I am poor compared to the top .1% of people.

'Tax the Rich' politicians will never give you a number when you ask just who they are talking about. It has to be fluid. Bernie Sanders used to rail on millionaires until he became one. Now he only says billionaires.

With regards to Senator Sanders, inflation is a thing. Also the massive increase in the cost of housing that increased the middle class net worth. He has been remarkably consistent about the segment of the population he wants to tax.

I'm also poor relative to the to 0.1% of people, but I still make a ridiculous amount of money compared to the minimum wage worker. If were better able to provide for everyone by taxing me more then I'd be all for it.

> Rich is just a word that is over-used to push political agendas. It is a relative term. I am rich compared to a huge segment of the world's population. I am poor compared to the top .1% of people.

i agree. "capitalist" is the word for what people really mean when they talk about "the rich"

That's a fun set of words to say instead of "just be born rich lmao" and yet they mean the exact same thing.

Let's not put the horse before the cart.

Exxon is up 40% year-to-date (YTD), BP is up 20% YTD while SNP500 is up 12% YTD.

So I'm not even sure the premise of this tangent is correct; oil stocks aren't shown to be the recipient of the current price spike.

>Exxon is up 40% year-to-date (YTD), BP is up 20% YTD while SNP500 is up 12% YTD.

But it's not sustainable in the medium term.

> But it's not sustainable in the medium term.

You think this is the only basis of investment in a large fund? You think they don't make plays which respect this fact, in their risk profile?

That's the point I was making.

Horses go before carts though, not after. Can't pull a cart from behind it.

But that is something the customer needs to consider. AWS doesnt offer that as standard if your data is in one zone, and during a war even multiple zones in the same region may not be sufficient.

Not if it's bulk, but fine if it is actually a direct outreach with a hand-crafted email. The latter is appreciated, and the former is hated. It's usually easy to spot the difference, and a quick look at the headers will usually confirm whether it's from a bulk mailing service.

Who says the readers are waiting while they sit? What's the rush out of there? Maybe this will make the concept easier for you to understand -

Restaurant: sit, eat, drink, chatter, coats, car, home.

Toilet: sit, splash, tinkle, read, wipe, wash, out.

Sure, but the actual splash act just takes a minute at most, and usually about 10 seconds for me. I don't understand how you can have time to read anything.

You're getting your book dirty for what is, as far as I can understand, no real reason. Why not read your book after washing your hands? (If you have a severe chair shortage, then sure, I can sort of understand: sitting to read is pleasant.)

It's worth clarifying, toilet-readers don't typically shit on their books.

The books contained shit long before entering the toilets.

This is a long article, and I haven't read beyond the first couple of pages. But the gist seems to be: shyster gets in bed with other shysters linked to Trump thinking it's a safe silver bullet, but ends up getting out-shystered by them and is now mad.

If anyone gets through to the end, let me know if I missed anything. I didn't feel it worth wasting two bottles of water getting it summarised by AI.

I find this cute and amusing, having had to write buttons in assembly language in the 80s, drawing the buttons into video memory using blits.

I did something similar in win16/32 at one point. Think we wanted something special with graphics on the button.

We basically had to recreate all of the actions of focus/unfocus/etc. Everything a normal button could do. Now that I have done more stuff I a know for a fact I made my life way harder than it should have been and could have subclassed. But it was a full button recreation. Styling messaging and all. You have to watch for things like what if someone clicks outside of your button but lets go inside the button. What does that mean? All sorts of weird side effects. What if your button has focus and someone starts typing? What if someone clicks outside of your button but holds the button down as they slide across your button? What does that look like?

Would I ever do it again. Probably not. Seriously use the built in ones.

Even reading through all the comments above yours I'm still in the dark. Everyone is talking about how they sabotaged their own business, and Carl Pei leaving, but none of that explains why specifically they aren't launching new products in Europe and the US (but still will in other parts of the world?) Something isn't quite adding up here.

Their nitch in the American market was selling high end devices for mid level prices, now that that is no longer the case, most people would rather get a Samsung for performance, a Pixel for it’s cameras or an iPhone for all of the above.

Yes, I got that from the comments. But it doesn't explain how they are continuing to sell in other markets. That's the confusing part.

Weirdly paywall is borken of safari….just a grey full screen modal overlay with nothing to click. But you can just use reading mode anyway.