←back to thread

Google AI Ultra

(blog.google)
320 points mfiguiere | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
charles_f ◴[] No.44045393[source]
This is the kind of pricing that I expect most AI companies are gonna try to push for, and it might get even more expensive with time. When you see the delta between what's currently being burnt by OpenAI and what they bring home, the sweet point is going to be hard to find.

Whether you find that you get $250 worth out of that subscription is going to be the big question

replies(5): >>44045528 #>>44045820 #>>44045959 #>>44046010 #>>44058223 #
Ancapistani ◴[] No.44045528[source]
I agree, and the problem is that "value" != "utilization".

It costs the provider the same whether the user is asking for advice on changing a recipe or building a comprehensive project plan for a major software product - but the latter provides much more value than the former.

How can you extract an optimal price from the high-value use cases without making it prohibitively expensive for the low-value ones?

Worse, the "low-value" use cases likely influence public perception a great deal. If you drive the general public off your platform in an attempt to extract value from the professionals, your platform may never grow to the point that the professionals hear about it in the first place.

replies(6): >>44045906 #>>44045964 #>>44046505 #>>44047071 #>>44050638 #>>44052117 #
jsheard ◴[] No.44045964[source]
I wonder who will be the first to bite the bullet and try charging different rates for LLM inference depending on whether it's for commercial purposes. Enforcement would be a nightmare but they'd probably try to throw AI at that as well, successfully or not.
replies(3): >>44046230 #>>44047061 #>>44048952 #
1. chw9e ◴[] No.44047061[source]
probably the idea behind the coding tools eventually. cursor charges a 20% margin on every token for their max models but people still use them