Hacker News Reader

Comment by 0x_rs | Hacker News Reader

If true, very strange change when Codex (at both 20 & 100) is a much, much better deal for a model much better at most coding tasks, with way more usage even with the /fast mode enabled. Is losing most non-enterprise customers the right move for them?

View on HN

Equally, will offering a presumably unprofitably large quota of Codex tokens at $20 to retain non-enterprise customers turn out to be the right move for OpenAI?

Would not be surprised to see OpenAI follow suit.

Or perhaps OpenAI's LLMs are just so more compute efficient that they can actually offer that sustainably...

Feels to me it's a battle between who has the most compute. OpenAI does not seem to be struggling with their x2 usage on the new 100 Plan, which is very close to unlimited usage with the best performing model on the highest reasoning setting. Not mentioning the resets every 1 million customers, or the other generous usage multipliers last months. Meanwhile Anthropic seems to be desperately trying to cut down on inference with their changes to reasoning effort and more lately, so they might be focusing on what they consider to be more valuable customers for their long-term strategy. The 20 plan with Opus had gotten so bad on CC they might've just pulled the plug to stop people from complaining about usage limits. If OpenAI can burn money longer and capture the market from the bottom, I think they'd win in the long run.

What does " Not mentioning the resets every 1 million customers" mean?

>To celebrate 3 million weekly codex users, we are resetting usage limits.

>We will do this every million users up to 10 million.

>Happy building!

https://x.com/sama/status/2041658719839383945

Last reset today, after the 4 million users milestone.

Seems we were both right: https://x.com/thsottiaux/status/2046740759056162816

"Codex will continue to be available both in the FREE and PLUS ($20) plans. We have the compute and efficient models to support it."

Both the compute, and the efficient models.

Because I believe things coming out of Altman's organization at face value. /s

I mean I hope it's correct, but given his history I'm not betting on it.

> much better deal for a model much better at most coding tasks

The first assertion is also subject to change (and likely, if this works for A\). The second assertion is very much subjective. I haven't found that to be the case, but everyones needs, use cases, and workflows are different, so glad that it's working that way for you.

That's exactly what I fear- that Mythos/Glasswing has made anthropic confident that they can survive by only serving that type of customer. Would be sad to see.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com