Hacker News Reader

Comment by pianopatrick | Hacker News Reader

do you have any data you can share on how many input and output tokens were used in that whole process to fix that bug?

  ~ % uvx agentsview session usage be8850a7-6119-46a0-b5d6-79c7fff5ae2b
  Session:       be8850a7-6119-46a0-b5d6-79c7fff5ae2b
  Agent:         claude
  Output:        68606
  Peak ctx:      113178
  Cost:          ~$12.11 (claude-fable-5, claude-opus-4-8)

Was the fix worth $12 to you?

I'd have been pretty annoyed if I'd been paying full price, hadn't paid attention and that one prompt (screenshot plus a line of text) had cost me $12!

On the discounted subscription I can tolerate it, it took a small bite out of my daily allowance but not enough that I regret anything.

As an LLM researcher I have no regrets at all because watching it work around the environmental restrictions was fascinating.

Reading your description of what it did, $12 seems pretty inexpensive. That's a lot of work!

If you knew up front it was a $12 fix, do you think you would have decided to just live with the scroll bar? Would have tried to fix it yourself? Do you think you would have been able to easily find and fix the problem?

If I wasn't in learning-about-the-new-model mode and knew in advance that it was going to cost me $12 in actual money then yes, I would have taken a stab at figuring it out myself.

Thanks for the response. That is too expensive for me right now but I appreciate you sharing.

I hope long term people will figure out how to make such fixes cheaper.

I didn't have to pay $12 myself - I'm paying $100/month for a subscription which gives me more like ~$1,000/month of credits, depending on how well I space them out.

This is also a very real outlier. I've been doing little CSS fixes with coding agents for over a year now and most of them finish in seconds and cost in the order of single digit cents.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com