The AI Credit Resale Economy | Hacker News Reader

The AI Credit Resale Economy

vectoral.com

334 pointsmlenhard130 comments

The original article linked in the opening has more context https://vectoral.com/blog/token-relay-market

People trading their unused credits feels more genuine, although still in violation of the agreements. The person who got into YC Startup School who was trying to resell the $2500 of credits was interesting. It wouldn’t be that hard for OpenAI to identify the IP addresses of the relays and start flagging accounts, tracing it back to the source. Risking burning your bridges with YC for a relatively small profit is a questionable decision.

The original article showed discounts ranging all the way up to 98%. At those levels it’s obviously not people reselling anything. It’s either sourced from stolen API keys, bought with stolen credit cards, or acquired through automated sign up of trial accounts if you’re actually getting the API you request.

I would expect a lot of them are reselling a different API. Sign up for Anthropic tokens and get Deepseek responses instead.

Another part of the discount is that Claude Max 20x is $200 but gives usage equivalent to thousands of dollars worth of API-based token spend.

But also, resellers only need to make an overall profit including kickbacks from the companies purchasing token history for distillation.

It's also unclear wherever the subscription price is the real cost, or the API.

I suspect it's closer to the sub price and anthropic is just milking their API users, but that's something you'd only know from the inside

Open weight SOTA models are not greatly cheaper than Anthropic and providers don't have to cover training capex.

> and providers don't have to cover training capex.

How so?

With an open-weights model, anyone with the hardware to run the model can act as a provider. The median provider pays nothing for the model, so they do not contribute to the cost of training it.

Ah! Makes sense. Thanks!

Providers like Fireworks offer inference, they're not training their own models. Yet training is the most expensive part, inference is easy profit.

And even the ones who trained it can’t afford to offer it at a price covering their training capex, since any good open-source model will see other providers selling inference without any training expenses to cover.

Didn’t see it, but it’s obvious in retrospect. Thanks!

Costs also have to include the amortized training costs.

But the API price is likely simply regular supply and demand, charging as much as the market will pay. Corporations are dropping insane amounts because it's still peanuts for many industries. Software has just been ridiculously cheap before AI. So high prices are still low for companies if it eases some bottlenecks.

The costs only have to include amortized training costs if you are trying to be profitable overall. Having positive unit economics and VC subsidized fixed costs is pretty standard.

What happens when the VCs decide to stop dumping more money onto the fire?

Positive unit economics means that inference as a business continues regardless. The VC's no longer dumping money in means no more training new models.

Not if there is competition who does train newer and better models.

By lighting VC (public soon) money on fire...

this would never work if the core business model requires your flagship product to be best-in-class.

So then the entire industry stagnates and most of the companies go bankrupt because they are all selling hype about what models "will" do in the future, not what they do not, and what they do WELL now is very limited.

Generally speaking, B2B prices are rarely supply-and-demand priced in the usual sense.

YC has advised startups in the past that it's easier to sell a single $100k customer than 100 $1k customers.

It would also be relatively surprising to learn that i.e. the Chinese providers are OOMs better at inference than OAI/Anthropic (like their prices would imply if they were in a perfectly competitive market).

Chinese prices aren't really OOM cheaper. Deepseek recently did a big price hike too.

Fair, I hadn't looked recently. It looks like currently kimi is either 1/2 or 1/4 Ant pricing depending on whether you think Opus 5 is usable or not. (Deepseek is still an OOM though)

The one thing I trust is that Chinese prices aren't overinflated. They're almost certainly closer to the actual cost of inference + training amortization than what Western labs are offering.

DeepSeek's price hike is mostly driven by increased demand, for example. It's not about losses so much as they don't have enough infrastructure and need to reduce demand somehow.

Why do you have this trust? Are they not profit oriented? Or you suspect that Xi's policy push is to undercut American AI?

Are you familiar with Chinas version of capitalism? It is markedly different than “the” western model

I am not, but would be interested to hear. Any articles?

"Overcapacity and low profitability" [1] is how I understand the difference, i.e. different competitive ecosystem from a different policy and intervention style.

https://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/IE-PROD/PDFVIEWER.calias?pdf...

There's no English-language article that can fully capture the system because it's a moving target to begin with, and anything official is vague on purpose (to be fair, much of the legislation in the US is too, except the Constitutional backstop and co-equal judiciary does not exist in China). The official messaging is always targeted and curated with a specific audience in mind and how much truth is contained within varies. The best way to describe it without turning it into an essay is that it's "aspirationally market-driven" system that is not defined by a fixed and consistent ideology but rather the constraints of the capacity of the administrative state to control the parts of the economy that is legible to the state. It's not a free market except for the black market, but the black market is frankly huge if nothing else to compensate for the state asserting not just a monopoly on the use of violence but also the monopolistic determinator of morality, which the people are less willing to buy into, but that disconnection itself creates an opportunity for arbitrage. That is the relationship dynamic that have retained some degree of stability, but everything else is effectively subject to change on a dime without notice. The party will never accept openly that it is capitalistic and in some sense that's not even a lie, but what the state is able to impose and what the people actually do are very different things. As the state excludes 99% of the population writ large from politics, full stop (you are either born into it, or you're not eligible to participate, with some narrow exceptions that occasionally pop up), there's not much of a ground-level appetite for dogma and doctrines. Instead you end up with a pragmatic, descriptive market that exists differently within and without, and just like the socialism label being basically symbolic, same goes for capitalism.

People have been talking about late capitalism in the west for a century. The Chinese state would argue that we cannot be in late capitalism because we're actually in the first stage of socialism, and the people would wonder how we got to late capitalism when they never got to experience early or middle capitalism. But really the only thing we know that definitively does not work is implenting Marxism and Marxism-Leninism and Maoism and its offshoots as doctrine. Whether that means that the default is a prescriptive version of capitalism is, well, open to debate, and probably too simplistic.

There is no "Chinese capitalism" or "Western capitalism" - capitalism is applied thermodynamics, once you remove the limiting factors (both material and political), it's the same everywhere.

Like the 10th Rule of Acquisition says, greed is eternal. Structures and behaviors that flow down from this tend to be the same everywhere.

Once you remove the limiting factors, which is what makes the capitalism be "chinese" or "western".

The problem with this reading is that Western capitalism has been effectively removing the thermodynamics analogy through monopolism, conglomeration, regulatory capture, etc.

I don't think DeepSeek's price increase has to do with increased demand, but rather increased investment. I think they increased their capacity and want to make the money back.

My pet theory is that the PRC is heavily subsidizing the hosted inferencing costs in order to capture valuable training data, token usage patterns and the occasional leak of valuable data.

Given their past history and current geopolitics, I'd be willing to bet this is more likely than not.

“It's also unclear wherever the subscription price is the real cost, or the API.”

There is no “real cost” other than the cost actually charged.

> It's also unclear wherever the subscription price is the real cost, or the API.

Define cost: Is it only the inference cost to the provider, or do you also consider training costs as well?

If it's the latter, how would you estimate the number of total tokens that will be sold for the current model (so that we can calculate marginal cost)?

> Another part of the discount is that Claude Max 20x is $200 but gives usage equivalent to thousands of dollars worth of API-based token spend.

this is all it is. it's not complicated.

With Claude Max, you have restricted token consumption per timespan (rolling time window measures token consumption in last 5 hrs, will suspend your account if you are above usage). API doesn't have that limitation unless you run out of credit.

Except for the cases of credit card fraud, I don't see what's morally wrong with it, for it to be called "fraud".

It's just reselling.

Maybe people are starting to copy Anthropic's rhetoric of "everything that inconveniences me is fraud (e.g. distillation). Everything that benefits me is legit."

Lying to someone to deceive them into providing you with an economic benefit that they otherwise wouldn’t is textbook fraud.

> Except for the cases of credit card fraud, I don't see what's morally wrong with it, for it to be called "fraud".

Signing up to the startup credit programs with fake startups is fraud.

In general, performing a misrepresentation to deceive another party for financial gain is fraud. So there are plenty of ways to define this as fraud

If you sign a contract on paper, I 100% agree. It's fraud.

Signing up for it on a website and checking a box that says "I agree to the terms of service", I don't think carries the same weight. But maybe that's just me.

Some sellers sell the token twice. Once to the buyer and once more as training data to labs building models.

The comments here are baffling. Is nobody seeing the easy opportunity for gathering amazing high-quality training data by inserting yourself as a MITM? If I were a competing lab, criminal, or opportunist I'd lie/cheat/steal/simply pay the difference to get the chance to listen into real life scenarios of usage of modern models in a high-impact business.

Seems a huge part of the story completely absent to me.

This is what every chinese "credit reseller" is doing, selling all the prompts and responses to labs in addition to selling quanted kimi/ds/etc as opus/fable

Arena.AI does this as well - they may appear as a leaderboard but what keeps business booming is their sale of traces to chinese labs

What's the source of information?

There's a strong theory with some rumors to support it that some of the largest customers of these services are labs doing distillation. The resellers are basically crowdsourcing the farming of accounts for them to use.

Doing MITM on other people's sessions isn't as interesting as simply sending your own synthetic requests to the models at a 97% discount. They manufacturer the questions and responses they want to train on.

Isn’t that essentially OpenRouter and Cursor play.

They are just offering API key swaps, not switching endpoints. No scope for mitm there. I'm sure users would only trust API key swaps, if only to be sure what models are actually being served

Distillation is one of the most unique and interesting aspects of this.

But otherwise, if a company gives something valuable for creating an account on their platform, expect that people will automate the creation of millions of accounts. If employees of B2B partners get benefits, they will resell them. Accounts will be hacked and resold. The same basic abuse patterns are decades old for online delivery services, loyalty accounts for airline and hotels, etc. There are entire industries dedicated to those spaces as well: large organizations with physical offices, hundreds of employees, HR departments, etc. dedicated to reselling digital benefits on grey markets.

Some companies are tolerant of allowing this to happen. The pessimistic view is that even illegitimate traffic contributes to the KPIs that your investors care about. The slightly less pessimistic view is that fraud prevention will always have trade-offs and false positives, and sometimes the savings of preventing fraud are genuinely outweighed by the false positives. Or maybe it's just Hanlon's razor and they truly never saw it coming.

Wait a sec, I have to trust a third party with basically no reputation, did I get it right?

It's basically asking for being hacked and/or sending you private data to random email addresses! Neither at a 99% discount I'd do it.

I understand if someone, for any reason, cannot access a specific model ... But nowadays, there are so many alternatives that even this doesn't make sense any more.

I expect most of the use to be for bulk data processing or desperate founders who don't care, not for agentic coding use at promising startups.

If your startup needs to run a million records of something, especially public data, through an LLM to extract the data you need, using bootleg tokens to shrink the bill starts feeling tempting.

If you're concerned about the data leaking, the biggest risk is that the API backends are quietly routing your requests to a cheaper model. You might be trying to buy Opus tokens but get Deepseek Flash responses.

> to run a million records of something, especially public data, through an LLM to extract the data you need

Maybe this make sense, but anyway I have to pay a lot of attention at the output I get. Eg: who guarantees there is no prompt/sql injection? Especially if I have to load the output in some internal system.

Bulk data processing typically has structured JSON output.

I mean someone could try to sneak prompt injection into a text field, but the people buying black market resale tokens from third parties aren’t thinking about anything other than getting cheap output.

I mean reselling items bought with stolen credit cards have been a thing for at least 20 years

I don't risk being hacked if I buy some stuff on vinted.

reselling items bought with stolen credit cards have been a thing for at least 80 years

FTFY.

I'd rather trust a third party with no reputation than a well known Misanthropic company led by a man whose wife was asking Epstein for investment. They are even less trustworthy then ClosedAI.

It's really common in China where OpenAI and Anthropic models are firewalled. There was a joke that Chinese people didn't realize how cheap DeepSeek was, because they already were using resold ChatGPT/Opus tokens at that price.

Here is a more detailed article about how it works:

https://www.chinatalk.media/p/how-to-buy-cheap-claude-tokens...

Oh that's interesting, looks like those proxies are probably also selling the data to Chinese AI companies for training.

So what? The world is more trustworthy than you can imagine. I have bought over 30 GPUs over the internet, sight unseen. From around the world and every single one has arrived good. I have also gotten over 20 from marketplace and the same. Use your common sense, from conversation and everything else, you can often separate the scammers from real folks.

It's not like buying random stuff that you can inspect!

You have no way to verify that your data is not sold to someone else, send to the provider you think, or the response is genuine and not full of prompt injections or other stuff!

The article indicates that the provided API key is probably a proxy to the actual so the third party is also recording all prompts made using the proxy key.

This research is way toooo shallow. He really should go check out linux.do or nodeseek.com — token resale economy there is truly breathtaking.

Edit: https://vectoral.com/blog/token-relay-market mentioned in comment.

This was specifically meant to be about the ai credit resellers, not the relays themselves. I put together another piece here: https://vectoral.com/blog/token-relay-market that tackles that side of the market.

Men breaching Sauron's ToS by reselling their nine rings of power, and they think they are beating the system.

that one platform is using a flipped chroma logo - chroma has nothing to do with this racket (source : i’m chroma’s ceo)

The reseller could use an intermediate proxy and modify the traffic like in [1], to get control of the client machine - depending on the harness permissions.

TLS terminates at the proxy (say, https://reselltokens.ai), end to end integrity is not enforced. LLM traffic contains tool calls like "bash ...", which are executed on the client machine, they can be manipulated. Secret exfil is also possible.

[1] https://arxiv.org/html/2604.08407v1

You can place your own CLIProxyAPI instance in front of the reseller proxy and block prompts/responses that look harmful.

There are community plugins like this: https://github.com/rheodev/cpa-plugin-privacyfilter

I haven't tried the plugin system myself yet.

I swear every time I think I have a unique tweak for an OSS tool, it turns out someone else did it. I forked CLIProxyAPI myself to add something similar, though my implementation is closer to a provider-egress DLP layer and it's intended for API keys and the like, not PII. It uses gitleaks but also supports reversible redaction so a secret that's flagged can be replaced with a placeholder before CLIProxyAPI sends the request to the provider and then any instances of that placeholder can be rehydrated in the response to the caller.

Since it modifies logic across the full request/response lifecycle, I unfortunately couldn't implement it cleanly with the existing plugin API.

Nice, he can help fix my Linux Bluetooth audio issues.

they have no reason to do that to harm their reputation if their goal is profit, in which in this case it is.

sure, but malicious actors could act as resellers and exploit the situation.

How can you verify, that the model that you are buying is the one that you are actually getting?

You basically can't. This episode from Syntax[0] shows one provider that he tried to go through to showcase this, and he was fairly certain it wasn't Claude, but of course that was all speculation on his part.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09UELaUhPEw

Most of these are your standard botnet rings. Either accounts directly are taken over, and the attacker adds 2FA or carding rings take stolen #s and attempt to add credits.

It is...incredible how many there are. Stripe does far too little in my opinion to help prevent issues like this, even though they have the business intelligence and enough data to do so.

I think Stripe does enough already. Fraud detection is a crapshoot regardless; I've had legitimate transactions rejected at random without explanation.

So are they stealing from their employers or is something else going on?

Stolen credit cards

Demo accounts

Free trials

Unlimited chat relays (eg chatgpt chat)

Leaked company credentials

Etc

And I’m pretty sure that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

nope - a.i companies to promote their platforms offer 'a.i' credits to startups usually worth 10ks, 100ks worth of credits in $ terms.

so to a startup - you can trade your credits - then get actual cash.

just like you would if trading debt etc.

What is the logic behind selling at such a steep discount? Lack of buyers or trust? Seems insane to sell tham at -50% or more, especially since you can use them yourself (if you're a startup)

Risk-reward calculus. A buyer may not take the risk or hassle of going underground only for a small upside. Basically it is not as tempting at 90% of list price, but it is at 10% .

A common refrain is that oh there are such great margins on tokens that none of this matters… I wonder how long until that notion will be disavowed? The scale of the tokensnaffling is massive, not just from resale, but also people using multiple subscriptions. The amount of subsidization is only growing, every week it seems like OpenAI and Anthropic are doing “resets” which allow a single $200 subscription to incur $20k+ of usage (if billed at API rates). At some point we must all surely accept that the economics of this do not work.

Or API rates are their way of doing price discrimination and it's all profitable. Make sure Enterprises(tm) pay the Enterprise(tm) rate, but mop up the rest of the demand too at lower price points. This has been part of the software playbook for decades.

I wonder if any of these providers have accounts that are in the cyber verification program. I got approved into it a week or two ago and there was no actual verification and only automated review. (Claude has never asked me for identity verification or even a phone number, and the email address of the account I use is a disposable relay address... I do not understand how they trust me so much, maybe it's the age of my account and the fact that I'm paying $200 a month ??)

In my project, I pay a general price for using agent quota. For me, it's not about saving money but about being sure that I have full control over the usage limits. My product provides a pool that depends on the plan (100 or 500 requests per paying account per month), and when these credits are used, I offer a backup option to bring your own AI key to use. And last but not least, I want to be sure that users' data won't be used to train models.

There's a lot of assertion here and the other article that this fraud and abuse but is there any evidence of that?

A simpler explanation is that that this is just a resale market.

From talking with some of the companies experiencing this, I can confirm that a portion of it is actual credit card fraud. Tokens have become a pseudo-currency, making them a prime target for abuse.

Some of the abuse is more benign, but there is also real fraud through chargebacks, account takeovers, and stolen credit cards.

When you say a portion is that more like 1%, 5%, 20%, 50%, or 90%?

I don't have exact numbers here, and it varies by company, but a rough guess is around 10-20%. This might be a bit biased because the companies willing to talk to me are probably seeing the worst of it.

Also, outside the labs, most of the companies I've talked with have shut off free tiers and free credits entirely because the abuse is so bad.

Any situation where you can extract a benefit from a stolen credit card and then sell that benefit before the chargeback renders it moot will have some fraud-based usage.

Funniest thing is I am fairly sure grey beards would be familiar with this happening during the cloud compute days, and probably during the every other days. Everyone thinks they are different when it is actually probably a better bet to be like how are we not.

"My rough estimate is that, across the sites, forums, and resellers I looked at, there are probably tens of millions of these credits being offered." Yeah very useful statemenet it's not like everyone spends hundreds of millions of tokens per day on the 100 or 200$ plan

This was poorly worded on my part; I meant in terms of dollars, not tokens.

I also saw some posts on linkedin of people willing to pay to use unused quota resets.

Not sure is this what they meant by the great “ai wealth redistribution”.

With Grok being half-priced for indian residents, I would not be shocked to see a parallel indian account resell economy coming.

Yunwu.ai was a nice way to get ultra-cheap tokens that someone will probably spy on you with, but they no longer offer US models.

At first I thought it was so people could steal the traces, but now I wonder if this isn't just laundering startup credits for dollars.

There are like thousands sites with similar features all using newapi core.

You can easily find them in Chinese tech forum linux.do

yep, with projects like open api/newapi it takes maybe 10 min to pin up and openAi compatible poxy gateway. The cheap prices look tempting until the relay operator logs all your prompts or the upstream account gets banned mid-request.

They were never offering actual US models. We tested them extensively and it was clear whatever they were passing as Anthropic were simply mediocre distillations based on Kimi.

Haha! Incredible. What a scam! Too good to be true, I suppose. I never used it for anything meaningful because everything meaningful is also tragically sensitive so I suppose I didn't notice.

> I checked where you’d expect to find underground marketplaces. Telegram had a few channels, with one being relatively active.

It's not exactly "underground" if they clearly advertising public channels out in the open.

For anyone looking to cash out unused AI credits, I'd pay 30% for Azure, 40% for GCP, 50% for OpenAI, and 65% for AWS/Anthropic.

Cool to see my thesis validated.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48664223

Just fyi:

Searching for "cheap AI credits" on Google returns none of these sites, or any in fact... on duckduckgo however, you get a lot of results.

Hey Claude, scan these marketplaces for arbitrage opportunities.

The thing will eat itself unless the AI companies find a way to make money directly from it.

This would be a fantastic method of getting data for distillation, would be surprised if that's not why the tokens are so cheap

What does the demand side look like? I understand why people have these tokens they want to sell, who wants to buy them?

Chinese. There are large number of Chinese people who are dependent on the Western model because they're still ahead of the game. But they're continuously getting banned and getting super frustrated.

Especially for Claude because Anthropic is very good at identifying mainland Chinese and getting them banned in hours. There are many of them who are willing to pay more than the original rate for a stable experience.

It's very hard for them because they'll need a legit phone number and bank cards that are not issued in China, and a clean enough IP, etc. and those better match together to make sense. (Back in the day, ChatGPT required resident IPs, which made it worse, but they worry about growth more now). Obviously, they have to use a VPN to access the real Internet, and most of the IPs they can find are shared with bots and abusers.

What does it mean for a phone number, bank card, and IP to "match together to make sense"?

Like using a British SIM card like Giffgaff, a Singaporean bank card, and an American IP, speaking simplified Chinese, working in the Chinese timezone, which is often the obvious combination of Chinese users. Or using a Nigerian/Turkish App Store/Play Store, also very common.

These combinations are questionable and very easy to filter, probably with Luna/Haiku tier of models that are able to tell things might get fishy here, and it would likely escalate to heavier checks and trigger KYC or straight banning.

Those are only my guess and probably aren't how the system works, but I think these rules are fairly easy to come up with for developers who have any idea of anti-abuse. I've seen too many Chinese posts mourning their accounts and communicating that their setups there would be similar mechanisms, I would say.

In previous months, there was news that Claude Code uploading a special signal for the Chinese timezone is pretty evident. I probably got away from having serious insomnia, using PST on my computers, and exclusively speaking English with those models lol.

man seems like this entire thread invited a bunch of ads for exactly the thing talked about in the article

can't they detect if someone is reselling their tokens like this ? doesn't seem too hard

What if the model providers themselves don't want to? What if this itself is the way to bypass sanctions? What recent open models like deepseek v4 have now shown is that inference is actually much cheaper than what most people think.

Cyberpunk dystopia vibes

> Cyberpunk dystopia vibes

right. Abstractions taken to the max. When tech solves problems that only 0.001% care about. NFT smelt similar.

It's fun. This new market could become a new source of funding to support the AI bubble.

When "token futures contracts", start selling. Then the bubble is about to burst.

CME is launching GPU compute futures in October: https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/energy/power/compute-future...

> CREDITS FROM YC STARTUP SCHOOL

Join YC, get free shit from the network, profit. Nice.

> CREDITS FROM YC STARTUP SCHOOL

Is that still a thing? I’ve thought they’ve discontinued the deals section. (There are a lot of other ways to get a startup grant, of course.)

What will you pitch to YC to get accepted?

"Cheap tokens marketplace" ... like openrouter, but, 80% cheaper .. lol

As a bonus, you’ve got a story for the “tell me about a time you hacked a non computer system” question on the YC application

Reselling something one gets for free doesn't sound like a very clever hack.

So let's see, we have the following factors in play:

1) Capitalism - Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes (Keynesian Economics), etc., etc. in most places in the world...

2) Huge validated existing international market...

3) Multi-jurisdictional World... laws/statutory codes applicable to businesses in specific circumstances in one place may not be applicable to businesses in specific circumstances in another...

4) AI Tokens are a commodity; i.e., there is no chokepoint or monopoly controlled by one AI company in one jurisdiction, i.e., if one AI company makes rules unacceptable to a token consumer, that consumer can simply switch providers to another provider in another jurisdiction somewhere else in the world.

5) Tokens can be bought, sold, and resold at profit just like any other good or service.

6) Tokens can be bought from anywhere in the world and sold to anywhere in the world. Easily.

7) Tokens are a digital good, easy to scale, and do not require supply chains, lead times, labor, manufacturing, warehousing, shipping, going through geographic chokepoints, customs, etc., etc. -- all of the things that manufactured goods do.

8) Many people around the world want to make money or make more money... i.e., "economic incentive" (aka Capitalism's "profit motive")...

Well... add all of those together and what do you get?

You get buy/sell/trade forums/auctions/individuals/brokers/businesspeople -- around that market...

Just like you get those same things around every other market.

In this large multi-jurisdictional world, if one government makes all of that illegal in their country, then another government is going to be happily collecting all of the taxes from making all of that legal, in theirs!

If a given government makes trade illegal -- then they correspondingly lose the tax revenue...

Taxes and trade are intricately, intricately intertwined...

Could this business model be used for money laundering or other illegal activities?

Yes -- but any other business model could as well!

And, on the flip side, this business model could be accomplished legally/lawfully/morally/ethically -- just like any other business where there is an actual underlying value being exchanged.

Because, AI Tokens, if legally/lawfully/morally/ethically traded, do have underlying value...

In conclusion, at this point in time, I am neither for this business model nor against it...

But I think it'll be highly interesting to watch this space for the next couple of years, to see what happens, to see who does what, to see what plays out on the legal front, on the government front (foreign + domestic), on the media front, and on the technology front surrounding it...

We built this already at surplusintelligence.ai

This is freaking so cool.

These are amateurs compared to what's happening in China.

Explain please?

They built this wall …

https://www.chinatalk.media/p/how-to-buy-cheap-claude-tokens...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com