Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | alexriddle's commentslogin

Anything over 150 seats means you need to pay at token rates plus the $20/user. My day job is operational (no coding at all) and I'm spending ~$300 a month on a few chats with Claude/Cowork a day over the course of a month.

$300 is my employer's monthly cap on Claude Enterprise. It lasts me at most a week of moderate use. I would much rather get Codex Pro and Claude Pro or Max, which would cost ≤ $200. For $300, one could also add Gemini Ultra to the mix so I could have all three review each other's code, etc.

Claude can be very good but enterprise pricing doesn't make sense to me.


The $200 plan you're talking about is subsidized by Anthropic. They cannot afford to keep offering that to everyone indefinitely. Absolute best case scenario for current users is that they can continue to subsidize it as way to sell enterprise plans, but there's no way that they can keep offering it to everyone at those prices.

They can if it is a way to get individuals hooked on it to then introduce it at their workplaces, who pay enterprise rates.

Right, they can do it to sell enterprise plans, but they can't offer said plans to those enterprise customers indefinitely. So if your employer wants to spend $200/month on tokens, you're going to get however many tokens $200 buys you each month, not the order of magnitude more you can get with a consumer subscription.

That’s what I’m saying. Enterprise customers don’t use the subscription plan

Except that they do, we do.

A lot of startups pile up enormous amount of accounts, companies don't need the Enterprise Anthropic solution, they can just subscribe to many accounts and have their own staff KYC for each (1 codex, 1 claude, 1 google and so-on).


I imagine it’s also really trivial to build some kind of local “enterprise” proxy that gives you the same visibility in usage as the anthropic dashboard would give you. I use one for aggregating all my subs.

We definitely pay enterprise api costs. Only way to get google vertex integration, and Enterprise is too sensitive to let all of their data leave their moat.

That will be clamped down on by Anthropic (and other providers) for the same reason they don't offer those plans to enterprise customers already.

Yes, but why not do that while it's available?

Startups do but do you know large enterprises that do?

> They cannot afford to keep offering that to everyone indefinitely.

Common talking point. There's enough evidence for the counter argument that this is essentially misinformation. I have no idea why it's so often repeated with confidence.


> There's enough evidence for the counter argument that this is essentially misinformation.

> No evidence is shared

Help an open-minded critic out.


Brand new industry, massive capital, dropping inference costs, increasing availability of compute, cost centers / subsidized subscriptions are common in SaaS, heavy competition, no public information on actual utilization rates.

How much is Waymo burning a year? 3B on 300M ARR? Anthropic is what 5B on 20B ARR? Waymo is 3x older. Why don't we hear such confident statements about how subsidized their rides are?

It's one thing to speculate it's another to parade it as fact. Even if the S1 reveals an unprofitable business today, you can still only claim it's unlikely.


> How much is Waymo burning a year? 3B on 300M ARR? Anthropic is what 5B on 20B ARR? Waymo is 3x older. Why don't we hear such confident statements about how subsidized their rides are?

We do. We hear it less often because no-one is talking about how Waymo changes how we all need to work or whatever, that's all.


Do people commonly argue Waymo isn't subsidizing rates?

Also, we do have some evidence for my position:

- We know that the consumer Claude plans provide _way_ more tokens than you could get if you were paying API prices. This is a huge part of why Anthropic's limits on other harnesses for subscription customers is such a big deal. So either their profit margin on API tokens is absurdly high, most consumer subscribers don't come anywhere near their rate limits, or they're losing money on the consumer subscriptions. - It appears that complains about people running into rate limits are common, which suggests the "consumers usually don't use much of their subscription" explanation is incorrect. - We also know that Anthropic has just become profitable, almost certainly driven mostly by enterprise customers. This rules out the "they make a very high profit margin on the API" explanation, since if that was the case they'd likely have been profitable much earlier.

Taken together, I think the case that their consumer subscriptions lose them money on net is pretty strong, even though their enterprise subscriptions (and API pricing) does make them a profit.


> I think the case that their consumer subscriptions lose them money on net is pretty strong, even though their enterprise subscriptions (and API pricing) does make them a profit.

To be clear I'm not arguing against this position, just questioning the confidence with which people claim that the current consumer subs are not a sustainable offering and a merely temporary.


Burning money is never sustainable. All you're actually saying is nobody can predict how long this particular bonfire will burn.

Again this is nonsense for the reasons I've already given. The costs aren't fixed.

Whether sustainability is achieved by raising prices or hoping that costs can be brought down, you have to acknowledge that the status quo is unsustainable. If it were sustainable nether change would be necessary.

That’s a shocking number. I don’t know how much my employer is billed, but based on the numbers reported by Claude code in its optional status bar, I’m often exceeding $300 in a day across sessions, when working on meatier tickets.

We deployed OpenWebUI with the Claude API the other day for employees. Someone sent ten messages (which appeared to just be reasonable day-to-day work), and we paid $200 for it. There were 44M input tokens, 100k output tokens, no cache hits at all. OpenWebUI reports 3M tokens used, Claude reports 44M, and I have no idea where the rest of the tokens went. This was all on a brand new API key, installed directly to the service, too.

With this kind of opaque billing, how can I reasonably deploy any AI?


No cache hits seems ominous, could this be an OpenWebUI issue? It also seems ominous that Anthropic models are basically nowhere on the OpenWebUI leaderboards.

I'm only doing a cursory search, but it seems OpenWebUI doesn't support Anthropic caching, and they don't intend to? Other providers handle caching automatically (apparently?) but caching has to be specifically managed by the client with Anthropic. If that's correct that OpenWebUI doesn't support it, it would really send your costs spiralling, because you're being billed for all the tokens in the entire multi-turn conversation on every turn:

https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/issues/4887

I have no experience with OpenWebUI though (honestly, first time I've heard of it). Just trying to be helpful. If I'm completely incorrect then apologies in advance for sending you down the wrong path.


Really? Huh, I've never heard of Anthropic caching needing to be specifically enabled. I'll look into that, thank you! Sounds like the culprit.

I hope your company is keeping the input/response pair in case they need to break free at some point.

Wouldn’t people mostly just want any artifacts?

Like Slack history, LLM history can be used to build searchable knowledge base. Questions are often more valuable than answers.

Hospital admissions are reliable indicators for violent crime and stabbings in particular - if you get injured you're going to need a doctor and they will record it - and these are going down [1]. There is little to suggest any kind of epidemic or increase in violent crime is going on and the stats on this seem to play out.

What is more of an issue is more antisocial crime such as street robbery or shoplifting. These crimes are much more likely to be snatch and grab, with no violence involved. They still have an impact on the victims but they're not making the city significantly more violent.

[1] https://www.london.gov.uk/london-records-fewest-homicides-ye...


Lumibricks is fantastic, built in lighting (or rather you build it in as part of the model) and as someone who has always turned their nose up at off brand Lego, the parts are definitely 99% of the way there. Instructions the same quality, if not better, than Lego as well - all for about the third of the price.

Minifigs are terrible but I have hundreds of those spare anyway!


The gap is reducing significantly - I have collected and built Lego for a long time and had this opinion but have recently discovered Lumibricks (formerly Funwhole) - excellent designs, and around 1/2 the price of Lego (but they all include lighting elements) and having put them together I can say they feel exactly like Lego. I believe there are other brands of similar quality.


Usually it would be either the full day (ceremony, meal and ‘evening party’ which we commonly call the reception) or just the reception. No one is being asked to skip the middle part of the event.

Less than 20% of weddings are religious (and a smaller subset of this will be in churches), and I don’t really hear of anyone just turning up at the ceremony of someone they don’t know.


> Less than 20% of weddings are religious (and a smaller subset of this will be in churches)

That's a likely a fair underestimate because many religious marriages aren't legally valid because of various requirements that the Church of England doesn't have to follow as the state church. In Catholic churches for e.g. they need to register the building, then either appoint the priest as an authorised person or get a registrar to come to every ceremony as in a civil wedding. They do usually do this but most non-Christian religions don't bother with this at all and so the couple end up just having a civil ceremony first and the religious one after.


Weirdly on Reddit I keep getting the doordash and ubereats communities pushed at me - there is a very strong view amongst people using these apps that anyone who says they will "give a cash tip" will not actually do it, so it's probably not as beneficial as you might think.

The tips on the apps nominally do go entirely to the driver.


All that this does is ensure you don't get stacked with another order ahead of you (so the delivery is direct from the restaurant to the person who ordered) in theory.

It doesn't help with situations where drivers are multi-apping (accepting orders across multiple apps and juggling them). The drivers don't even know you have priority.

edit: and in the US where you can definitely see the tip up front, you will almost always find that the order will get picked up quicker if you increase the tip by the equivalent of the priority fee. But you may well get stuck with a delivery before yours.


Other than Amex for airline points I don’t spend a penny on banking, all the standard services (eg transfers, bill payments, cash withdrawals, deposits) are free (in the U.K.) with no monthly fee.


Lots of insurance covers these types of situation which are the result of careless acts...

Don't take the right safety precautions and burn down a customers house - liability insurance

Click on a link in a phishing email and open up your network to a ransomware attack - cyber insurance

Forget to lock your door and get burgled - property insurance

Write buggy software which leads to a hospital having to suspend operations - PI (or E&O) insurance

Fail to adequately adhere to regulatory obligations and get sued - D&O insurance

Obviously there will be various conditions etc which apply but I've been in Insurance a long time and cover for carelessness and stupidity is one of the things which keeps the industry going. I've dealt directly with (paid) claims for all of the above situations.

It doesn't absolve responsibility though, it just protects against the financial loss. I suspect if you leave a child alone with an AI and the house burns down that's going to be the least of your problems.


> Forget to lock your door and get burgled - property insurance

I’m pretty sure this will be the same for the other insurance you mentioned but for property insurance if you left your front door open you will have a hard time getting the insurance to actually pay out your claim. At least here they require a burglar alarm and they require it to be armed when nobody is on site or they will absolutely decline the claim.

Insurance insures against risk, but there’s a threshold to that and if you prove to be above it they will decline your claim or void your insurance in totality.


In the UK where I am, most standard (not budget) property policies would cover theft from an unlocked entry point.

Two main exceptions:

1 - if you are letting the property to someone else, e.g a lodger or have paying guests staying with you then this is typically excluded.

2 - if you have had previous theft claims, live in a high crime area, or you have a particularly high risk (e.g lots of valuables), the Insurer will add an endorsement that you need a minimum standard of locks and have them engaged when the property is unoccupied.

Outside of those, if you accidentally leave a door unlocked, your claim will likely be paid. The situation obviously may be different in other countries. I worked for a property insurer and saw hundreds of these claims (entry via an unlocked entry point) paid during my time there - I also saw many declined because of the above.

I suspect that over time the number of policies in the 'budget' category will continue to increase as price continues to trump everything else for most people]

edit: it is the same for the other lines I mentioned as well -e.g a cyber policy I saw recently has no conditions relating to use of MFA. It will have been factored in when writing the risk (they will have said they use it) and if it turned out it was a lie then there would be an issue with cover but if it was just a case of an admin forgetting to include an OU in the MFA group policy the claim would almost certainly be covered. Policies aimed at the SME space are much more likely to have specific conditions though.


> In the UK where I am, most standard (not budget) property policies would cover theft from an unlocked entry point.

How is this supposed to be assessed? You can demonstrate that a door was locked, if some kind of obvious measure was taken to circumvent it (destroying the lock, destroying the door, destroying the window...), but you can't demonstrate that it was unlocked. Burglars aren't limited to destroying things to bypass locks. One obvious approach is to pick them.


Most of the time we knew because people are generally honest and tell the truth. A few times where we had concerns we'd apply for a police report - even if someone will lie to their insurer, they rarely lie to the police in the heat of the moment when reporting the crime.

All that said, I can't recall many instances where the theft wasn't either breaking and entering, or entry through an open access point. As easy as lock picking might be, it's not a common burglary technique.


I have no idea who is underwriting your policies but this is absolutely not true with any carrier in the US that I've ever seen. Insurance pretty regularly covers being a dumbass.


> At least here they require a burglar alarm

Is that commercial or residential?

I've never seen a residential insurance that requires an alarm system, let alone a monitored system. Though many carriers will offer a discount for having this.


> At least here they require a burglar alarm and they require it to be armed when nobody is on site or they will absolutely decline the claim.

Where is here? I'm not aware of that being common anyplace in the US. I'm guessing you're in some country where crime is significantly higher than in the US.


This sounds like a racket for residential properties. Alarms do nothing to prevent burglary. Where this is a requirement, I'm sure the insurance company gets kick backs from companies that make or install them. Or it's an easy out, designed to make it as hard as possible for people to get any value from their insurance...


Alarms usually don't prevent burglaries, but they often reduce the amount of theft, as the burglars take what they can do in one trip and leave, rather than comprehensively emptying the building/unit.


There is no insurance that will insure you against your own gross negligence.

Insurance will only pay out if you can show that you have done everything a reasonable person would be expected to do to avoid the loss/damage.

> Don't take the right safety precautions and burn down a customers house - liability insurance

You mean someone burnt a customers house down /because of something like an electrical or equipment malfunction that they could not have reasonably foreseen or prevented/, right?

> Forget to lock your door and get burgled - property insurance

That seems unlikely. Compare this: https://moneysmart.gov.au/home-insurance/contents-insurance

> It's worth checking what isn't included. For example, damage caused by floods, intentional or criminal damage, or theft if you leave windows or doors unlocked.

Happy to be shown that I'm wrong but please do not give people the impression that liability insurance or property insurance will absolve them of losses no questions asked.


I don't think that's particularly true but even if it was, the site is overrun with crypto spam and porn bots that will drive people away. I know 3 people who have deactivated their account and switched to bluesky in the past week - and anecdotal evidence for many people on bluesky seems to suggest engagement levels are significantly higher. The network effects are really gaining traction as well.

I gave up on Twitter when I opened the app in public to find a porn video playing in the main feed, despite not following or interacting with any accounts of that nature previously. That was ~6 months ago and I haven't looked back.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: