How? I struggle to use the 1000 Kiro tokens I get a month, and that only costs $20. And I use it more then anyone else on my team. Maybe we're just massively behind?

I highly doubt that. Humans might become obsolete, but money will almost certainly still be a thing.

Resources are finite though

Interesting. Do you think a super intelligence would use our currency?

Yeah. I think the economy will be by AI for AI. Markets will still be the most efficient way to allocate resources, and AI will probably still want to achieve infinite growth of capitalism.

If we achieve runaway AI, the stock market goes to infinity. So from an expected value standpoint, massive spending on it is worthwhile. Even if the odds are tiny, the payoff warrants a massive bet size.

Not really. If run away AI ever became a real thing, the stock market would be completely destroyed since most companies would become worthless.

But a few companies will skyrocket and completely offset those.

I can't imagine humanity, let alone any company or the stock market survive runaway AI.

You underestimate the non-computerized part of humanity. Even with automated plants building other automated plants the propagation speed will be highly constrained by natural factors, plain unavailability of resources, and xenophobic nature of humanity of course.

Companies and the stock market don't need humanity.

They promise to not use customer code to train models. AFAIK, that hasn't changed.

Yeah doesn't make sense.

My guess is they are doing this to prep for an acquisition. Probably by an AI company or Datadog or similar.

That's exactly what's happening here.

Yeah, didn't see til after I commented, but this CEO ran this same playbook with New Relic. Layoffs and then sold the company 2 months later.

I think Staples is a guy you bring in to sell the company, not run the company.

Isn't that just Gitlab with Duo turned on?

Are they doing PRs? Putting their code in git? Is AI deploying it or do they get help with that?

Well it might.

If the actual rate is .9x then it matters a lot.

Or even if it's like 1.1x, is the cost worth the return?

The cost is so small relative to the increase. The cost whining on HN is bizarre to me. Feels like everyone here is on an individual plan and has no understanding of what margins look like for actual business.

Meta pays $750k+ TC and makes far more profit/eng, do you think they care about $5k/eng/mo in inference? A 1.1x increase would be so significant that it would justify the cost easily, especially when you can just compress comps to make up for it

Nobody is whining here.

What? You don't think businesses do financial planning and calculations for profit margins?

Do you really think they go on vibes - "welp, this AI thing seems to improve developer performance, I guess. Heck, what's an extra 5k per developer anyways, amirite".

Well, maybe they really do in your neck of the woods. Explains a lot, I guess.

Yes most companies do in fact operate like this. There are tens of thousands of companies that will pay more for the best thing and call it at that, because the cost is dwarfed by what even marginal gains in quality unlock for the business.

> the cost is dwarfed by what even marginal gains in quality

That is just, like, your opinion, man.

Also, I doubt these kinds of companies have "quality" of anything, never mind "gains in quality".

What Sam is doing is immoral too, just not illegal.