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

It’s apple fault that swift and swift ui is completely garbage.


Not true at all. Do you really believe that generating 1m output tokens on sol really cost 100 usd?

These companies are printing money on inference. The only issue is the capex of expending on new servers but they are generating TONS of income.


Just build it


Free cash? Crazy. I think I can live with the interest of that in the bank.


you could live (100k a year) with the interest of 0.004% of that in the bank.


The inertia is legal and financial. People are paying Anthropic through AWS accounts because the simple reason of not dealing making new contract and legal agreements is enough of reason of the inertia.

But, eventually, I’m quite sure that AWS will also provide open models with those contracts without any inertia. Copilot is already offering Kimi.

My company has a deal with Devin and they provide new models all the time, and open models are becoming the most used ones by our internal metrics, especially because the company is very worried about cost.


AWS already supports Llama and GLM in its Bedrock service for hosted models.

They’re much cheaper to run, eg, Llama 3.3 Instruct 70B is 5-10x cheaper than Sonnet 5.

https://aws.amazon.com/bedrock/pricing/

Say you have 20% of usecases that require the more expensive model — but in 80% you could just use Llama instead of Sonnet (eg, for basic queries of a document). That saves 80% of that 80%, or 65% of your total bill!

That is the kind of “swap” that’s likely to occur in automated tooling as pricing pressure kicks in — “can you save 65% on our AI bill by switching Bedrock over in 80% of uses?”


Bedrock is really out of date with the models it offers, to the extent that I'm not sure they even have plans to update what's on there now they have the deal with Anthropic. They're still offering Qwen 3, not even 3.5 and certainly not 3.6. GLM 5 is the newest z.AI model they have, when it's 5.2 that would be the one to worry Sonnet.

There are some ok models on there (Qwen 3 Coder Next is usable and fast, for instance) but the lack of updates in a fast-moving field makes it something I don't want to recommend to my org.


Because these models are not going to stand up legally


That's a stretch but it doesn't change the outcome.


Also they pay for legal liability of code produced


Maybe for a fantasy of legal liability of output produced. I haven't heard of any LLM corpo being held liable for any output they generate. Even NYT lawsuit is going nowhere for 3 years in courts already, despite being the most grounded.


Copilot insures your company up to x if someone sues our company. I guess most companies do this. That’s why we can’t use anything else except copilot.


Ultracode is pretty good. I’m not basically using the grill-with-docs from Matt and default plan mode on Cc or codex. It’s just enough.


Is it usable on Pro plan? Seems like it would burn my rate limits immediately


Did you mean "I'm basically" (!not)?


Yes! Crazy typo, sorry.


Not if happens before the new memory factories get built


That’s context, not philosophy.


With 2 wouldn’t have good results. Ideal range for coding is at least Q8.


According to this very article, 4-bit dynamic is essentially lossless


Watch out. Those claims are often made based on KL-divergence over some arbitrary corpus, not performance in the real world or benchmarks.

I’ve found that I need to go a couple steps past whatever quantizations are good enough in the KL-divergence testing to get good performance in real tasks with long context. So when Q4 is claimed to be lossless I end up with Q5 or Q6 for actual long-context tasks.


Nothing weird. The mayor wanted something brag about. That Rio, my friend.


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

Search: