I think some of the power user demand is fairly inelastic. I’ve seen developers who are allergic to spending money happily drop $200/mo on those new Claude subscriptions.
Yeah but if you push the price up, given that many users will cancel their subscriptions you will end up with still a tiny market segment relative to what is necessary, in revenues, to justify the valuations purported.
It's a tricky one, there is also a lot of push right now to use AI so developers are incentivized to drop money on subscriptions. I'd have difficulty justifying 1k/month for smaller shops - but corporations will be different. If the average engineer is just 20% more productive, then that is a 30-60k value to the company.
I don't have difficulty getting to a 20% productivity gain with AI just from automating the tasks I procrastinate on or can't focus on. Likewise the ability to code a prototype overnight/over the weekend is a reasonable extension of practical working hours.
The challenge I do see is that fully AI generated code bases devolve into slop pretty fast. The productivity cutoffs are much lower compared to human engineers.
Like… you’d expect a company to evaluate the potential for competition, right? But these AI companies are obviously not actual companies with any business model, most are just trying to grab some investors money while they can surf the hype.
> In terms of value per minute spent, it’s the same tier of slop as TikTok or Instagram
Insane take. Reddit hosts deep threaded discussions on almost any topic imaginable. In its prime it was the best forum on the internet. There’s a reason people commonly add “reddit” to the end of their search queries.
Unfortunately it feels like the community has gotten much dumber after they banned third party apps and restricted API access. It’s also lost almost all of its Aaron Swartz style hacktivist culture.
Reddit, in its prime, was incredible and beloved by almost everyone I know (most of which are far outside the HN sphere)
There are still many around - most of them die because admins give up or users leave - if you actually miss them it should be easy to find some for your interests
I would love to have some directory with all kinds of active (PHP) web forums. That was the heyday of the open web for me.
Do you have any tips on how to specifically search for these forums? Without just googling for topics and browsing hours to find some. When I think about it, just googling/searching might be the only way.
The reality is that modern (meaning LTE) public networks are more secure today, than they have been, its also trivial to bring an LTE base station with you now - with the hardware at this point being no more complex than a controller driven wifi network.
Indeed, I have an LTE base station in my office, on perpetual "loan" from T-Mobile for US$25, providing us with LTE service in an area where they have no service. It's roughly the same volume, or a bit less, as our modem/router.
That’s what this is. It’s caching the state of the model after the tokens have been loaded. Reduces latency and cost dramatically. 5m TTL on the cache usually.
Interesting! I’m wondering, does caching the model state mean the tokens are no longer directly visible to the model? i.e. if you asked it to print out the input tokens perfectly (assuming there’s no security layer blocking this, and assuming it has no ‘tool’ available to pull in the input tokens), could it do it?
The model state encodes the past tokens (in some lossy way that the model has chosen for itself). You can ask it to try and, assuming its attention is well-trained, it will probably do a pretty good job. Being able to refer to what is in its context window is an important part of being able to predict the next token, after all.
Theres no difference between feeding an LLM a prompt and feeding it half the prompt, saving the state, restoring the state and feeding it other half of the prompt.
Ie. The data processed by the LLM is prompt P.
P can be composed of any number of segments.
Any number of segments can be cached, as long as all preceeding segments are cached.
The final input is P, regardless.
So; tldr; yes? Anything you can do with a prompt you can do, becasue its just a prompt.
When the prompt is processed, there is an internal key-value cache that gets updated with each token processed, and is ultimately used for inference of the new token. If you process the prompt first and then dump that internal cache, you can effectively resume prompt processing (and thus inference) from that point more or less for free.
Not just out, both directions can be tricky to measure. It is hard to say for certain how many potential kcal you're consuming are actually absorbed by the body. If you see whole corn kernels in the toilet, those kcal didn't count :)
But yes. CICO is and always has been absolutely true. People are just overly reductive in how they measure both sides, and then claim that CICO is garbage.
In my experience, the most reliable way to understand your body's calorie needs is through consistent measurement:
1. Log everything you eat each day.
2. Weigh yourself first thing the next morning, before eating.
3. Track the trend (did you gain, lose, or maintain?)
Over time, clear patterns emerge. You start to see exactly how your intake maps to weight changes, and you can fine-tune accordingly. It’s not guesswork, it’s feedback.
What surprised me most was how little food I actually needed. Even with regular strength training, a modest surplus was enough to support muscle growth.
Aren't calorie numbers on foods just made up numbers anyway? I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure that a body's method of metabolizing food is not the same as oxygen burning it. They might offer a standardized number, and a basis for comparison, but other than that it's not reflective of anybody's reality.
You need to get orders of magnitude right at first. I find keeping a punned tab with any AI works pretty well. Drop 5 words with every meal or snack and thats it.
It’s ok to assume that you absorb 100% of what you eat, unless you see evidence to the contrary, and no corn kernel poop doesn’t count. Frequent diarrhea, weight loss, skin rash, and basically any symptom of vitamin or mineral deficiency.
>It’s ok to assume that you absorb 100% of what you eat
That's not really true. If you've ever done the keto diet, you know that your body expels unburned ketones through your breath, sweat, and urine. Protein can be used to repair structures rather than burned or stored for energy.
There's also something called the "thermic effect of feeding". Your body requires more energy to process protein (20-30% of calories consumed) than it does carbs (5-10%) than it does fats (0-3%).
There are many ways for food to not be 100% absorbed, which I think can most easily be demonstrated by eating a bag of nuts and waiting a day or two
I don't think it's unreasonable to think that different bodies absorb food in different ways (or proportions), particularly given what we've seen about the gut microbiome
In response to, "but those are rats", I think it's a lot easier to cast doubt on "100% of food is always absorbed" vs "I don't think that always holds true"
I mean, heck: if there are no residual calories in human waste, how can it burn?
My original point: it's ok to assume you absorb 100%.
About the rat thing: the cico hypothesis point of view might look at whether meal timing affecting energy expenditure first, rather than assuming meal timing change digestive absorption.
There is not much point in getting in the weeds about how much you absorb, unless you're running trials on yourself like changing when you eat, or what you eat, and leaving all other things equal like calorie intake and expenditure.
The best dieting strategies I've seen track calories in and weight change. From their you derive calorie expenditure, and it really doesn't matter if you burned it or pooped it out, does it?
It’s not like almonds have x calories for a certain group and y calories for another.
Being wrong about the number of calories in almonds doesn’t count as evidence that skinny people are skinny because they poop out undigested calories.
Also, I’m not saying digestive malabsorption is impossible, just that you shouldn’t assume it unless you have strong evidence to the contrary that doesn’t have another simpler explanation.
CICO is more of an upper bound, but people like to incorrectly use it as a lower bound. Meaning that it's true that you can't burn more calories than you eat, but you can certainly eat many more calories than you store as fat.
(Hell, CICO isn't even valid for something as "simple" as an electric vehicle. My EV's end-to-end efficiency is quite a bit different depending on whether I'm charging from 120V or 240V, the outside temperature at charging time, the outside temperature at driving time, and a handful other factors like state-of-charge. The human body is even more complicated.)
However, since this is Hacker News, I must say I'd probably enjoy building this myself using TTS and LLM APIs...