8 ms·

Zed's Pricing Has Changed: LLM Usage Is Now Token-Based

182 points by meetpateltech 1y ago

input_sh 1y ago
Entirely predictable and what should've been done from the start instead of this bait-and-switch mere months after introducing agentic editing.
- relativeadv 1y ago
  is this effectively what Cursor did as well? I seem to remember some major pricing change of their in the past few months.
  - input_sh 1y ago
    In a way I would say they were even worse, instead of outright saying "we've increased our prices", they "clarified their pricing".
cactusplant7374 1y ago
How much are companies spending per developer on tokens? From what I read it seems like it might be quite high at $1,000 or more per day?
- trenchpilgrim 1y ago
  No, not at all! At my org it's around $7000 a month for the entire org - my personal usage is around $2-10 a day. Usually less than the price of my caffeinated beverages.
binwang 1y ago
Now I see little value in subscribing to Zed Pro compared to just bringing my own API key. Am I missing something?
- prasoon2211 1y ago
  Presumably the tab based edit-prediction model + $5 of tokens is worth the (new) $10 / mo price. Though from everything I've read online, Zed's edit prediction model is far, _far_ behind that of Cursor.
- agrippanux 1y ago
  Their burn agent mode is pretty badass, but is super costly to run. I'm a big fan of Zed but tbf I'm just using Claude Code + Nvim nowadays. Zed's problem with their Claude integration is that it will never be as good as just using the latest from Claude Code.
  - lemontheme 1y ago
    Same except with Helix. The integration in Zed is limited by what the Claude Code SDK exposes. Since about half of the /commands are missing from the SDK, they don’t show up in Zed. I think ACP was a good strategic move by Zed, but all I personally really need is Claude Code in a terminal pane with diffs of proposed edits in the absolutely wonderful multibuffer view
- morgankrey 1y ago
  (I work at Zed) No, you aren't. We care about you using Zed the editor, and we provide Zed Pro for folks who decide they'd like to support Zed or our billing model works for them. But it's simply an option, not our core business plan, and this pricing is in place to make that option financially viable for us. As long as we don't bear the cost, we don't feel the need (or the right) to put ourselves in the revenue path with LLM spend.
  - jsheard 1y ago
    > [Zed Pro is] not our core business plan What is the core business plan then?
    - morgankrey 1y ago
      https://zed.dev/blog/sequoia-backs-zed#introducing-deltadb-operation-level-version-control https://zed.dev/blog/sequoia-backs-zed#introducing-deltadb-o...
bluehatbrit 1y ago
Token based pricing generally makes a lot of sense for companies like Zed, but it sure does suck for forecasting spend. Usage pricing on something like aws is pretty easy to figure out. You know what you're going to use, so you just do some simple arithmetic and you've got a pretty accurate idea. Even with serverless it's pretty easy. Tokens are so much harder, especially when using it in a development setting. It's so hard to have any reasonable forecast about how a team will use it, and how many tokens will be consumed. I'm starting to track my usage with a bit of a breakdown in the hope that I'll find a somewhat reliable trend. I suspect this is going to be one of the next big areas in cloud FinOps.
- prasoon2211 1y ago
  This is partially why, at least for LLM-assisted coding workloads, orgs are going with the $200 / mo Claude Code plans and similar.
  - jsheard 1y ago
    Until the rug inevitably gets pulled on those as well. It's not in your interest buy a $200/mo subscription unless you use >$200 of tokens per month, and long term it's not in their interest to sell you >$200 of tokens for a flat $200.
    - Hamuko 1y ago
      The pricing model works as long as people (on average) think they need >$200 worth of tokens per month but actually do something less, like $170/month. Is that happening? No idea.
      - jsheard 1y ago
        Maybe that is what Anthropic is banking on, from what I gather they obscure Max accounts actual token spend so it's hard for subscribers to tell if they're getting their moneys worth. https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/1109 https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/1109
qsort 1y ago
I wonder if first-party offerings like Codex and Claude will follow suit. Most "agents" are utter nonsense, but they cooked with the CLI tools. It'd be a shame to let go of them.
- hashbig 1y ago
  Eventually that is the plan. Like we saw with Claude Code, they want developers to get a taste of that unlimited and unrestrained power of a state of the art model like Opus 4, then slowly limit usage until you fully transition to metered billing and deprecate subscription based billing.
prymitive 1y ago
I can imagine the near future where companies “sponsor” open source projects by donating tokens to “mine” a PR for a feature they need.
- ebrescia 1y ago
  I love this! Finally a more direct way for companies to sponsor open source development. GitHub Sponsors helps, but it is often so vague where the funding is going.
  - bsnnkv 1y ago
    More often than not, for individuals, it's barely contributing to their living costs
  - scuff3d 1y ago
    If companies want to help they can just... I don't know... give projects some money
  - drakythe 1y ago
    Unless companies also donate money to sponsor the code review that will be required to be done by real human being I could see this idea being a problem for maintainers. Yes you have to code review a human being as well but a human being is capable of learning and carrying that learning forward and their next PR will be better, as well as being able to look at past PRs to evaluate whether the user is a troll/bad actor or someone who genuinely wants to assist with the project. An LLM won't learn and will always spit out valid _looking_ code.
- hombre_fatal 1y ago
  But the reason LLMs aren't used to build features isn't because they are expensive. The hard work is the high level stuff like deciding on the scope of the project, how it should fit in to the project, what kind of extensibility the feature might need to be built with, what kind of other components can be extended to support it, (and more), and then reviewing all the work that was done.
sharkjacobs 1y ago
This whole business model of trying to shave off or arbitrage a fraction of the money going to OpenAI and Anthropic just sucks. And it seems precarious. There's no honest way to resell tokens at a profit, and everyone knows it.
- Havoc 1y ago
  >There's no honest way to resell tokens at a profit, and everyone knows it. Agree with the sentiment, but I do think there are edge cases. e.g. I could see a place like openrouter getting away with a tiny fractional markup based on the value they provide in the form of having all providers in one place
  - Lalabadie 1y ago
    The issue with a model like this (fixed small percentage) is that your biggest clients are the most incentivized to move away. At scale, OpenRouter will instead get you the lower high-volume fees they themselves get from their different providers.
- thelastbender12 1y ago
  Sorry, how is this new pricing anything but honest? They provide an editor you can use to - optimize the context you send to the LLM services - interact with the output that comes out of them Why does not justify charging a fraction of your spend on the LLM platform? This is pretty much how every service business operates.
  - hu3 1y ago
    There's now greater incentive for Zed to stuff more content in the prompts to inflate tokens used and thus profit more. Or at least be less zealous. This is not a new concern. And is not unique to Zed.
- drakythe 1y ago
  For companies where that is their entire business model I absolutely agree. Zed is a solid editor with additional LLM integration features though, so this move would seem to me to just cover their costs + some LLM integration development funds. If their users don't want to use the LLM then no skin off Zed's back unless they've signed some guaranteed usage contract.
andrewmcwatters 1y ago
Am I wrong in that GitHub Copilot Pro apparently has the best overall token spend when considering agentic editors?
- ramon156 1y ago
  Better than Gemini Pro 2.5? Github Copilot doesn't even support tooling in Zed yet. It's been months..
- hu3 1y ago
  $10 GitHub Copilot Pro plan works for me in VSCode. I've been exclusively using Claude Sonnet 4 model in VSCode and so far I've used 90% of the premium quota at the end of the months. I can always use GPT4.1 or GPT5-mini for free if need be.
  - andrewmcwatters 1y ago
    Yeah, that's what I've been using since its release as well. I don't really see a point in trying the competition. It can't be better than this.
genshii 1y ago
I'm personally looking forward to this change because I currently pay $20/month just to get edit prediction. I use Claude Code in my terminal for everything else. I do wish I could just pay for edit prediction at an even lower price, but I can understand why that's not an option. I'm curious if they have plans to improve edit prediction though. It's honestly kind of garbage compared to Cursor, and I don't think I'm being hyperbolic by calling it garbage. Most of the time it's suggestions aren't helpful, but the 10-20% of the time it is helpful is worth the cost of the subscription for me.
- morgankrey 1y ago
  We have a significant investment underway in edit predictions. We hear you, more soon.
  - genshii 1y ago
    That's great to hear, thanks!
  - sippeangelo 1y ago
    This is the one thing keeping me from switching from Cursor. I much prefer Zed in every other way. Exciting!
    - hombre_fatal 1y ago
      Yeah, Cursor tab completion is basically in the realm of magical mind reading and might still be the most insane productivity demonstration of LLM tech in software. It obsoleted making Vim macros and multiline editing for example. Now you just make one change and the LLM can derive the rest; you just press tab. It's interesting that the Cursor team's first iteration is still better than anything I've seen in their competitors. It's been an amazing moat for a year(?) now.
      - sippeangelo 1y ago
        I agree. I wish they focused more on it. I'd love to be able to give it a few sentences of instructions to make it even more effective for me. It's so much more of a productivity boon than all the coding agent stuff ever was.
okokwhatever 1y ago
This is going to be a blood bath for many freelancers if the trend continues with other platforms. Mark my words.
WD-42 1y ago
Good change. I’m not a vibe coder, I use Zed Pro llm integration more like glorified stack overflow. I value Zed more for being an amazing editor for the code I actually write and understand. I suspect I’m not alone on this. Zed is not the editor for hardcore agentic editing and that’s fine. I will probably save money on this transition while continuing to support this great editor for what it truly shines at: editing source code.
AbuAssar 1y ago
Zed and Warp were two promising Rust-based projects that I closely monitor. Currently, both projects are progressing towards becoming a generic AI Agentic code platform.
- scuff3d 1y ago
  Until now I've never really come across a comment on Hackernews I thought was AI generated...
  - AbuAssar 1y ago
    You are partially right, after I wrote the comment I used the writing tools in macOS to rewrite it in a professional tone. The wording may sound AI generated but the gist of the comment is my true opinion
muratsu 1y ago
For those of us building agentic tools that require similar pricing, how does one implement it? OpenRouter seems good for the MVP, but I'm curious if there are alternatives down the line.
VGHN7XDuOXPAzol 1y ago
> Token-agnostic prompt structures obscure the cost and are rife with misaligned incentives Saying that, token-based pricing has misaligned incentives as well: as the editor developer (charging a margin over the number of tokens) or AI provider, you benefit from more verbose input fed to the LLMs and of course more verbose output from the LLMs. Not that I'm really surprised by the announcement though, it was somewhat obviously unsustainable
dmix 1y ago
I just asked this exact question about Zed pricing 2 days ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45333425 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45333425
dinobones 1y ago
Making this prediction now, LLM pricing will eventually be priced in bytes. Why: LLMs are increasingly becoming multimodal, so an image "token" or video "token" is not as simple as a text token. Also, it's difficult to compare across competitors because tokenization is different. Eventually prices will just be in $/Mb of data processed. Just like bandwidth. I'm surprised this hasn't already happened.
- vtail 1y ago
  Hm... why not tokens as reported by each LLM provider? They already handle pricing for images etc.
- jermaustin1 1y ago
  The problem is that tokens don't all equate to the same size. A megabyte of some random json is a LOT more tokens than a megabyte of "Moby Dick".
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  > Why: LLMs are increasingly becoming multimodal, so an image "token" or video "token" is not as simple as a text token. For autoregressive token-based multimodal models, image tokens are as straightforward as text tokens, and there is no reason video tokens wouldn’t also be. (If models also switch architecture and multimodal diffusion models, say, become more common, then, sure, a different pricing model more tied to actual compute cost drivers for that architecture are likely but... even that isn’t likely to be bytes.) > Also, it's difficult to compare across competitors because tokenization is different. That’s a reason for incumbents to prefer not to switch, though, not a reason for them to switch. > Eventually prices will just be in $/Mb of data processed. More likely they would be in floatint point operations expended processing them, but using tokens (which are the primary drivers for the current LLM architectures) will probably continue as long as the architecture itself is doninant.
  - oblio 1y ago
vtail 1y ago
Prediction: the only remaining providers of AI-assisted tools in a few years will be the LLM companies themselves (think claude code, codex, gemini, future xai/Alibaba/etc.), via CLIs + integrations such as ASP. There is very little value that a company that has to support multiple different providers, such as Cursor, can offer on top of tailored agents (and "unlimited" subscription models) by LLM providers.
- computerex 1y ago
  I don't know. Foundation models are very good, and you can get a surprising amount of mileage from them by using them with low level interfaces. But personally I think companies building development tools of the future will use LLMs to build systems with increasing capabilities. I think a lot of engineering challenges remain in scaling LLM's to take over day to day in programming, and the current tools are scratching the surface of what's possible when you combine LLMs with traditional systems engineering.
- serbuvlad 1y ago
  I recently started using Codex (OpenAI's Claude Code) and it has a VSCode extension that works like a charm. I tried out Windsurf a while ago. And the Codex extension simply does everything that Windsurf did. I guess it doesn't show changes at well, (it shows diffs in it's own window instead of in the file), but I can just check a git diff graphically (current state vs. HEAD) if I really wanted that. I am really tempted to buy ChatGPT Pro, and probably would have if I lived in a richer country (unfortunetley purchase power parity doesn't equalize for tech products). The problem with Windsurf (and presumably Cursor and others) is that you buy the IDE subscription and then still have to worry about usage costs. With Codex/Claude Code etc., yeah, it's expensive, but, as long as you're within the usage limits, which are hopefully reasonable for the most expensive prices, you don't have to worry about it. AND you get the web and phone apps with GPT 5 Pro, etc.
- rudedogg 1y ago
  If you look at even the Claude/OpenAI chat UIs, they kind of suck. Not sure why you think someone else can't/won't do it better. Yes, the big players will copy what they can, but they also need to chase insane growth and getting every human on earth paying for an LLM subscription. A tool that is good for everyone is great for no one. Also, I think we're seeing the limits on "value" of a chat interface already. Now they're all chasing developers since there's a real potential to improve productivity (or sadly cut-costs) there. But even that is proving difficult.
oakesm9 1y ago
I completely get why this pricing is needed and it seems fair. There’s a major flaw in the announcement though. I get that the pro plan has $5 of tokens and the pricing page says that a token is roughly 3-4 characters. However, it is not clear: - Are tokens input characters, output characters, or both? - What does a token cost? I get that the pricing page says it varies by model and is “ API list price +10%”, but nowhere does it say what these API list prices are. Am I meant to go to The OpenAI, Anthropic, and other websites to get that pricing information? Shouldn’t that be in a table on that page which each hosted model listed? — I’m only a very casual user of AI tools so maybe this is clear to people deep in this world, but it’s not clear to me just based on Zelda pricing page exactly how far $5 per month will get me.
- morgankrey 1y ago
  List here: https://zed.dev/docs/ai/models https://zed.dev/docs/ai/models. Thanks for the feedback, we'll make sure this is linked from the pricing page. Think it got lost in the launch shuffle.
  - oakesm9 1y ago
    All makes sense. I presumed it was an oversight. It’s hard for me to conceptualise what a million tokens actually looks like, but I don’t think there’s a way around that aside from making proving some concrete examples of inputs, outputs, and the number of tokens that actually is. I guess it would become clearer after using it a bit.
    - morgankrey 1y ago
      Now live: https://zed.dev/pricing#what-is-a-token https://zed.dev/pricing#what-is-a-token. Thanks for the feedback
bananapub 1y ago
seems fine - they're aligning their prices with their costs. presumably everyone is just aiming or hoping for inference costs to go down so much that they can do a unlimited-with-tos like most home Internet access etc, because this intermediate phase of having to count your pennies to ask the matrix multiplier questions isn't going to be very enjoyable or stable or encourage good companies to succeed.
giancarlostoro 1y ago
I was just thinking this morning about how I think Zed should rethink their subscription because its a bit pricey if they're going to let you just use Claude Code. I am in the process of trying out Claude and figured just going to them for the subscriptions makes more sense. I think Zed had a lot of good concepts where they could make paid AI benefits optional longer term. I like that you can join your devs to look at different code files and discuss them. I might still pay for Zed's subscription in order to support them long term regardless. I'm still upset so many hosted models dont just let you use your subscription on things like Zed or JetBrains AI, what's the point of a monthly subscription if I can only use your LLM in a browser?
- hamandcheese 1y ago
  > I'm still upset so many hosted models dont just let you use your subscription on things like Zed or JetBrains AI, what's the point of a monthly subscription if I can only use your LLM in a browser? This is her another reason why CLI-based coding agents will win. Every editor out there trying to be the middle man between you and an AI provider is nuts.
  - oblio 1y ago
    Wouldn't the last step just be an API? That would allow direct integration from everywhere.
    - praseodym 1y ago
      There is one, developed by the Zed team in collaboration with Gemini. And Claude Code is also supported now. https://agentclientprotocol.com/overview/introduction https://agentclientprotocol.com/overview/introduction
- ibejoeb 1y ago
  > if they're going to let you just use Claude Code I'm pretty sure that's only while it's in preview, just like they were giving away model access before that was formally launched. Get it while it's hot.
dinvlad 1y ago
Another one bites the dust :-( I hope at least Windsurf stays the same..
pkilgore 1y ago
This is much better for me but I really want a plan that includes zero AI other than edit prediction and BYOK for the rest. But as a mostly claude max + zed user happy to see my costs go down.
blutoot 1y ago
Why is most of the AI-tooling industry still stuck on this "bring your own key" model?
- sethhochberg 1y ago
  What would you propose as an alternative? As a corporate purchaser, "bring your own key" is just about the only way we can allow our employees to stay close to the latest happenings in a rapidly moving corner of the industry. We need to have a decent amount of trust in the model execution environment and we don't like having tons of variable-cost subscriptions. We have that trust in our corporate-managed OpenAI tenant and have good governance and budget controls there, so BYOK lets us have flexibility to put different frontends in front of our trusted execution environment for different use cases.
- Macha 1y ago
  The companies actually providing the models charge by token and this lets the tooling avoid having to do cost planning for something with a bunch of unknowns and push the risk of overspend to customers.
hmokiguess 1y ago
Zed was supposed to be the answer to Atom / Sublime Text in my opinion, and I kinda do want to use it as my main driver, but it just isn’t there yet for me. It’s shameful because I like its aesthetics as a product more than the competition out there. Just this other day I tried using it for something it sort of advertised itself as the superior thing, which was to load this giant text file I had instantly and let me work on it. I then tried opening this 1GB text file to do a simple find/replace on it only to find macOS run out of system memory with Zed quickly using 20gb of memory for that search operation. I then switched to vscode, which, granted opened it in a buffered sort of way and limited capability, but got the job done. Maybe that was a me issue I don’t know, but aside from this one-off, it doesn’t have a good extensions support in the community for my needs yet. I hope it gets there!
- j_bum 1y ago
  VSCode is my go to for large text file interaction on macOS. TextEdit may be worth looking into as well? Haven’t tested it for large files before.
  - dewey 1y ago
    I have Sublime Text installed for the onlu use case of opening large files. Nothing comes close.
    - CharlesW 1y ago
      Googling around a bit, Sublime Text doesn't seem to be particularly good at this: https://forum.sublimetext.com/t/unable-to-open-a-large-text-file-767-mb/7068/3 https://forum.sublimetext.com/t/unable-to-open-a-large-text-... In my experience, BBEdit will open files that kill other editors: "Handling large files presents no intrinsic problems for BBEdit, though some specific operations may be limited when dealing with files over 2GB in size."
      - xrisk 1y ago
        While I don’t know if the claim is true, you’ve linked a post from 2012…
bitwize 1y ago
Thought this was 2015 for a sec and this was about Zed Shaw.
- insane_dreamer 1y ago
  “Learn LLM-coding the hard way”.
acaloiar 1y ago
Tokens are an implementation detail that have no business being part of product pricing. It's deliberate obfuscation. First, there's the simple math of converting tokens to dollars. This is easy enough; people are familiar with "credits". Credits can be obfuscation, but at least they're honest. The second and more difficult obfuscation to untangle is how one converts "tokens" to "value". When the value customers receive from tokens slips, they pay the same price for the service. But generative AI companies are under no obligation to refund anything, because the customer paid for tokens, and they got tokens in return. Customers have to trust that they're being given the highest quality tokens the provider can generate. I don't have that trust. Additionally, they have to trust that generative AI companies aren't padding results with superfluous tokens to hit revenue targets. We've all seen how much fluff is in default LLM responses. Pinky promises don't make for healthy business relationships.
- mrcwinn 1y ago
  Doesn’t prompt pricing obfuscate token costs by definition? I guess the alternative is everyone pays $500/mo. (And you’d still get more value than that.)
- ibejoeb 1y ago
  Tokens aren't that much more opaque than RAM GB/s for functions or whatever. You'd have to know the entire infra stack to really understand it. I don't really have a suggestion for a better unit for that kind of stuff.
travisgriggs 1y ago
I love this for Zed. I hate that I’m going to have deal with the model providers more directly. Because I don’t know what tokens are. It’s like if McDonalds changed their pricing model to be some complex formula involving nutrition properties (calories, carbs, etc) plus some other things (carbon tax, local state taxes, whatever) and moved to a pay as you bite model. You start eating a Big Mac, but every bite has different content proportions, so every bite is changing in price as you go. Only through trial and error would you figure out how to eat. And the fact that the “complex formula” is prone to real time change at any point, makes it impossible to get excited about eating.
travisgriggs 1y ago
I really want to be able to see outline panel, project panel, agent panel, and terminal panel all at the same time. If I stay at $20/mo, can you guys fix the please? I’m tired of toggling between them.
rdtsc 1y ago
I am wondering why they couldn't have foreseen this. Was it really a failure to predict the need to charge for tokens eventually, or was planned from the start that way -- get people to use the unlimited option for a bit, they get hooked, then switch them to per-token subscriptions.
indymike 1y ago
I'm going through this with pricing for our product and the battle is: Customer: wants predictable spend Sales/Marketing: wants an amazing product that is easy to sell (read does the mostest for the leastest) Advisors: want to see the SaaS model in all it's glory (i.e. 85% margin primarily from oversubscription of infrastructure) Finance: wants to make money and is really worried about variable costs ruining SaaS profit margin A couple of thoughts: 1. AI-based cost is mostly variable. Also, things like messaging, phone minutes and so on are variable. Cloud expenses are also variable... There's a theme and it's different. 2. The unit of value most ai software is delivering is work that is being done by people or should be being done and is not. 3. Seems like it's time to make friends with a way to make money other than subscription pricing.
nextworddev 1y ago
The first thing they do after getting funded by Sequoia lmao
marcopolo 1y ago
I'm glad to see this change. I didn't much use the AI features, but I did want to support Zed. $20 seemed a bit high for that signal. $10 seems right. $5 with no tokens would be nicer. Great work folks
hendersoon 1y ago
So they're essentially charging $5/month for unlimited tab completions, when you get 2k for free. That seems reasonable, many could just not pay anything at all. But in the paid plan they charge 10% over API prices for metered usage... and also support bring your own API. Why would anyone pay their +10%, just to be nice? This is the same problem cursor and windsurf are facing. How the heck do you make money when you're competing with cline/roocode for users who are by definition technically sophisticated? What can you offer that's so wonderful that they can't?
hit8run 1y ago
Say what you want but Sublime is the GOAT.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
ibejoeb 1y ago
> Additional usage billed at API list price +10% I'm hoping that zed is someday able to get discount bulk pricing to resell through their providers. With the 10% markup, is there any benefit to using zed's provider vs. BYOK?
insane_dreamer 1y ago
I’d like to see $5/mo for BYOK only (I already have copilot for edit predictions and CC in the terminal).
gazpachotron 1y ago
[dead]
lemontheme 1y ago
Since the VC investment by Sequoia I’ve had my doubts about Zed. For one thing, a certain high-profile member of that VC publicly promotes a worldview that does not align with mine. For another, I’ve had it with my favorite products constantly enshittifying. I’d always seen my subscription more as a recurring donation toward development anyway, so I canceled it. That said, Zed continues to impress. The editor itself, the technical blog posts, the introduction of new standards like ACP, fair pricing – all paint a picture of a talented, stand-up group of people. So I welcome this new pricing, although like others I’m confused why I would pay 10% extra if I can BYOK. Honestly, I wish I could just pay for Zed as a regular user. After all, I pay for Pycharm even though I don’t use it that much these days. I want to be a paying user so that Zed’s incentives align with mine, not with some big corpo’s. But perhaps that sort of thinking is detached from the reality of building a viable business around an editor…
- rexpop 1y ago
  Are you referring to Shaun Maguire remarks labeling Zohran Mamdani an "Islamist"? Then you'll love that a16z general partner Katherine Boyle went on Bari Weiss's[0] podcast[1] to help spin the Charlie Kirk martyrdom narrative. 0. https://www.thenation.com/article/society/bari-weiss-free-press-cbs-news-paramount/tnamp/ https://www.thenation.com/article/society/bari-weiss-free-pr... 1. And syndicated it, themselves: https://a16z.simplecast.com/episodes/charlie-kirk-and-the-rise-of-political-violence-8m1Qba_N https://a16z.simplecast.com/episodes/charlie-kirk-and-the-ri...

182 points by meetpateltech 1y ago

Entirely predictable and what should've been done from the start instead of this bait-and-switch mere months after introducing agentic editing.

relativeadv 1y ago
is this effectively what Cursor did as well? I seem to remember some major pricing change of their in the past few months.
- input_sh 1y ago
  In a way I would say they were even worse, instead of outright saying "we've increased our prices", they "clarified their pricing".

cactusplant7374 1y ago

How much are companies spending per developer on tokens? From what I read it seems like it might be quite high at $1,000 or more per day?

trenchpilgrim 1y ago
No, not at all! At my org it's around $7000 a month for the entire org - my personal usage is around $2-10 a day. Usually less than the price of my caffeinated beverages.

binwang 1y ago

Now I see little value in subscribing to Zed Pro compared to just bringing my own API key. Am I missing something?

prasoon2211 1y ago
Presumably the tab based edit-prediction model + $5 of tokens is worth the (new) $10 / mo price. Though from everything I've read online, Zed's edit prediction model is far, _far_ behind that of Cursor.
agrippanux 1y ago
Their burn agent mode is pretty badass, but is super costly to run. I'm a big fan of Zed but tbf I'm just using Claude Code + Nvim nowadays. Zed's problem with their Claude integration is that it will never be as good as just using the latest from Claude Code.
- lemontheme 1y ago
  Same except with Helix. The integration in Zed is limited by what the Claude Code SDK exposes. Since about half of the /commands are missing from the SDK, they don’t show up in Zed. I think ACP was a good strategic move by Zed, but all I personally really need is Claude Code in a terminal pane with diffs of proposed edits in the absolutely wonderful multibuffer view
morgankrey 1y ago
(I work at Zed) No, you aren't. We care about you using Zed the editor, and we provide Zed Pro for folks who decide they'd like to support Zed or our billing model works for them. But it's simply an option, not our core business plan, and this pricing is in place to make that option financially viable for us. As long as we don't bear the cost, we don't feel the need (or the right) to put ourselves in the revenue path with LLM spend.
- jsheard 1y ago
  > [Zed Pro is] not our core business plan What is the core business plan then?
  - morgankrey 1y ago
    https://zed.dev/blog/sequoia-backs-zed#introducing-deltadb-operation-level-version-control https://zed.dev/blog/sequoia-backs-zed#introducing-deltadb-o...

bluehatbrit 1y ago

Token based pricing generally makes a lot of sense for companies like Zed, but it sure does suck for forecasting spend. Usage pricing on something like aws is pretty easy to figure out. You know what you're going to use, so you just do some simple arithmetic and you've got a pretty accurate idea. Even with serverless it's pretty easy. Tokens are so much harder, especially when using it in a development setting. It's so hard to have any reasonable forecast about how a team will use it, and how many tokens will be consumed. I'm starting to track my usage with a bit of a breakdown in the hope that I'll find a somewhat reliable trend. I suspect this is going to be one of the next big areas in cloud FinOps.

prasoon2211 1y ago
This is partially why, at least for LLM-assisted coding workloads, orgs are going with the $200 / mo Claude Code plans and similar.
- jsheard 1y ago
  Until the rug inevitably gets pulled on those as well. It's not in your interest buy a $200/mo subscription unless you use >$200 of tokens per month, and long term it's not in their interest to sell you >$200 of tokens for a flat $200.
  - Hamuko 1y ago
    The pricing model works as long as people (on average) think they need >$200 worth of tokens per month but actually do something less, like $170/month. Is that happening? No idea.
    - jsheard 1y ago
      Maybe that is what Anthropic is banking on, from what I gather they obscure Max accounts actual token spend so it's hard for subscribers to tell if they're getting their moneys worth. https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/1109 https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/1109

qsort 1y ago

I wonder if first-party offerings like Codex and Claude will follow suit. Most "agents" are utter nonsense, but they cooked with the CLI tools. It'd be a shame to let go of them.

hashbig 1y ago
Eventually that is the plan. Like we saw with Claude Code, they want developers to get a taste of that unlimited and unrestrained power of a state of the art model like Opus 4, then slowly limit usage until you fully transition to metered billing and deprecate subscription based billing.

prymitive 1y ago

I can imagine the near future where companies “sponsor” open source projects by donating tokens to “mine” a PR for a feature they need.

ebrescia 1y ago
I love this! Finally a more direct way for companies to sponsor open source development. GitHub Sponsors helps, but it is often so vague where the funding is going.
- bsnnkv 1y ago
  More often than not, for individuals, it's barely contributing to their living costs
- scuff3d 1y ago
  If companies want to help they can just... I don't know... give projects some money
- drakythe 1y ago
  Unless companies also donate money to sponsor the code review that will be required to be done by real human being I could see this idea being a problem for maintainers. Yes you have to code review a human being as well but a human being is capable of learning and carrying that learning forward and their next PR will be better, as well as being able to look at past PRs to evaluate whether the user is a troll/bad actor or someone who genuinely wants to assist with the project. An LLM won't learn and will always spit out valid _looking_ code.
hombre_fatal 1y ago
But the reason LLMs aren't used to build features isn't because they are expensive. The hard work is the high level stuff like deciding on the scope of the project, how it should fit in to the project, what kind of extensibility the feature might need to be built with, what kind of other components can be extended to support it, (and more), and then reviewing all the work that was done.

sharkjacobs 1y ago

This whole business model of trying to shave off or arbitrage a fraction of the money going to OpenAI and Anthropic just sucks. And it seems precarious. There's no honest way to resell tokens at a profit, and everyone knows it.

Havoc 1y ago
>There's no honest way to resell tokens at a profit, and everyone knows it. Agree with the sentiment, but I do think there are edge cases. e.g. I could see a place like openrouter getting away with a tiny fractional markup based on the value they provide in the form of having all providers in one place
- Lalabadie 1y ago
  The issue with a model like this (fixed small percentage) is that your biggest clients are the most incentivized to move away. At scale, OpenRouter will instead get you the lower high-volume fees they themselves get from their different providers.
thelastbender12 1y ago
Sorry, how is this new pricing anything but honest? They provide an editor you can use to - optimize the context you send to the LLM services - interact with the output that comes out of them Why does not justify charging a fraction of your spend on the LLM platform? This is pretty much how every service business operates.
- hu3 1y ago
  There's now greater incentive for Zed to stuff more content in the prompts to inflate tokens used and thus profit more. Or at least be less zealous. This is not a new concern. And is not unique to Zed.
drakythe 1y ago
For companies where that is their entire business model I absolutely agree. Zed is a solid editor with additional LLM integration features though, so this move would seem to me to just cover their costs + some LLM integration development funds. If their users don't want to use the LLM then no skin off Zed's back unless they've signed some guaranteed usage contract.

andrewmcwatters 1y ago

Am I wrong in that GitHub Copilot Pro apparently has the best overall token spend when considering agentic editors?

ramon156 1y ago
Better than Gemini Pro 2.5? Github Copilot doesn't even support tooling in Zed yet. It's been months..
hu3 1y ago
$10 GitHub Copilot Pro plan works for me in VSCode. I've been exclusively using Claude Sonnet 4 model in VSCode and so far I've used 90% of the premium quota at the end of the months. I can always use GPT4.1 or GPT5-mini for free if need be.
- andrewmcwatters 1y ago
  Yeah, that's what I've been using since its release as well. I don't really see a point in trying the competition. It can't be better than this.

genshii 1y ago

I'm personally looking forward to this change because I currently pay $20/month just to get edit prediction. I use Claude Code in my terminal for everything else. I do wish I could just pay for edit prediction at an even lower price, but I can understand why that's not an option. I'm curious if they have plans to improve edit prediction though. It's honestly kind of garbage compared to Cursor, and I don't think I'm being hyperbolic by calling it garbage. Most of the time it's suggestions aren't helpful, but the 10-20% of the time it is helpful is worth the cost of the subscription for me.

morgankrey 1y ago
We have a significant investment underway in edit predictions. We hear you, more soon.
- genshii 1y ago
  That's great to hear, thanks!
- sippeangelo 1y ago
  This is the one thing keeping me from switching from Cursor. I much prefer Zed in every other way. Exciting!
  - hombre_fatal 1y ago
    Yeah, Cursor tab completion is basically in the realm of magical mind reading and might still be the most insane productivity demonstration of LLM tech in software. It obsoleted making Vim macros and multiline editing for example. Now you just make one change and the LLM can derive the rest; you just press tab. It's interesting that the Cursor team's first iteration is still better than anything I've seen in their competitors. It's been an amazing moat for a year(?) now.
    - sippeangelo 1y ago
      I agree. I wish they focused more on it. I'd love to be able to give it a few sentences of instructions to make it even more effective for me. It's so much more of a productivity boon than all the coding agent stuff ever was.

okokwhatever 1y ago

This is going to be a blood bath for many freelancers if the trend continues with other platforms. Mark my words.

WD-42 1y ago

Good change. I’m not a vibe coder, I use Zed Pro llm integration more like glorified stack overflow. I value Zed more for being an amazing editor for the code I actually write and understand. I suspect I’m not alone on this. Zed is not the editor for hardcore agentic editing and that’s fine. I will probably save money on this transition while continuing to support this great editor for what it truly shines at: editing source code.

AbuAssar 1y ago

Zed and Warp were two promising Rust-based projects that I closely monitor. Currently, both projects are progressing towards becoming a generic AI Agentic code platform.

scuff3d 1y ago
Until now I've never really come across a comment on Hackernews I thought was AI generated...
- AbuAssar 1y ago
  You are partially right, after I wrote the comment I used the writing tools in macOS to rewrite it in a professional tone. The wording may sound AI generated but the gist of the comment is my true opinion

muratsu 1y ago

For those of us building agentic tools that require similar pricing, how does one implement it? OpenRouter seems good for the MVP, but I'm curious if there are alternatives down the line.

VGHN7XDuOXPAzol 1y ago

> Token-agnostic prompt structures obscure the cost and are rife with misaligned incentives Saying that, token-based pricing has misaligned incentives as well: as the editor developer (charging a margin over the number of tokens) or AI provider, you benefit from more verbose input fed to the LLMs and of course more verbose output from the LLMs. Not that I'm really surprised by the announcement though, it was somewhat obviously unsustainable

dmix 1y ago

I just asked this exact question about Zed pricing 2 days ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45333425 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45333425

dinobones 1y ago

Making this prediction now, LLM pricing will eventually be priced in bytes. Why: LLMs are increasingly becoming multimodal, so an image "token" or video "token" is not as simple as a text token. Also, it's difficult to compare across competitors because tokenization is different. Eventually prices will just be in $/Mb of data processed. Just like bandwidth. I'm surprised this hasn't already happened.

vtail 1y ago
Hm... why not tokens as reported by each LLM provider? They already handle pricing for images etc.
jermaustin1 1y ago
The problem is that tokens don't all equate to the same size. A megabyte of some random json is a LOT more tokens than a megabyte of "Moby Dick".
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 1y ago
> Why: LLMs are increasingly becoming multimodal, so an image "token" or video "token" is not as simple as a text token. For autoregressive token-based multimodal models, image tokens are as straightforward as text tokens, and there is no reason video tokens wouldn’t also be. (If models also switch architecture and multimodal diffusion models, say, become more common, then, sure, a different pricing model more tied to actual compute cost drivers for that architecture are likely but... even that isn’t likely to be bytes.) > Also, it's difficult to compare across competitors because tokenization is different. That’s a reason for incumbents to prefer not to switch, though, not a reason for them to switch. > Eventually prices will just be in $/Mb of data processed. More likely they would be in floatint point operations expended processing them, but using tokens (which are the primary drivers for the current LLM architectures) will probably continue as long as the architecture itself is doninant.
- oblio 1y ago

vtail 1y ago

Prediction: the only remaining providers of AI-assisted tools in a few years will be the LLM companies themselves (think claude code, codex, gemini, future xai/Alibaba/etc.), via CLIs + integrations such as ASP. There is very little value that a company that has to support multiple different providers, such as Cursor, can offer on top of tailored agents (and "unlimited" subscription models) by LLM providers.

computerex 1y ago
I don't know. Foundation models are very good, and you can get a surprising amount of mileage from them by using them with low level interfaces. But personally I think companies building development tools of the future will use LLMs to build systems with increasing capabilities. I think a lot of engineering challenges remain in scaling LLM's to take over day to day in programming, and the current tools are scratching the surface of what's possible when you combine LLMs with traditional systems engineering.
serbuvlad 1y ago
I recently started using Codex (OpenAI's Claude Code) and it has a VSCode extension that works like a charm. I tried out Windsurf a while ago. And the Codex extension simply does everything that Windsurf did. I guess it doesn't show changes at well, (it shows diffs in it's own window instead of in the file), but I can just check a git diff graphically (current state vs. HEAD) if I really wanted that. I am really tempted to buy ChatGPT Pro, and probably would have if I lived in a richer country (unfortunetley purchase power parity doesn't equalize for tech products). The problem with Windsurf (and presumably Cursor and others) is that you buy the IDE subscription and then still have to worry about usage costs. With Codex/Claude Code etc., yeah, it's expensive, but, as long as you're within the usage limits, which are hopefully reasonable for the most expensive prices, you don't have to worry about it. AND you get the web and phone apps with GPT 5 Pro, etc.
rudedogg 1y ago
If you look at even the Claude/OpenAI chat UIs, they kind of suck. Not sure why you think someone else can't/won't do it better. Yes, the big players will copy what they can, but they also need to chase insane growth and getting every human on earth paying for an LLM subscription. A tool that is good for everyone is great for no one. Also, I think we're seeing the limits on "value" of a chat interface already. Now they're all chasing developers since there's a real potential to improve productivity (or sadly cut-costs) there. But even that is proving difficult.

oakesm9 1y ago

I completely get why this pricing is needed and it seems fair. There’s a major flaw in the announcement though. I get that the pro plan has $5 of tokens and the pricing page says that a token is roughly 3-4 characters. However, it is not clear: - Are tokens input characters, output characters, or both? - What does a token cost? I get that the pricing page says it varies by model and is “ API list price +10%”, but nowhere does it say what these API list prices are. Am I meant to go to The OpenAI, Anthropic, and other websites to get that pricing information? Shouldn’t that be in a table on that page which each hosted model listed? — I’m only a very casual user of AI tools so maybe this is clear to people deep in this world, but it’s not clear to me just based on Zelda pricing page exactly how far $5 per month will get me.

morgankrey 1y ago
List here: https://zed.dev/docs/ai/models https://zed.dev/docs/ai/models. Thanks for the feedback, we'll make sure this is linked from the pricing page. Think it got lost in the launch shuffle.
- oakesm9 1y ago
  All makes sense. I presumed it was an oversight. It’s hard for me to conceptualise what a million tokens actually looks like, but I don’t think there’s a way around that aside from making proving some concrete examples of inputs, outputs, and the number of tokens that actually is. I guess it would become clearer after using it a bit.
  - morgankrey 1y ago
    Now live: https://zed.dev/pricing#what-is-a-token https://zed.dev/pricing#what-is-a-token. Thanks for the feedback

bananapub 1y ago

seems fine - they're aligning their prices with their costs. presumably everyone is just aiming or hoping for inference costs to go down so much that they can do a unlimited-with-tos like most home Internet access etc, because this intermediate phase of having to count your pennies to ask the matrix multiplier questions isn't going to be very enjoyable or stable or encourage good companies to succeed.

giancarlostoro 1y ago

I was just thinking this morning about how I think Zed should rethink their subscription because its a bit pricey if they're going to let you just use Claude Code. I am in the process of trying out Claude and figured just going to them for the subscriptions makes more sense. I think Zed had a lot of good concepts where they could make paid AI benefits optional longer term. I like that you can join your devs to look at different code files and discuss them. I might still pay for Zed's subscription in order to support them long term regardless. I'm still upset so many hosted models dont just let you use your subscription on things like Zed or JetBrains AI, what's the point of a monthly subscription if I can only use your LLM in a browser?

hamandcheese 1y ago
> I'm still upset so many hosted models dont just let you use your subscription on things like Zed or JetBrains AI, what's the point of a monthly subscription if I can only use your LLM in a browser? This is her another reason why CLI-based coding agents will win. Every editor out there trying to be the middle man between you and an AI provider is nuts.
- oblio 1y ago
  Wouldn't the last step just be an API? That would allow direct integration from everywhere.
  - praseodym 1y ago
    There is one, developed by the Zed team in collaboration with Gemini. And Claude Code is also supported now. https://agentclientprotocol.com/overview/introduction https://agentclientprotocol.com/overview/introduction
ibejoeb 1y ago
> if they're going to let you just use Claude Code I'm pretty sure that's only while it's in preview, just like they were giving away model access before that was formally launched. Get it while it's hot.

dinvlad 1y ago

Another one bites the dust :-( I hope at least Windsurf stays the same..

pkilgore 1y ago

This is much better for me but I really want a plan that includes zero AI other than edit prediction and BYOK for the rest. But as a mostly claude max + zed user happy to see my costs go down.

blutoot 1y ago

Why is most of the AI-tooling industry still stuck on this "bring your own key" model?

sethhochberg 1y ago
What would you propose as an alternative? As a corporate purchaser, "bring your own key" is just about the only way we can allow our employees to stay close to the latest happenings in a rapidly moving corner of the industry. We need to have a decent amount of trust in the model execution environment and we don't like having tons of variable-cost subscriptions. We have that trust in our corporate-managed OpenAI tenant and have good governance and budget controls there, so BYOK lets us have flexibility to put different frontends in front of our trusted execution environment for different use cases.
Macha 1y ago
The companies actually providing the models charge by token and this lets the tooling avoid having to do cost planning for something with a bunch of unknowns and push the risk of overspend to customers.

hmokiguess 1y ago

Zed was supposed to be the answer to Atom / Sublime Text in my opinion, and I kinda do want to use it as my main driver, but it just isn’t there yet for me. It’s shameful because I like its aesthetics as a product more than the competition out there. Just this other day I tried using it for something it sort of advertised itself as the superior thing, which was to load this giant text file I had instantly and let me work on it. I then tried opening this 1GB text file to do a simple find/replace on it only to find macOS run out of system memory with Zed quickly using 20gb of memory for that search operation. I then switched to vscode, which, granted opened it in a buffered sort of way and limited capability, but got the job done. Maybe that was a me issue I don’t know, but aside from this one-off, it doesn’t have a good extensions support in the community for my needs yet. I hope it gets there!

j_bum 1y ago
VSCode is my go to for large text file interaction on macOS. TextEdit may be worth looking into as well? Haven’t tested it for large files before.
- dewey 1y ago
  I have Sublime Text installed for the onlu use case of opening large files. Nothing comes close.
  - CharlesW 1y ago
    Googling around a bit, Sublime Text doesn't seem to be particularly good at this: https://forum.sublimetext.com/t/unable-to-open-a-large-text-file-767-mb/7068/3 https://forum.sublimetext.com/t/unable-to-open-a-large-text-... In my experience, BBEdit will open files that kill other editors: "Handling large files presents no intrinsic problems for BBEdit, though some specific operations may be limited when dealing with files over 2GB in size."
    - xrisk 1y ago
      While I don’t know if the claim is true, you’ve linked a post from 2012…

bitwize 1y ago

Thought this was 2015 for a sec and this was about Zed Shaw.

insane_dreamer 1y ago
“Learn LLM-coding the hard way”.

acaloiar 1y ago

Tokens are an implementation detail that have no business being part of product pricing. It's deliberate obfuscation. First, there's the simple math of converting tokens to dollars. This is easy enough; people are familiar with "credits". Credits can be obfuscation, but at least they're honest. The second and more difficult obfuscation to untangle is how one converts "tokens" to "value". When the value customers receive from tokens slips, they pay the same price for the service. But generative AI companies are under no obligation to refund anything, because the customer paid for tokens, and they got tokens in return. Customers have to trust that they're being given the highest quality tokens the provider can generate. I don't have that trust. Additionally, they have to trust that generative AI companies aren't padding results with superfluous tokens to hit revenue targets. We've all seen how much fluff is in default LLM responses. Pinky promises don't make for healthy business relationships.

mrcwinn 1y ago
Doesn’t prompt pricing obfuscate token costs by definition? I guess the alternative is everyone pays $500/mo. (And you’d still get more value than that.)
ibejoeb 1y ago
Tokens aren't that much more opaque than RAM GB/s for functions or whatever. You'd have to know the entire infra stack to really understand it. I don't really have a suggestion for a better unit for that kind of stuff.

travisgriggs 1y ago

I love this for Zed. I hate that I’m going to have deal with the model providers more directly. Because I don’t know what tokens are. It’s like if McDonalds changed their pricing model to be some complex formula involving nutrition properties (calories, carbs, etc) plus some other things (carbon tax, local state taxes, whatever) and moved to a pay as you bite model. You start eating a Big Mac, but every bite has different content proportions, so every bite is changing in price as you go. Only through trial and error would you figure out how to eat. And the fact that the “complex formula” is prone to real time change at any point, makes it impossible to get excited about eating.

travisgriggs 1y ago

I really want to be able to see outline panel, project panel, agent panel, and terminal panel all at the same time. If I stay at $20/mo, can you guys fix the please? I’m tired of toggling between them.

rdtsc 1y ago

I am wondering why they couldn't have foreseen this. Was it really a failure to predict the need to charge for tokens eventually, or was planned from the start that way -- get people to use the unlimited option for a bit, they get hooked, then switch them to per-token subscriptions.

indymike 1y ago

I'm going through this with pricing for our product and the battle is: Customer: wants predictable spend Sales/Marketing: wants an amazing product that is easy to sell (read does the mostest for the leastest) Advisors: want to see the SaaS model in all it's glory (i.e. 85% margin primarily from oversubscription of infrastructure) Finance: wants to make money and is really worried about variable costs ruining SaaS profit margin A couple of thoughts: 1. AI-based cost is mostly variable. Also, things like messaging, phone minutes and so on are variable. Cloud expenses are also variable... There's a theme and it's different. 2. The unit of value most ai software is delivering is work that is being done by people or should be being done and is not. 3. Seems like it's time to make friends with a way to make money other than subscription pricing.

nextworddev 1y ago

The first thing they do after getting funded by Sequoia lmao

marcopolo 1y ago

I'm glad to see this change. I didn't much use the AI features, but I did want to support Zed. $20 seemed a bit high for that signal. $10 seems right. $5 with no tokens would be nicer. Great work folks

hendersoon 1y ago

So they're essentially charging $5/month for unlimited tab completions, when you get 2k for free. That seems reasonable, many could just not pay anything at all. But in the paid plan they charge 10% over API prices for metered usage... and also support bring your own API. Why would anyone pay their +10%, just to be nice? This is the same problem cursor and windsurf are facing. How the heck do you make money when you're competing with cline/roocode for users who are by definition technically sophisticated? What can you offer that's so wonderful that they can't?

hit8run 1y ago

Say what you want but Sublime is the GOAT.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

ibejoeb 1y ago

> Additional usage billed at API list price +10% I'm hoping that zed is someday able to get discount bulk pricing to resell through their providers. With the 10% markup, is there any benefit to using zed's provider vs. BYOK?

insane_dreamer 1y ago

I’d like to see $5/mo for BYOK only (I already have copilot for edit predictions and CC in the terminal).

gazpachotron 1y ago

[dead]

lemontheme 1y ago

Since the VC investment by Sequoia I’ve had my doubts about Zed. For one thing, a certain high-profile member of that VC publicly promotes a worldview that does not align with mine. For another, I’ve had it with my favorite products constantly enshittifying. I’d always seen my subscription more as a recurring donation toward development anyway, so I canceled it. That said, Zed continues to impress. The editor itself, the technical blog posts, the introduction of new standards like ACP, fair pricing – all paint a picture of a talented, stand-up group of people. So I welcome this new pricing, although like others I’m confused why I would pay 10% extra if I can BYOK. Honestly, I wish I could just pay for Zed as a regular user. After all, I pay for Pycharm even though I don’t use it that much these days. I want to be a paying user so that Zed’s incentives align with mine, not with some big corpo’s. But perhaps that sort of thinking is detached from the reality of building a viable business around an editor…

rexpop 1y ago
Are you referring to Shaun Maguire remarks labeling Zohran Mamdani an "Islamist"? Then you'll love that a16z general partner Katherine Boyle went on Bari Weiss's[0] podcast[1] to help spin the Charlie Kirk martyrdom narrative. 0. https://www.thenation.com/article/society/bari-weiss-free-press-cbs-news-paramount/tnamp/ https://www.thenation.com/article/society/bari-weiss-free-pr... 1. And syndicated it, themselves: https://a16z.simplecast.com/episodes/charlie-kirk-and-the-rise-of-political-violence-8m1Qba_N https://a16z.simplecast.com/episodes/charlie-kirk-and-the-ri...