4 ms·
switching models is insanely cheap compared to token cost on anything signficant, this is a take so cynical it misses the reality
by lanthissa 5mo ago
switching models is insanely cheap compared to token cost on anything signficant, this is a take so cynical it misses the reality
- Clueed 5mo agoin any corporate or half compliance-relevant setting switching isn't trivial. new DPA, subprocessor notifications, TIA, procurement review, security questionnaires, plus re-running your evals because prompts don't transfer 1:1. token cost is just one of the line items.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- lanthissa 5mo agono it really not, even the soggiest bank has multiple api vendors atm.
- alexandre_m 5mo agoI agree with parent. I'm not sure where your stance is coming from. From what I hear, most enterprise AI deployments are seat-based subscriptions with annual commitments.
- p1esk 5mo agoYes, I work at a 50 person startup and even here switching from CC to codex or cursor would be non-trivial for multiple reasons - not just the annual commitment.
- esperent 5mo agoI don't doubt you but it's amazing how much easier things get when there's another option at 20% of the price, and that's what's going to happen here if these American companies keep trying to squeeze the prices up.
- opsnooperfax 5mo ago50K FTE global firm. We’re still piloting ChatGPT. AI is a four-letter word and there are ridiculous ceremonies and hundreds of hours of overhead for every trivial use case. Amusingly, Enterprise credits are more expensive than just paying a zero-commitment on-demand API fee. Personal accounts are still the best value.
- lanthissa 4mo agomy stance is coming from working at one of the soggiest banks and having access to 3 with 2 more coming, and knowing the same is true at 2 of our large competitors.