3 ms·

One thing I can tell you is you are either favored by Anthropic, or your version of the CLI does not exhaust limits, or there's some major bug, as two people ar

by larodi 4mo ago

One thing I can tell you is you are either favored by Anthropic, or your version of the CLI does not exhaust limits, or there's some major bug, as two people around me (myself included) claim it took half an hour to hit the ceiling. Which makes it practically unusable, where the same workflow a day ago produced a good 5-6 hours of workload with several agents.

piokoch 4mo ago
Monetization is coming. They'll tell companies, AI is replacing your workers, so it is still worth to pay 100K/year for the license, as those AI are not going to jump to other job, get sick, be late, complain, require free coffee and so on. Soon the times of AI for $20/$200 a month will be long gone.
- miroljub 4mo ago
  Thankfully, we have Chinese models we can use for a fraction of the price. Not everyone needs a Ferrari to go for a weekly shopping.
  - baq 4mo ago
    A Ferrari will likely lap you when you’re racing, though, and the market and the economy is a race. You’ll be facing a question soon, or your employer will, whether to spend a significant chunk of free cash on fable-class tokens or on literally anything else instead - wages and salaries included.
    - iugtmkbdfil834 4mo ago
      << You’ll be facing a question soon, or your employer will Maybe? If you talk to executives, the impression that I am getting is that they tend to be somewhat misinformed at best, which, yes, is bound to result in some really bad decisions down the road. But, and it is not a small but, the ones I did talk to ( and, amusingly, those are the ones with strong opinions ) don't seem to have a lot, um, practical exposure to this tech beyond what they heard at the watercooler. Honestly, it is kinda infuriating. And all this before we get to how companies want to say they use AI, but also keep cost down.
    - miroljub 4mo ago
      Yeah, sure. In the same way I can see only Ferraris driving as taxis, company cars, transport vehicles, used by post, delivery services ... You and your work are not that special, you are not participating in car races, and you don't need a Ferrari.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
- larodi 4mo ago
  As someone noted here recently - use the frontier models as much as u can, while you can.
- tarkin2 4mo ago
  Get people hooked, tell them spending time coding is no longer needed, let their skills deteriorate, tell them they need cough up for a licence to do their job Forcing developers to pay for models that were build on code they scraped scott-free A tax to do their job that developers are jumping at the chance to pay Everybody's finally realising that node dependencies are a threat, but letting these AI companies gatekeep the industry is a bandwagon people are scrambling towards
  - paganel 4mo ago
    > Forcing developers to pay for models that were build on code they scraped scott-free That's also caused by some very smart (even brilliant) developers (you can see many of them in this very thread) choosing to be oblivious about all this and bury us all under, hoping that they'll be among the last ones to go. Writing this down I realise that they maybe aren't all that smart.
  - witx 4mo ago
    > Forcing developers to pay for models that were build on code they scraped scott-free. Yes this makes me sad behound explanation. Specially when I see open source developers happily using these tools. These companies stole your, free, hard work and charge you a subscription!! Not to speak about them torrenting books and (most likely) training on private repos. This and devs paying a subscription to use a tool that is marketed as trying to replace them. I had 150$ monthly budget thatbI used for various open source projects and I've cut that entirelly.
    - majora2007 4mo ago
      I don't get what you're saying. You're frustrated that Open Source projects were used to build these AIs and that OS devs (or devs in general) are paying to use AI. Then you say you had money that you used to donate(?) to OS and have cut that because of the frustration? Open source just means sharing the source code for people to learn off or have the ability to customize on their own. I don't think there is any need to be frustrated about that (now if it was copyright/private of course).
- thewebguyd 4mo ago
  I've been saying this since the beginning, the rug pull is coming. If these models can eventually replace a human worker, there is no reason these companies won't charge (and get away with it) very close to a typical SWE salary. It would not surprise me one bit to see anywhere from $80k-$100k/seat pricing.
  - andriy_koval 4mo ago
    Unless there is competition (e.g. Chinese models, taking you 80% there, but costing 20x less)
- dualvariable 4mo ago
  AI for $20/month won't ever go away, but it won't be the absolute latest and greatest frontier model. Most of us don't need a model that can prove the Riemann hypothesis or Goldbach's conjecture in order to get work done.
witx 4mo ago
They are most likely shills from Anthropic, there's quite a few here everytime new models come out.
- miyoji 4mo ago
  That's not fair. Simon is a well-known shill for the entire AI industry, not just Anthropic.
  - simonw 4mo ago
    What's your definition of "shill"?
    - Jensson 4mo ago
      Probably means fan, shills have undisclosed ties and I doubt he means Simon has undisclosed ties to the entire AI industry, that would be very impressive if so.
      - supern0va 4mo ago
        Ah, yeah. I've noticed people also starting to just use "slop" to also mean "anything I see online that I don't like" now, too. Words apparently don't mean anything anymore.
    - miyoji 4mo ago
      Merriam-Webster: noun, 1b: one who makes a sales pitch or serves as a promoter You might want to ask the guy who said it first what he meant; I was just pointing out that your work isn't particularly Anthropic-biased, in my experience.
simonw 4mo ago
Are you on the $100/month subscription?
- joshstrange 4mo ago
  I am, and I used up the entire 5 hour window in 8min using the highest thinking setting. It also ate up $15 of extra usage before I noticed. I’ve done the same thing with opus multiple times with no issue. According to ccusage I racked up just shy of $100 of tokens using Fable. It spun up subagents or workflows or whatever so obviously that contributed but “double opus” was not my experience. I’ve done the exact same prompt with opus on the highest setting and only once before (not even while using this prompt) hit my limits. My prompt? I’m not a prompt wizard or anything but it was literally: > Please review the uncommitted code in this repo for bugs/issues/code smells. I use variations on that all the time with opus and never had issues. I figured it was a good one to kick the tires with Fable. Little did I know it would mean no more Claude Code for the next 4.5hrs (unless I wanted to pay) after this being the first time I had used CC that day (yesterday). All in all, a pretty crappy first experience.
  - simonw 4mo ago
    Try running this command: and see what it thinks you spent at API prices: uvx agentsview usage daily Then edit the config file to add Fable pricing as described here: https://til.simonwillison.net/llms/agentsview-custom-model-price https://til.simonwillison.net/llms/agentsview-custom-model-p... And run the command again. I get $126.89 for yesterday.
    - joshstrange 4mo ago
      Hmm, I tried that and made the config file change but it didn't work for me. I just see: DATE INPUT OUTPUT CACHE_CR CACHE_RD COST MODELS ---- ----- ------ -------- -------- ---- ------ 2026-06-09 142015 85315 321224 6880110 $10.96 claude-fable-5, gpt-5.5, claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 I tried to filter down to just fable (or 5.5 so I could deduct it) but the `--agent` flag doesn't seem to work how I'd expect... I think the $10.96 is coming from gpt-5.5 since I switched to it once I exhausted all my usage on CC. CCusage reports completely different numbers so I don't know which one of those is right. Thanks for trying, for yesterday ccusage says "$92.02" for claude, which I assumed was the Fable usage.
cedws 4mo ago
It’s not meant for subscription users; the subscriptions are just the gateway drug to Enterprise pricing which Anthropic intends to use to juice their numbers before IPO.
desmond1303 4mo ago
Or use API billing? We have access to it at my company with no limits

by larodi 4mo ago

piokoch 4mo ago

Monetization is coming. They'll tell companies, AI is replacing your workers, so it is still worth to pay 100K/year for the license, as those AI are not going to jump to other job, get sick, be late, complain, require free coffee and so on. Soon the times of AI for $20/$200 a month will be long gone.

miroljub 4mo ago
Thankfully, we have Chinese models we can use for a fraction of the price. Not everyone needs a Ferrari to go for a weekly shopping.
- baq 4mo ago
  A Ferrari will likely lap you when you’re racing, though, and the market and the economy is a race. You’ll be facing a question soon, or your employer will, whether to spend a significant chunk of free cash on fable-class tokens or on literally anything else instead - wages and salaries included.
  - iugtmkbdfil834 4mo ago
    << You’ll be facing a question soon, or your employer will Maybe? If you talk to executives, the impression that I am getting is that they tend to be somewhat misinformed at best, which, yes, is bound to result in some really bad decisions down the road. But, and it is not a small but, the ones I did talk to ( and, amusingly, those are the ones with strong opinions ) don't seem to have a lot, um, practical exposure to this tech beyond what they heard at the watercooler. Honestly, it is kinda infuriating. And all this before we get to how companies want to say they use AI, but also keep cost down.
  - miroljub 4mo ago
    Yeah, sure. In the same way I can see only Ferraris driving as taxis, company cars, transport vehicles, used by post, delivery services ... You and your work are not that special, you are not participating in car races, and you don't need a Ferrari.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
larodi 4mo ago
As someone noted here recently - use the frontier models as much as u can, while you can.
tarkin2 4mo ago
Get people hooked, tell them spending time coding is no longer needed, let their skills deteriorate, tell them they need cough up for a licence to do their job Forcing developers to pay for models that were build on code they scraped scott-free A tax to do their job that developers are jumping at the chance to pay Everybody's finally realising that node dependencies are a threat, but letting these AI companies gatekeep the industry is a bandwagon people are scrambling towards
- paganel 4mo ago
  > Forcing developers to pay for models that were build on code they scraped scott-free That's also caused by some very smart (even brilliant) developers (you can see many of them in this very thread) choosing to be oblivious about all this and bury us all under, hoping that they'll be among the last ones to go. Writing this down I realise that they maybe aren't all that smart.
- witx 4mo ago
  > Forcing developers to pay for models that were build on code they scraped scott-free. Yes this makes me sad behound explanation. Specially when I see open source developers happily using these tools. These companies stole your, free, hard work and charge you a subscription!! Not to speak about them torrenting books and (most likely) training on private repos. This and devs paying a subscription to use a tool that is marketed as trying to replace them. I had 150$ monthly budget thatbI used for various open source projects and I've cut that entirelly.
  - majora2007 4mo ago
    I don't get what you're saying. You're frustrated that Open Source projects were used to build these AIs and that OS devs (or devs in general) are paying to use AI. Then you say you had money that you used to donate(?) to OS and have cut that because of the frustration? Open source just means sharing the source code for people to learn off or have the ability to customize on their own. I don't think there is any need to be frustrated about that (now if it was copyright/private of course).
thewebguyd 4mo ago
I've been saying this since the beginning, the rug pull is coming. If these models can eventually replace a human worker, there is no reason these companies won't charge (and get away with it) very close to a typical SWE salary. It would not surprise me one bit to see anywhere from $80k-$100k/seat pricing.
- andriy_koval 4mo ago
  Unless there is competition (e.g. Chinese models, taking you 80% there, but costing 20x less)
dualvariable 4mo ago
AI for $20/month won't ever go away, but it won't be the absolute latest and greatest frontier model. Most of us don't need a model that can prove the Riemann hypothesis or Goldbach's conjecture in order to get work done.

witx 4mo ago

They are most likely shills from Anthropic, there's quite a few here everytime new models come out.

miyoji 4mo ago
That's not fair. Simon is a well-known shill for the entire AI industry, not just Anthropic.
- simonw 4mo ago
  What's your definition of "shill"?
  - Jensson 4mo ago
    Probably means fan, shills have undisclosed ties and I doubt he means Simon has undisclosed ties to the entire AI industry, that would be very impressive if so.
    - supern0va 4mo ago
      Ah, yeah. I've noticed people also starting to just use "slop" to also mean "anything I see online that I don't like" now, too. Words apparently don't mean anything anymore.
  - miyoji 4mo ago
    Merriam-Webster: noun, 1b: one who makes a sales pitch or serves as a promoter You might want to ask the guy who said it first what he meant; I was just pointing out that your work isn't particularly Anthropic-biased, in my experience.

simonw 4mo ago

Are you on the $100/month subscription?

joshstrange 4mo ago
I am, and I used up the entire 5 hour window in 8min using the highest thinking setting. It also ate up $15 of extra usage before I noticed. I’ve done the same thing with opus multiple times with no issue. According to ccusage I racked up just shy of $100 of tokens using Fable. It spun up subagents or workflows or whatever so obviously that contributed but “double opus” was not my experience. I’ve done the exact same prompt with opus on the highest setting and only once before (not even while using this prompt) hit my limits. My prompt? I’m not a prompt wizard or anything but it was literally: > Please review the uncommitted code in this repo for bugs/issues/code smells. I use variations on that all the time with opus and never had issues. I figured it was a good one to kick the tires with Fable. Little did I know it would mean no more Claude Code for the next 4.5hrs (unless I wanted to pay) after this being the first time I had used CC that day (yesterday). All in all, a pretty crappy first experience.
- simonw 4mo ago
  Try running this command: and see what it thinks you spent at API prices: uvx agentsview usage daily Then edit the config file to add Fable pricing as described here: https://til.simonwillison.net/llms/agentsview-custom-model-price https://til.simonwillison.net/llms/agentsview-custom-model-p... And run the command again. I get $126.89 for yesterday.
  - joshstrange 4mo ago
    Hmm, I tried that and made the config file change but it didn't work for me. I just see: DATE INPUT OUTPUT CACHE_CR CACHE_RD COST MODELS ---- ----- ------ -------- -------- ---- ------ 2026-06-09 142015 85315 321224 6880110 $10.96 claude-fable-5, gpt-5.5, claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 I tried to filter down to just fable (or 5.5 so I could deduct it) but the `--agent` flag doesn't seem to work how I'd expect... I think the $10.96 is coming from gpt-5.5 since I switched to it once I exhausted all my usage on CC. CCusage reports completely different numbers so I don't know which one of those is right. Thanks for trying, for yesterday ccusage says "$92.02" for claude, which I assumed was the Fable usage.

cedws 4mo ago

It’s not meant for subscription users; the subscriptions are just the gateway drug to Enterprise pricing which Anthropic intends to use to juice their numbers before IPO.

desmond1303 4mo ago

Or use API billing? We have access to it at my company with no limits