<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: __jl__</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=__jl__</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2026 06:17:04 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=__jl__" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "GPT-5.4"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I see your point. I do find Anthropic's approach more clean though particularly when you add in mini and nano. That makes 5 models priced differently. Some share the same core name, others don't: gpt 5 nano, gpt 5 mini, gpt 5.1, gpt 5.2, gpt 5.4. And we are not even talking about thinking budget.<p>But generally: These are not consumer facing products and I agree that someone who uses the API should be able to figure out the price point of different models.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2026 22:27:46 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47268163</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47268163</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47268163</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "GPT-5.4"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>What a model mess!<p>OpenAI now has three price points: GPT 5.1, GPT 5.2 and now GPT 5.4. There version numbers jump across different model lines with codex at 5.3, what they now call instant also at 5.3.<p>Anthropic are really the only ones who managed to get this under control: Three models, priced at three different levels. New models are immediately available everywhere.<p>Google essentially only has Preview models! The last GA is 2.5. As a developer, I can either use an outdated model or have zero insurances that the model doesn't get discontinued within weeks.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2026 20:54:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47267148</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47267148</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47267148</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Gemini 3.1 Pro"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Another preview release. Does that mean the recommended model by Google for production is 2.5 Flash and Pro? Not talking about what people are actually doing but the google recommendation. Kind of crazy if that is the case</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2026 16:32:55 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47075579</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47075579</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47075579</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "GPT-5.3-Codex"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Impressive jump for GPT-5.3-codex and crazy to see two top coding models come out on the same day...</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2026 18:16:28 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46902772</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46902772</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46902772</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Unrolling the Codex agent loop"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yes you can and I really like it as a feature. But it ties you to OpenAI…</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2026 01:31:50 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46740225</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46740225</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46740225</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Gemini 3 Flash: Frontier intelligence built for speed"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I will have to try that. Cursor bill got pretty high with Opus 4.5. Never considered opus before the 4.5 price drop but now it's hard to change... :)</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 17:47:56 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302889</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302889</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302889</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Gemini 3 Flash: Frontier intelligence built for speed"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Mostly at the time of release except for 1.5 Flash which got a price drop in Aug 2024.<p>Google has been discontinuing older models after several months of transition period so I would expect the same for the 2.5 models. But that process only starts when the release version of 3 models is out (pro and flash are in preview right now).</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 17:45:30 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302852</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302852</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302852</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Gemini 3 Flash: Frontier intelligence built for speed"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This is awesome. No preview release either, which is great to production.<p>They are pushing the prices higher with each release though:
API pricing is up to $0.5/M for input and $3/M for output<p>For comparison:<p>Gemini 3.0 Flash: $0.50/M  for input and $3.00/M for output<p>Gemini 2.5 Flash: $0.30/M  for input and $2.50/M for output<p>Gemini 2.0 Flash: $0.15/M  for input and $0.60/M for output<p>Gemini 1.5 Flash: $0.075/M for input and $0.30/M for output (after price drop)<p>Gemini 3.0 Pro: $2.00/M for input and $12/M for output<p>Gemini 2.5 Pro: $1.25/M for input and $10/M for output<p>Gemini 1.5 Pro: $1.25/M for input and  $5/M for output<p>I think image input pricing went up even more.<p>Correction: It is a preview model...</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 16:58:25 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302073</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302073</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302073</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Gemini 3"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>API pricing is up to $2/M for input and $12/M for output<p>For comparison:
Gemini 2.5 Pro was $1.25/M for input and $10/M for output
Gemini 1.5 Pro was $1.25/M for input and $5/M for output</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 15:30:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45967561</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45967561</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45967561</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Gemini 3 Pro Model Card [pdf]"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>API pricing is up to $2/M for input and $12/M for output<p>For comparison:
Gemini 2.5 Pro was $1.25/M for input and $10/M for output
Gemini 1.5 Pro was $1.25/M for input and $5/M for output</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 15:30:03 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45967554</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45967554</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45967554</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Gemini 3 Pro Model Card [pdf]"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Same here. They have been aggressively increasing prices with each iteration (maybe because they started so low). Still hope that is not the case this time. GPT 5.1 is priced pretty aggressively so maybe that is an incentive to keep the current gemini API prices.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 14:05:52 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45966169</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45966169</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45966169</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "GPT-5.1 for Developers"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The prompt caching change is awesome for any agent. Claude is far behind with increased costs for caching and manual caching checkpoints. Certainly depends on your application but prompt caching is also ignored in a lot of cost comparisons.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2025 22:17:02 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45921377</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45921377</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45921377</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Cursor 1.7"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Since we have cursor people joining, let me bring up my constant problems around applying code changes. For background, I mostly work with "chat":<p>1. The apply button does not appear. This used to be mostly a problem with Gemini 2.5 Pro and GPT-5 but now sometimes happens with all models. Very annoying because I have to apply manually<p>2. Cursor doesn't recognize which file to apply changes to and just uses the currently open file. Also very annoying and impossible to change the file to which I want to apply changes after they were applied to one file.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2025 17:22:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45440385</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45440385</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45440385</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Making 2.5 Flash and 2.5 Pro GA, and introducing Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>1.5 -> 2.0 was a price increase as well (double, I think, and something like 4x for image input)<p>Now 2.0 -> 2.5 is another hefty price increase.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2025 18:42:32 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44302396</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44302396</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44302396</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Cursor 1.0"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Same! :)</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 10:51:59 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44190356</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44190356</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44190356</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "voyage-3.5 and voyage-3.5-lite: improved quality for a new retrieval frontier"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Voyage models are great in my experience and I am planing to test 3.5. Almost more interested in 3.5-lite though. Great price.<p>My concern: voyage api has been unreliable. They were bought by mango db, which makes me a little uneasy.<p>Gemini embeddings look like a great model but it’s in preview and there haven’t been any updates for a while (including at io). Also not sure how committed Google is to embeddings models.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2025 23:33:18 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44084418</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44084418</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44084418</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Claude 4"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Thanks. I looked a couple minutes ago and couldn't see it. For anyone curious, pricing remains the same as previous Anthropic models.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2025 16:46:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44063864</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44063864</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44063864</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Claude 4"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Anyone found information on API pricing?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2025 16:43:04 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44063808</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44063808</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44063808</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "OpenAI reaches agreement to buy Windsurf for $3B"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Here are my two cents on cursors versus windsurf approach:<p>CURSOR shifted to a more agentic approach even for chat requests to reduce input tokens.<p>Previously, they used the good old RAG pattern with code dumps: Request with user added files -> Retrieval (when Codebase enabled) -> LLM requests with combined context from user and retrieval.<p>Now they seem to be doing something like this:
Request -> LLM with tools to search code base and/or user-added files<p>I get constant search tool calls even for user-added files. Big reduction in input token but I think performance suffers as well.<p>WINDSURF is still willing to dump code into the context, which gives them an edge in some cases (presumably at a cost of input tokens).<p>Windsurf is willing to spent to acquire customers (lower subscription cost, higher expenses for llm calls). Cursor has a huge customer base and is working on making it sustainable by a) reducing costs (see above) and b) increasing revenue (e.g. "Pro" requests for 0.05 with more input and output token).</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2025 13:18:30 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43904767</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43904767</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43904767</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by __jl__ in "Google Gemini has the worst LLM API"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Only problem is that the genai API at <a href="https://ai.google.dev" rel="nofollow">https://ai.google.dev</a> is far less reliable and can be problematic for production use cases. Right around the time Gemini 2.0 launched, it was done for days on end without any communication. They are putting a lot of effort into improving it but it's much less reliable than openai, which matters for production. They can also reject your request based on overall system load (not your individual limits), which is very unpredictable. They advertise 2000 requests per minute. When I tried several weeks ago, I couldn't even get 500 per minute.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2025 14:53:46 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43887058</link><dc:creator>__jl__</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43887058</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43887058</guid></item></channel></rss>