I was actually quite worried, because I've been using GHCP for large chunks of work, but the billing estimator they released shows I was only at about $150-200 a month in API priced tokens. Sure, that's a subsidy for my $20 subscription, but not insane.

Heavy use of agentic coding tools, in a responsible manner, probably lands somewhere around that $200/m mark at API pricing. Assuming that makes the provider money, I don't see that being hard to swallow for businesses employing developers in Western countries, given the hours it can save.

The real risk here is to personal project vibe coders. Building a huge app by abusing subsidized plans is ending.

Just today, when I wasn't being especially chatty with GHCP, I used about 12 requests to get a few thousand line changes in 3 projects I'm juggling. The last project repo of copilot I closed, in 3 hours burned 38M input tokens, 28M cache, and like 400K out. For GPT5.4, high. That's like $135, in half the day, 1 of 3 instances. No crazy tool use, just lots of docs and unorganized code. GHCP charged like 70 cents for that on the old plan.

It hit me that as it's deciphering some verbose log file, it has also read through all the source code that wrote that log, and likely all of the discussions/commits that went into building that (broken) feature.

Once they're in MD format, you can always get your favorite agent to do more formatting and organization, which was one of the big reasons I moved away from ON.

If you go adding any old repo to APT, you have the same risk. You should look at how much code review goes into packages for major distros like Debian, hint, not much, especially once the initial package was accepted.

GHCP at least is transparent about the pricing: hit enter on a prompt= one request. CC/Codex use some opaque quota scheme, where you never really know if a request will be 1,2,10% of your hourly max, let alone weekly max.

I've never seen much difference with context ostensibly being shorter in GHCP, all of the models (in any provider) lose the thread well before their window is full, and it seems that aggressive autocompaction is a pretty standard way to help with that, and CC/Codex do it frequently.

I only use password keys for things that need to be scripted.

I reenabled DB on that alt port when I did the recent major update, just in case, but it wasn't necessary. After the upgrade, OpenSSH was alive and ready.

Mind you, I think GHCP is a great service at an excellent price, but the hardcore vibe coders complain about the rate limits that I've never personally experienced using the CLI.

There, sorted!

I've used/use both, and find them pretty comparable, as far as the actual model backing the tool. That wasn't the case 9 months ago, but the world changes quickly.

Most abusers of methamphetamine are not taking it orally (slow route of administration) and are generally using much higher relative dosing than ADHD patients are using amphetamines. Potential for addiction and other physical harms are greatly affected by both of those things, so the comparison has some truth, but is obviously sensationalized.

However, besides a few trades that use unions/licensure/apprenticeship as an artificial supply limit, most trades are only limited by a willingness to do the work. A few decades ago, trade work was much less expensive, because supply was higher and many did their own DIY, which limited what prices the market would tolerate.

I'd put Codex 5.3 on par with CC for almost every task, and OAI has been rapidly updating their app, with a major initial release for Windows just a few weeks ago. Quotas are a moving target, but right now, Codex offers a better value by far, being very usable at the $20 level.

I don't have a dog in this race other than competition keeping them all honest. Claude led for so long, but I think that early lead has blinded many to how close it is now.

The only one really eating dust is Google. What a terrible offering. I wish it wasn't so, because they could really apply some price pressure to the competition with their scale and integration.

Just deny WAN access to the IoT junk you don't trust at the router, or for things like cameras, a separate switch for those. That usually makes sense, since they're one of the few devices that must be powered with PoE and doesn't require gig+ bandwidth. A cheap 100mbit PoE switch will handle a good number of cameras.

Teaching this as a requires HS class would be an incredible benefit to society, because, on the flip side, many police encounters escalate to violence because the citizen has an incorrect understanding of where their rights end/don't exist.

The most obvious rule to follow is that you should always assert your rights (correct or incorrect) verbally only, as soon as you involve physical resistance, the situation will deteriorate rapidly (for you.) Any violations of your rights will be argued and dealt with in court, not on the street. Confirm requests/demands from officers are 'lawful orders', and then do them.