Initially, you picked the Multi-ZA RDS db.t3.2xlarge instance because you figured "eh i have credits anyway". Two years later, someone looks at this and says "hey, this is expensive and I bet we can do everything we need on a machine half the size". But then they think "if i downsize it and that works, i'll get a thumbs up emoji on a slack thread. If i downsize it and it causes problems, i'll draw the ire of the whole team. I better leave it alone." And the truth is... by the time your company hits the end of those credits, you're probably at the point where that savings isn't gonna do much. Or maybe you are out of business.

And that is how almost every successful company that uses AWS eventually ends up paying six-figures or more annually.

Sometimes models are vastly underpriced. Fable is an example. I can easily spend hundreds of dollars using it to code. On the other hand, if I'm looking for AI to review a contract for any obvious mistakes, I don't really care if I spend $0.01 vs $1.00, even if the difference is only marginal. I'll pay quite a bit more for something that's just a little bit better.

Same thing with design, in many cases. When the absolute dollar amounts are small, I'm happy to pay more for even marginally better quality.

If I’m using this towards something that makes me money, I’d pay a lot more, but it really depends on context. In general, I’ll spend $5 like it’s nothing, $20 if it’s nothing and it’s for a business expense, and probably $50-100 for a design scheme for my (quite small) business. I don’t know that I’m a representative sample, but I’ll put my money where my mouth is, because I just added an extra $5 to play around more.

Btw, it’s a really innovative interface. It’s fun and very different from other tools I’ve seen. I quite like it but it’s also a bit confusing. Feel free to contact me if you want customer feedback (info in profile).

To the parent commenter's point, we don't have enough information to know if that's true.

EDIT: the founder is on this thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48933905) providing more info and explains that adding expenses on would be too burdensome.

Furthermore, a lot of my workflow is now done on remote servers (i love exe.dev) where claude code is sandboxed to an extent (it can still cause damage, just not to my main computer's file system). When I'm configuring those, i have a setup script that installs all of my vim files just the way i like them, so vim behaves exactly the same on a remote server as it does locally. I can edit things as needed. I can also access claude code on those servers as well. So working on my remote machine feels a lot like workin locally [1].

[1] I'm aware that i can setup cursor or vs code to access SSH servers, but it's just not as easy and doesn't feel as natural, IMO. There's something i like about needing to call `ssh remote-server` first.

I'm not defending the UN here, but I don't think that the Secretary General is the person who decided to put Google Tags on their website. I'd be shocked if he even vaguely knows what a Google Tag is.

A lot of people gladly pay humans to launder their clothes, so the market is there. But the current iteration of wash/dry combo machines doesn’t solve the main issue. I don’t mind transferring my clothes from the washer to the dryer, because that takes 60 seconds. It’s folding and putting away the clothes that makes laundry a chore.

I think a reasonable metric would be "you have 2 years to sell your assets and convert to cash (or something super liquid like treasuries)". This accounts for people who hold things like farm land or real estate that can't just be liquidated tomorrow. By this Metric, the values for many of the billionaires out there are real. Bill Gates, for example, hardly owns a significant stake in Microsoft anymore, but he does have lots of illiquid assets like farmland and real estate. Brin/Page/Bezos still have significant stakes in their companies, but the companies stand on their own at this point and I doubt that shares would go down a ton if any of them liquidated over the course of a year. Zuckerberg probably can't sell his meta shares without a reasonable decrease in value, so there'd be some haircut, but it's still an incredibly valuable company without him.

But Musk is at a different level. I can't imagine him selling his stakes in his companies without the stocks plummeting more than 50%.

As a hiring manager, I will immediately prioritize hiring graduates of that school. I can teach someone who knows how to code how to use Claude Code. I find the other way around quite difficult.

Iran knows that the US population really really doesn’t want a ground invasion. Right now, we have lost a handful of lives from missiles hitting US bases, but it’s not the same as a ground war.

Cuba, however, would very much get a ground invasion if they start striking the US with missiles. It’s not even a question. And I also assume their leaders are not religious fanatics with any interest in martyrdom.

The crazy thing is we often cite an Apple Tax, but in this case, I think they actually have a cheaper product.