Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | kingstnap's commentslogin

Ironically the few people not scamming you for cache reads are Deepseek.

Everyone else charges a ridiculous amount but Deepseeks API is $0.003625 / M tok.

I'm surprised no one talks about this because of how significant it is. GPT 5.5 for example costs a ridiculous $0.50 / M tok cached. It's literally almost 140 times cheaper which matters a lot for tool calls.


it's a temporary promo, deepseek will return to only 10x cheaper after.

Yes Deepseek V4 pro is currently on discount.

> The deepseek-v4-pro model is currently offered at a 75% discount, extended until 2026/05/31 15:59 UTC.

However even when the discount ends its still very cheap. It will go back to $0.0145 / M cache hit. That's still 34x cheaper than GPT 5.5.


doesn't matter when subscriptions get cache reads for free, it is only really worth it if it's x340 cheaper otherwise I'd be paying $120 a day, 90% of the cost being cache reads for any top level opensource model.

The details are secret. It very well could be wasted GPU time but Anthropic could have made a killer offering as well.

I'm just speculating, but a particularly killer offering Elon wouldnt be able to refuse would be if Anthropic agreed to give them some training data / technology.


Billions in revenue just before your IPO isn't a bad deal either.

The icing on the cake for Elon is that it strengthens the competition to OpenAI.

Or is that actually his main motivation. Hard to know. Either way it's a win win win for him.


That's certainly one way one could spin this.

I guess loosing a ton of money then trying to get some if it back makes you a genius...


Yeah real geniuses go down with the ship and never change what they set out to do

Elon has many many faults but "loosing" money doesn't appear to be one of them. He's literally the richest person alive!

This is such a bizarre setup.

> American Efficient then used that sales data to calculate the energy savings from the anticipated use of the lighting and appliances, entering those projected savings into “capacity auctions.”

> At capacity auctions, grid operators pay for the ability of traditional power suppliers and utilities— as well as energy-efficiency aggregators like American Efficient—to produce power when needed.

The home depot example shows it more succinctly. How does American Efficient sending a small check to home depot mean that they get to bid for having produced capacity?

If I squint I can almost imagine the goal of this setup. If you want people to use less power you could definitely promote energy efficient appliances and lighting via market forces.

But doing so at capacity auctions seems ridiculous. If your power company wants it then they should cut checks directly to the consumer as a discount/subsidy on energy efficient appliances.



Gift expired.

10M tokens of raw execution traces to grep through is slop. The tasks are fizzbuzz, palindrome, list reversal, and sum-even. The palindrome challenge is literaly this:

> Is the word "racecar" a palindrome? Answer with exactly one lowercase word: "yes" or "no". Print only the answer.


0.04 to 0.1 kWh/GB is insane even for 2018 lol.

I have gigabit internet (125 MB/s). This would imply when I'm downloading something I'm using 18 to 45 kW of electricity. Completely bonkers.


It would also imply that it costs Google ~7¢ in only energy cost to deliver that file to you (using average EU energy costs), which is clearly non-sensical given the rates hyperscalers charge for network egress.

Additionally, the cited number also conflates wired internet (low power consumption) with mobile internet (higher), even though this model is only being downloaded to Chrome Desktop AFAICT.


I'd guess there is some offset power needed for keeping a "line" open. Like, 200 kB/s is not twice the power of 100?

When looking at the power consumption across the whole network path and not just a single link, most of the power draw is probably baseline static power costs of keeping all the routers and switches running. Which means that judging the impact of a download in terms of Watts per MB/s is a pretty bad way of analyzing this.

Clearly you're charging an EV to drive a jar of microsd cards with your data back and forth

1.8 to 4.5 kW.

This was my math:

0.1 kWh * 3600s/hr = 360 kJ

360 kJ / 8s (time for 1 GB) = 45 kW


Or, slightly more direct: .1kW*h/GB * .125GB/s * 3600s/h = 45kW

Those are some goofy numbers. Obviously incorrect.


Right now it seems to say:

> Showing 1,808 changed files with 790,916 additions and 151 deletions.

Just looking at the git diff [0].

I looked at one of these rust port files [1]. Its 827 loc and apparently 7,576 tokens. So that gives you a first order guess that the full 700k additions is around 8 million output tokens. Obviously there are some tool calls, reasoning, reads of the zig version, and fixing compile errors as overhead. So I would guess maybe this is like 40 million tokens by multiplying by 5?

If we guess that is around $200 to $500 in token spend. We can probably guess that it emits around the same as buying $100 in gas? Or like 50 or so kgs of CO2?

[0] https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/compare/main...claude/phase-a...

[1] https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/blob/dacc59c62a8f93eabe6d9998...


Thanks, that's a really great answer.

It feels odd that the same message can be thus down voted and give the impulse to provide courteous response with reasoning, metrics and values.

Glory to your kindness and informarive way to react.


Interest is a percentage of debt.

Income through taxes is roughly a percentage of GDP.

You could also just compare interest spending vs budget, and lots of people do. Spending on interest is roughly $1T out of a total $7T with income of $5.23T

$1T of an incoming $5.23T is pretty concerning. Especially given projections that the $1T is likely to go up significantly over the next decade.


It's not hard to imagine how this happens. I assume most people here have used these models extensively.

The help bot system prompt probably includes some statement about how Claude should phrase everything as "we".

The system prompt includes statements about how it doesn't have tools for managing funds.

A little bit of A and a bit of B and you get a message from Haiku telling you that you can't get your money back said as though this isn't a trivial customer service thing to do.


> The help bot system prompt probably includes some statement about how Claude should phrase everything as "we".

Yes, why did Anthropic do that when everyone knew it could result in this situation we're discussing?

> The system prompt includes statements about how it doesn't have tools for managing funds.

Yes, why did Anthropic do that when everyone knew it could result in this situation we're discussing?

What you've been describing are all effects of the cause, which is poor management decisions to have poor support and poor customer service. Clearly those decisions resulted in poor support bot system prompts, too.

To wit: this would likely not have happened if the prompt included something like "in a scenario like this, or any scenario where the customer asks, simply transfer them to a human", and if Anthropic had not decided to have dysfunctional support and customer service.

The feedback from folks here is not that poor decisions can have poor effects. It's 'for the love of god, please stop making poor decisions that repeatedly, invariably, lead to unforced errors like the one in TFA'.


Of the things you could complain about in modern cars as being too complicated, you chose turning on seat heating???

Like you push the seat heating button if your seat feels cold. What is there to think about?


On an electric car that yells at you your range left and that you won't make it to your destination unless you charge, if you turn on the seat warmers, that range goes down so you have to think about if you'd rather have a toasty butt and have to stop and charge, or just be colder and get there sooner. But you have to charge anyway.

That sounds like a problem with whatever brand of car that is. Is it one made by a certain white supremacist perhaps? That could be the problem.

Using the heated seats will cause you to loose range on every car, not just electric

Ohrly? Are you reading HN or pretending to be stupid?

I’m often stupid, but usually not on purpose. What’s your point?

In an ICE powered car, running the heater doesn't have the same effect on range. Because an ICE is hot due to how it works, sending hot air to the car's interior is basically free because the heater uses waste heat from the engine.

We're talking about the seat heaters though. I'm pretty sure heated seats use resistive heaters and not waste heat from the engine

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: