this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2026
581 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

85645 readers
3169 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OptimusPrimeDownfall@discuss.tchncs.de 393 points 2 weeks ago (14 children)

I'm sorry, did everybody else not see this coming from miles away? This is the private equity playbook.

  1. Make a service so cheap as to seem to good to be true to attract customers.
  2. Gain a loyal base of people
  3. once theyre locked in, squeeze them for all they're worth.

When something is too good to be true, you ALWAYS have to be ready to either jump ship, massively change how you do things, or pay through the nose.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 82 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

Pretty sure they picked the wrong tech to try and lock people into. It isn't hardware and doesn't have some kind of proprietary interface that takes time to get used to when switching. Some models might be better than others at specific things, but not enough to justify the prices they are going to charge for output you have to review and fix.

This is literally the easiest thing to jump ship from.

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 33 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

That's the stupidest thing about these AI companies' valuation.

They don't even really own anything!

Their models -- their main proprietary IP -- are not copyrightable or patentable, and not legally protected in any way. Any competitor can copy them at any time and then offer the same service for cheaper, without the overhead costs for training. The giants of the AI industry could easily be undercut and replaced at any time.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The hardest part about the copying is the actual copying without having access to the weights or even just a ready to run file for the model.

IIRC Deepseek kinda did something like that by asking ChatGPT tons of questions to train their own model or something

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 11 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, you can do that ... or some good old fashioned corporate espionage.

Or, hell, just ask ChatGPT for its weights model. With how shitty these AI companies are at security and guardrails, that might just work.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jagermo@feddit.org 11 points 2 weeks ago

All of them also bring their own comfortable export feature.

"I want to share all of this with my team. Create the prompt that is necessary to do this"

[–] Prove_your_argument@piefed.social 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

This is literally the easiest thing to jump ship from.

It depends how heavily you are leaning on ML tools to do business processes honestly.

It's easy to implement something that mostly works and doesn't need a ton of baby sitting, but moving from one solution to another is like rebuilding an ERP if you have gotten deep enough into the weeds.

This bubble is super scary though. The only things I can see propping it up would be world governments once the tech companies and other large enterprises halt spending. I don't think the US can shoulder the costs and nobody else is gonna lol

[–] Maestro@fedia.io 28 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Have you seen the IPOs and the rule changes that the stock exchanges and index funds made to please the AI overlords? It'll be US pension funds left holding the bag when the bubble goes pop

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago

astronaut meme.

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses man.

[–] urandom@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Since the article is talking about devs, any who were able to code before should be able to carry on without an LLM by their side. They might not be as “productive”, but jumping ship, or even forgoing one, should not be a challenge.

[–] one_old_coder@piefed.social 9 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

This is literally the easiest thing to jump ship from.

I'm not sure about that. We see professional developers complaining all the time when their AWS or GitHub account is banned. But this time we're talking about vibe coders who have less skills than the average developer.

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

I believe that is largely their employers' decision. It is easy to switch, but it is the boss who makes that decision, not the tech-literate team. Bosses like big well-known companies that can absorb blame so they can continue to cash their big pay checks even after failures that were clearly the fault of the 3rd party that no other bosses could blame them for choosing.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

And they need to subscribe to access and execute their troubleshooting options.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SalamenceFury@piefed.social 7 points 2 weeks ago

If you're a pure vibe coder, this is literally 9/11.

[–] blargh513@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago

It would be if so many companies hadn't bought into the microsoft ecosystem so hard. My company did the usual BS of "well we have an e5 license so it's free". Now we are married to all their stupid shit and have no relationships with other providers. End of the month gonna be expensive. Now expect a scramble to cut master service agreements and contracts with others in a panic.

[–] chisel@piefed.social 3 points 2 weeks ago

It isn’t hardware and doesn’t have some kind of proprietary interface that takes time to get used to when switching.

The proprietary interface is kinda the largest selling point, besides the once cheap prices. But the $10 plan going from 300 multi-hour prompts per month to 20 quick prompts per month effectively makes it worthless. Though, you could just pay a few hundred/thousand per month and continue, or bring your own API key from elsewhere, but at that point just use someone else's interface. It's not that much better than competitors and copilot isn't offering anything unique.

[–] amju_wolf@pawb.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

It can still be pretty difficult to jump ship for any large corporation, but yeah there's certainly harder things.

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 62 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

The unique thing about GitHub Copilot (and all the other vibe-coding tools) is that they're speed-running the playbook because this shit is not profitable. It can't be. Their costs scale up with usage, unlike every other business that can take advantage of economies of scale, so they've skipped the slow, steady enshittification phase and jumped directly into the "squeeze blood from this stone to keep the scam going a little longer" phase.

[–] BladeFederation@piefed.social 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Good sign that it may be over soon.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Absolutely 100% do not count on it

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 5 points 2 weeks ago

they’re speed-running the playbook because this shit is not profitable.

Wait, what? You say it is a scam? A kind of technical Ponzi scheme? A Madoff syndicate on steroids?

[–] pooterbroo@programming.dev 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Plain inference is profitable actually, that's why there are a hundred inference providers on OpenRouter who compete by undercutting each other. The labs however aren't profitable because training the models is a huge drain.

[–] Cenotaph@mander.xyz 7 points 2 weeks ago

But they can only do that because others are doing traning, no? There's no point at which you can go "okay it's all inference from here", the model needs to be updated with new information/guardrails/context to continue being useful for most use cases

[–] chris@l.roofo.cc 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

In a vacuum maybe but are they profitable if you add the infrastructure investments to the mix? What about model development? There was a shit ton of money that was spent. Covering the running costs is not enough. At some point someone has to pay for the investments.

Didn't deepseek train their model for $6m?

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

As others have pointed out, the compute cost of inference is only one small part of the puzzle. All the frontier model providers - which OpenRouter gives you access to - are massively raising their prices in desperate bids to recoup the cost of model generation in the first place.

There's really no hiding from the token apocalypse unless you're running a model on your own hardware.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 40 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I've been preaching this for the past couple of years. Everything up until now has been entirely about gaining market share, and AI will never be cheaper than it is right now, and it's not cheap.

Just look at the "earnings" for companies like openAI. They are 1000+% in the red. It's impossible for them to change their sales model enough to make that profitable. As more data centers go up, the operating costs are also going to go up.

I've been telling people that now is the best time in the past decade or more to learn how to code. There will be positions available in the coming years when the only junior devs available are vibe coders.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 28 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I remember having to sit down my boss and explain how it can only become more expensive over time. It’s the big tech playbook after all. Didn‘t matter. I‘m told again and again how AI is only becoming stronger and cheaper. Especially during salary negotiations. Nasty stuff. They know I know it‘s BS and they still cling to this nonsensical narrative because it would be very beneficial to them and very bad for me.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 weeks ago

Open weight LLMs are actually pretty cheap because there are competing providers. But something tells me your boss isn't using openrouter to find the best price per million tokens lol

[–] JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 28 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Yeah - people are talking about replacing jobs with AI. As if it is not totally obvious that people like Sam Altman will totally bleed you dry after you fired all your workers. You will not save on your wage bill, you will simply give the money to Sam Altman

[–] KillerWhale@orcas.enjoying.yachts 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Wages are treated as an immediate operational cost, while AI is framed as a capital investment. This accounting distinction makes AI look like a long-term asset, whereas labor remains perpetually categorized as an expense.

[–] jrs100000@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Only if you are running your own servers. You dont get to depreciate a SaaS subscription or metered bill.

[–] eleitl@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

And the servers are only useful for AI and they don't last long.

[–] pluge@piefed.social 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The crazy thing is, this isn't really a "squeeze" in the traditional sense. The problem was that every single mainstream AI product has been heavily subsidized....because it's wildly expensive and not even close to being profitable.

That sort of subsidization was only going to last for so long. The dam is starting to crack. People aren't ready to pay what AI truly costs.

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

And it doesn't seem like they ever will be. The LLM value proposition is already dubious at today's subsidized rates.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I didn't see it coming as I am on Codeberg 😎

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sexy_peach@feddit.org 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The angry devs from this article are idiots

[–] bilb@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago

I have some sympathy for these people, but some don't seem to realize that Microsoft is not going to be upset over them leaving. They are not valuable to Microsoft as users. If they are unable or unwilling to pay now, Microsoft wants them gone. They are being shown the door. Making a post about deleting your copilot+ subscription or whatever is like bragging about being kicked out of a nightclub.

[–] Aneorthisio@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The strategy is always to gain a monopoly or near monopoly on a market before pushing for the enshittification of the product to reduce costs and maximize profits, once customers have become dependent on said product, then pray that most choose the path of least resistance which is staying and dealing with the worse and more expensive version of what they're used to rather than retraining or restarting from zero elsewhere.

Capitalism 101.

Which is why deepseek releasing it's model open source was such a big deal. The monopoly isn't feasible.

[–] binux@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] ptu@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

It reminds of any software made by any company that is at all well known. They are all operating from the same playbook.

[–] kurmudgeon@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The tactic has worked for drug dealers for decades

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This is going much faster than most private equity enshittification. That usually takes about 5 years to start. And has a system or hardware that makes switching painful. That doesn't apply here, it's easy to switch and almost a drop in change.

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

They are burning money so quickly that they don't have the luxury of using the "slowly boil the frog" standard VC tactic, so they have to start the boiling before the frog is comfortable.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)