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

Yeah this exact thing is happening to me also. Minutes of runtime and only errors. I guess I’ll try again later? I have billing up and I’m Tier 1. Wouldn’t expect to hit limits like this on the first prompt.

I'm building something like this. The value to you would be that you could earn a margin on the token costs. That is, the end user is charged 2x the token cost of the API call. The API provider earns the base cost, the platform owner earns 20% of the remaining cost, and the webapp creator earns 80% of the remaining price.

So for an API call that costs $0.50, the end user is charged $1; and from that AI API earns $0.50, the webapp creator earns $0.40 and the host earns $0.10.

I'm trying this out with https://codeplusequalsai.com right now but it's not clear to me yet that it will take off!

But clearly, the value to you should be that you could earn $ based on the token usage from end-users.


I checked your website I it's an interesting idea. I think you need some additional copy though, because just landing on your homepage you don't really understand what it does. More exactly I don't know what to use it for. Your comment and GP's coming together gave me a better idea.

What's your target audience? developers?


Fantastic feedback, my gosh, thank you. Yes the home content doesn’t do a good job of explaining what it is. Honestly that’s because a lot of the ideas I typed here are pretty fresh, and my ‘marketplace’ is only implemented on prod as a prototype. I do see the the mismatch in copy and the real utility.

I’ll work on positioning and update the copy to keep in sync with my vision …

And yeah, my target audience is developers, specifically those with not a lot of time but with a lot of ideas.

Gosh thanks again, that’s super excellent feedback.


All life on Earth is going die. Humanity has never been content with staying put, why would we start now? And what do you mean "literally nothing there"? The universe has a loooooot of stuff in it.

It's mostly empty, isn't it?

By "literally nothing there," I mean there's literally nothing for us. Three stars and a few Earth-sized planets in the habitable zone that are, more than likely, uninhabitable by humans. There's nothing there worth going all that way for.

I like sci-fi as much as the next person but the reality of the situation, it seems to me, is that the universe is mostly empty, vast, and inhospitable to human life.


The difference between a multi-generational interstellar ship and a self-sustaining space colony is the engine. They wouldn’t need inhabitable planets - they would need raw materials to build more ships and habitats.

I’m not sure that after spending a lifetime in an ample space colony its inhabitants would feel nostalgic of the time we spent sitting on round rocks cooking around a star.


> It's mostly empty, isn't it?

So is the Pacific Ocean for practical definitions of emptiness. You don't got to the empty places.


To quote Babylon 5

Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics, and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao-Tzu, and Einstein, and Morobuto, and Buddy Holly, and Aristophanes, and - all of this - all of this - was for nothing. Unless we go to the stars


The odds are against us. We will never go to the stars. But it doesn’t matter for us as we will likely die before any of this happpens.

And those stars will go out as well.

Well true.

That's the fallacy in the given argument.


By then we’d better understand how to implement a “Let there be light” procedure.

Might very well be the last question we need to ask ourselves.


"Implement Fiat Lux" is a hell of a title for a sci-fi story, if nothing else.

Happily when Asimov wrote the same story, he didn't give away the punchline in the title.

Sure, if you put it in the title you need a different punchline. :D

It would be a different tale altogether - probably engineers discussing how ludicrous the idea is, until it's feasible, and then debating the consequences before pressing the red button.

Yeah. I think I was really imagining it as a chapter title in something like Ra [0]. Sam is good at bombastic chapter titles.

[0] https://qntm.org/ra


> The universe has a loooooot of stuff in it.

In fact, technically, there's nothing here. It's all out there.


The Sun: 99.86% of the solar system's total mass.

Jupiter: ~0.095% of the total mass, and ~71% of the non-solar mass.

Saturn: ~0.03% of the total mass, and ~19% of the non-solar mass.

Uranus and Neptune: Contribute a small percentage to the remaining non-solar mass.

All other objects: (inner planets, dwarf planets, moons, asteroids, comets, etc.) account for less than 0.002% of the solar system's total mass.

Your brain mass is about 3 disposable water bottles in weight and we can debate what parts of that are thinking and actually "you".

You are insignificant on the scale of the solar system let alone the universe.


>Tragula's wife used to complain to him about the utterly inordinate amount of time he spent staring out into space, or mulling over the mechanics of safety pins, or doing spectrographic analyses of pieces of fairy cake. She would often tell her husband to have some sense of proportion, sometimes as often as thirty-eight times in one day. In response to her pleas for him to find some perspective, he built the Total Perspective Vortex.

>Into one end he plugged the whole of reality as extrapolated from a piece of fairy cake, and into the other end he plugged his wife: so that when he turned it on she would see in one instant the whole infinity of creation and herself in relation to it. To Trin Tragula’s horror, the shock completely annihilated her brain...

~Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe


insignificant to whom?

>Humanity has never been content with staying put, why would we start now?

For whatever reason, humanity's attitude in this regard has changed drastically in the last century. We can't even bother to make the next generations, and a shrinking population eventually (quite quickly, really) shrinks to zero. Not only do they want to "stay put", they want to lay down and die.


The steelman counterargument is that focusing resources on extraplanetary colonies at the expense of the one habitable planet within reach will hasten humanity's destruction. How are you going to make an Eden on Mars if we can't even make an Eden on Earth? The only large-scale planetary engineering in humanity's history is Veniforming its home world.

>The steelman counterargument is that focusing resources on extraplanetary colonies at the expense of the one habitable planet within reach will hasten humanity's destruction.

That doesn't seem like a strong argument to me. It seems like a distraction from the crowd that would save the planet by extinguishing humanity if that's what it took. Though what value the planet might have with all of us gone I leave as an exercise for the reader.

The first priority of any society that wants to continue to exist into the future must always be to make the next generation. If you do not do this, or if you just leave the task to others hoping that someone else will do it, then you are behaving in a way that will in all probability lead towards there being no next generation sooner or later. The "global warming is the apocalypse" movement constantly talks about how the best way to reduce your carbon footprint is to have no children.

>The only large-scale planetary engineering in humanity's history is Veniforming its home world.

So it is claimed, but from my point of view it looks very much as if it's intent on making itself extinct through fertility decline. But at least carbon dioxide levels will return to normal, eh?


I remember going into local browser cache folders and pulling out YouTube videos in full. Am I remembering wrong or did in fact the #1 video streaming platform simply just download the videos to your hard drive, same as you would have with right click save? Only difference is the default folder it goes to.


absolutely. you would just go to the browser cache folder and look for the file that was increasing in size as the seconds passed. This is why I disagree with the comment above that you can't defeat piracy through technology. I think there are plenty of people like me who routinely kept music/video through tricks like that who are now thwarted by whatever the heck html5 thing browsers started doing in the 2010s.


If you could find a file in the cache folder you are fully capable of typing `yt-dlp URLHERE` in a terminal. I taught my dad how to do that around 2010 or so so he could save his religious music to his computer.


well yt-dlp didnt exist in 2010, so no you didn't. At some point he had to move from youtube-dl or whatever it was called to get the new fork. and looking at yt-dlp's github I see how often its tricks get shut down by google, and old releases don't work. Every few months. That inconvenience alone will discourage many pirates and save a lot of money for content providers. Just as there are many users users will at the margin economically there are many at the margin of competence or drive.


I've been running a YT-DLP build for a year now, no issues. Even I am surprised.


People who use tricks like this will always be in the minority. This is harder than going to TPB.


I do not recall this specifically with YouTube - but I recall pulling wmv's out of the IE cache in the same way.


The plan: You are a PM and Engineer - and so is the AI. You both write tickets and you both complete them to iterate on your code.

https://codeplusequalsai.com

You can build webapps very quickly, especially AI-enabled ones, and deploy them on a subdomain. Other users can sign up and use your webapp, and any tokens they use will be billed to them and you will get a large cut (80%) of the margin earned on the tokens billed - as I bill 2x OpenAI API token costs to create this margin.

So ideally you can validate your idea by rapidly building a prototype and evening earning revenue to boot.


DeepMind’s original demos were also of Atari gameplay.


I don’t think the expression is positive or negative. It just means we can’t go back. I guess that could be positive or negative case by case depending on how you feel about going back or not.

The confetti is out of the canon.


I hope it's not just another orb that talks to you. Maybe they're making humanoids, that's all the rage now... I do wonder what they have built! Surely something right?


The actual money can’t be the issue. It’s $136 for failure to stop at a stop sign in WA. If they enforced that for 30 seconds per day the cities would be wealthy beyond belief.

Or maybe not-but we’d have much safer traffic! Thus enabling revenue from fewer deaths.

But I digress- the problem with “revenue” for cities is they actively avoid getting it. If they actually wanted or desired more funds for the city, simply enforcing laws is all that is needed. It’s just not desired to have revenue I suppose, if it means enforcing laws and collecting dues owed.

Yes yes I’m probably being “unrealistic” but honestly? Maybe not.


Law enforcement should not be a primary mean of funding for anything, as this creates a plethora of perverse incentives for lawmakers.

That does not mean law enforcement is bad or unnecessary. It just means that law enforcements primary purpose should be to keep people safe and educate, not to fund the districts


TBH if I suddenly notice a massive change in stop sign or speed enforcement, to me, it'd be more of a signal of revenue gathering than safety. It somewhat undermines my opinion of police since I start seeing them more as a money making tool of the bossman.. I really couldn't care less if someone's speeding a bit or rolling stop signs as long as they are actually paying attention. For all I care you can even run red lights as long as no one is coming..


Fines are a disincentive. If they work what happens to your funding?


Yup - honestly the space is so open right now still, everyone is trying haha. It's got quite hard to keep track of different models and their strengths / weaknesses, much less the IDE and editor space! I have no idea which of these AI editors would suite me best and a new one comes out like every day.

I'm still in vim with copilot and know I'm missing out. Anyway I'm also adding to the problem as I've got my own too (don't we all?!), at https://codeplusequalsai.com. Coded in vim 'cause I can't decide on an editor!


This is cool! I like that you have a visual element for the agent working on multiple tickets at a time.


Thanks! And yeah, it really is satisfying watching the tickets move from column to column "all on their own" as the works gets done!


Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: