"Here's why:"
...
Is it because you're dumb?
this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2026
568 points (99.1% liked)
LinkedinLunatics
6762 readers
3 users here now
A place to post ridiculous posts from linkedIn.com
(Full transparency.. a mod for this sub happens to work there.. but that doesn't influence his moderation or laughter at a lot of posts.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's cause he's a bot account doing marketing for Anthropic
It's to "Swan AI", so I assumed they were happy about the invoice because they're reselling that service to suckers for a lot more than that.
With a four person team spending over a million annually (potentially) on AI tokens is morbidly stupid.
I would love another season or two of Silicon Valley to roast the latest techbro bullshit.
I think it would suffer from reality being so batshit insane that it would struggle to surpass it in any comedic way, just like The Onion these days.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
My company has been jizzing themselves that our token usage has gone up.
I’ve never seen so many people rushing to add a middleman into their product dev.
Tokenmaxxing
You could hire twelve senior engineers in Europe for that kinda money
That's insane. A company I work at leverages AI heavily across sales, product, engineering, etc.
Company of 50ish.
Nobody I know at our size or smaller uses it as heavily as us. I realize that's subjective.
We're sub $20k/mo.
This person is not using a tool correctly. They're probably burning on inference. Probably inflated rules and context. Probably shipping slop and then fixing slop with slop. Absolute garbage.
From their website it looks like they're "reselling" so, that's my best guess as to why their bill would be so high
Man, if the robots tried to take over this guy would really just drop to his knees and suck robot dick, wouldn't he?
Export the data, dissolve the LLC, leave the bill unpaid and start a new LLC using the data, repeat.
I don't think these AI companies have enough funding to take legal action without their part of the house of cards collapsing.
This is the kind of snake eating its tail chaos I'm here for.
load more comments
(1 replies)
In my school, kids who said "I'm proud of an invoice" got kicked in the balls and it was good for them in the long run.
My company is going wild like this too. I mean, it makes sense - more AI use means code is being written faster and thus we’re making more money.
But they go weirdly quiet when devs ask if AI has actually been speeding up the time to get a finished product in front of customers. You know, the only metric you should care about?
That's an... interesting correlation they're making, more code = more money. I know it's not you personally making that comparison, but man is it strange. That's a very business school way of thinking.
What good is "more code" from the LLMs, if I have to scrutinize it for bugs and vulnerabilities? More code only means more surface area, more points of failure. And of the AI I've tried, every single one writes far far far too much code. And all that time in code review, QA, user acceptance testing, that absolutely does not make the company more money - it costs them more money, in paying for labor. And it doesn't get the product to the end user faster anyway.
I'm just ranting and this a minor point, but speed is also not the only metric I would care about. I'd also care about making sure the user doesn't experience many bugs - preferably no bugs at all. The classic engineer's triangle still holds: "Fast, Cheap, and Good: choose 2." And AI seems to pick "Fast" twice. XD
More code only means more surface area, more points of failure. And of the AI I’ve tried, every single one writes far far far too much code. And all that time in code review, QA, user acceptance testing, that absolutely does not make the company more money - it costs them more money, in paying for labor. And it doesn’t get the product to the end user faster anyway.
Duh, just have the LLM do code review, QA, and testing for you! And then blindly ship it to production once that's done.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I mean, it makes sense - more AI use means code is being written faster
This AI you speak of - is it in the room with us right now? Because if you mean to say LLM slop machines, then "code is being written faster" does not imply the code is in any way useful.
load more comments
(1 replies)
But add another employee or 2, or God forbid increase benefits and they burn you at the stake.
good business is when bankruptcy
I use an LLM as a glorified search engine at work. Basically to search thousands of pages of documentation and tickets to get context before approving something. 2-3 prompts amounts to a dollar. Imagine doing that several times a day multiplied by thousands of employees (because everyone is mandated to use AI). And that’s a simple task, not even coding yet.
Nice. I've been making various models create QR code generators that only work within a terminal. Then they collapse when I tell them to make the code hardened against exploits.
That's 12 fairly decent engineers' salary
Is AI really 4x-ing productivity at his company? Even the optimistic estimates don't even have it as a 2x improvement
It's baffling to me that people who's entire career hinges on them displaying a level of extreme competence, just tell on themselves like this.
It's a company that sells 'AI' services to their customers. Most likely the major part of the 113,000 dollars is paid by those customers. They're basically resellers.
You could have bought a small house with that kind of money 😅
In London, you might be able to buy a shed with that 😅
load more comments
(2 replies)
this whole industry is completely unsustainable
Well every job i have worked at requires me to not use ai. Is this all private companies?
The company I work for (publicly listed) has granted company-wide access to Copilot, but requires users to complete a pretty extensive (2+ hour) training module before you’re able to use it.
Pretty obvious stuff like, don’t upload sensitive data, validate output etc. I just use it as a glorified search engine usually - validating function syntaxes etc., and also cot rewriting email to be less blunt.
Really comes down to whether companies have; no tech departments to stop employees from using AI, small departments that don’t want to deal with the headache, large departments capable of managing the rollout.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Nah, you've just been lucky
What field you working in? I know some are more security conscious and don't allow AI for that reason (gambling, sports betting, banking)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Mandatory: CEOe are like the village idiot who won the lottery. Don't listen to them and stop giving them a voice.
load more comments
(1 replies)
thats a lot of money for inherently Flaude Code
view more: next ›