Pricing for digital services sucks. I really hate the monthly subscription payment model. If I use a service infrequently I’m being ripped off, and if I use it a lot I’m undercharged. The incentives are all wrong.
Why can’t I just pay for what I actually use? I do that for electricity and my landline — why can’t I do the same for my mobile phone, internet, video streaming, AI, etc.
The popular ones are boring and way over used
Most people are happy with a subscription service that doesn't really serve their tastes or compensate the sources effectively.
* I won't get really into it unless I have a solution using hardware I own.
* People that care about it are incredibly passionate about it. For the rest it is a boring subject in and of itself.
* "It can change the world"
The author complains about model picker drop “complexity”, then follows up with an example about how the insurance industry prices their products.
They conclude by asserting that ai-adjacent apps should “get rid of that damn model picker” and “be more like insurance”. As if the insurance industry wasn’t one of the most predatory, parasitic, scummy and user-hostile industries out there.
Please don’t follow this advice, we don’t need _more_ opacity and insurance-like companies.
I also personally think think that the “point it at the mosh of your choice” mechanism will only become _more_ popular, not less.
Are you _sure_ that the choice doesn’t matter to them, or are we just so used to removing that choice for them. Maybe”normie” users wouldn’t be “normie”’s if they were infantilised by product choices?
Pricing for digital services sucks. I really hate the monthly subscription payment model. If I use a service infrequently I’m being ripped off, and if I use it a lot I’m undercharged. The incentives are all wrong.
Why can’t I just pay for what I actually use? I do that for electricity and my landline — why can’t I do the same for my mobile phone, internet, video streaming, AI, etc.
The popular ones are boring and way over used Most people are happy with a subscription service that doesn't really serve their tastes or compensate the sources effectively. * I won't get really into it unless I have a solution using hardware I own. * People that care about it are incredibly passionate about it. For the rest it is a boring subject in and of itself. * "It can change the world"
> Everyone describes AI apps the same way: "Cursor for X."
First time I hear this phrase, and I’ve read a healthy amount of articles about AI.
My experience, particularly over X, has been "Cursor for X"
Maybe you can do a search at YC startups page and see it there as well.
>"Cursor for X" was a common expression in 2 weeks
The author complains about model picker drop “complexity”, then follows up with an example about how the insurance industry prices their products.
They conclude by asserting that ai-adjacent apps should “get rid of that damn model picker” and “be more like insurance”. As if the insurance industry wasn’t one of the most predatory, parasitic, scummy and user-hostile industries out there.
Please don’t follow this advice, we don’t need _more_ opacity and insurance-like companies.
I also personally think think that the “point it at the mosh of your choice” mechanism will only become _more_ popular, not less.
I do agree the transparency often is good for the user. However, only when it matters to them.
For developers, the model picker is the right choice because we do care about it. For more mainstream "normie" users - not so much.
Are you _sure_ that the choice doesn’t matter to them, or are we just so used to removing that choice for them. Maybe”normie” users wouldn’t be “normie”’s if they were infantilised by product choices?
A rare excellent take
thank you!
Another call for the ongoing stupid-ification of software....