Re:Leaked financial docs show OpenAI is losing billions of d...
by apatheticonion on Wednesday June 17, 2026 @08:11PM
(#48578805)
> You're pricing it wrong and looking at it wrong. First, the per token price doesn't consider that a smarter model can end up using fewer tokens overall to achieve a result. Secondly, if the difference is between failing to accomplish the task and accomplishing the task, suddenly that 50x can seem like a bargain.
Perhaps, yeah. Napkin math; if we go off of the assertion that DeepSeek makes me twice as productive for an extra $24 per year.
The same number of tokens with Fable would be around 50k/y. Say Fable uses half as many, that's still 25k
The question is then; How does Fable make an engineer more productive than DeepSeek?
- Prompt adherence?
- Inference speed?
- Can engineers delegate more work to unsupervised autonomous workflows?
Are unsupervised workflows suitable for production applications or does the review overhead erode the productivity benefits?
Perhaps a company could hire a mid level engineer + Fable to achieve senior engineer levels of productivity for the same price as a senior + deepseek.
Perhaps, yeah. Napkin math; if we go off of the assertion that DeepSeek makes me twice as productive for an extra $24 per year.
The same number of tokens with Fable would be around 50k/y. Say Fable uses half as many, that's still 25k
The question is then; How does Fable make an engineer more productive than DeepSeek?
- Prompt adherence?
- Inference speed?
- Can engineers delegate more work to unsupervised autonomous workflows?
Are unsupervised workflows suitable for production applications or does the review overhead erode the productivity benefits?
Perhaps a company could hire a mid level engineer + Fable to achieve senior engineer levels of productivity for the same price as a senior + deepseek.