Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror

Submission + - WSJ: Corporate America Has Suddenly Decided to Stop Blowing Money on AI

Submitted by theodp
theodp writes: "Companies across the country are coming around to a radical idea with the potential to upend the industry powering the global economy," reports the WSJ. "They don’t have to blow their budgets on AI. Fed up with ballooning costs, companies big and small are starting to use lower-priced models, including some built in China. In many cases, they are adding the new, cheaper models alongside OpenAI and Anthropic’s products, shopping a la carte for their artificial intelligence."

"Being economical—or tokenomical—is a dramatic reversal in mindset. Just a few months ago, it was a badge of honor to be using AI so much that you spent a lot on tokens. Companies rewarded employees for tokenmaxxing, flashing leaderboards that showed who had spent the most. Now they are thrift-maxxing."

"Strategies to lower AI costs include limiting access to top models for new hires and using the most advanced AI systems to plan how tasks will be completed before turning to cheaper models for the execution, Cursor’s [Mike] Saeks says. Cursor recently ran an experiment to evaluate the cost of building a web browser from scratch. Doing the entire task on OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 cost a little more than $10,000. Using Cursor’s Composer coding model in combination with Anthropic’s Opus 4.8, cost $1,339."

Correction: The costs cited by the WSJ were evidently to recreate SQLite functionality, not to build a web browser from scratch, an earlier experiment that Cursor explained involved running coding agents autonomously for weeks and burning trillions of tokens to build software that Cursor's CEO boasted "*kind of* works", prompting The Register to credit Cursor for "proving AI can write shoddy code at scale".

Comment Right once, patch away (Score 2) 76

by Z80a (#66239894) Attached to: Microsoft Patches a Record 570 Security Flaws

To find a security flaw, you only need to be right once.
So if you have a machine that has a shitload of false positives, and have a way to filter em quickly, you end up with a bunch of true positives.
Now to code, you ideally want to always be right, which is not quite ideal for a machine that does a lot of false positives.
It's a pretty fun scenario, specially if you're not the only one running the security flaw finding machine.

Submission + - Linux Boots On The Atari Jaguar (github.io)

Submitted by BrianFagioli
BrianFagioli writes: Remember the Atari Jaguar? The ill-fated 64-bit game console from 1993 just pulled off something nobody expected over 30 years later: it now boots Linux. Developer cakehonolulu managed to port uClinux to the aging hardware, overcoming the Jaguar’s lack of an MMU, tiny 2MB RAM limit, and quirky architecture by writing platform-specific code, custom drivers, and taking advantage of Linux’s existing Motorola 68000 support. The system now reaches a BusyBox shell on both real hardware and in emulation, though input is currently limited to a serial connection. The developer published a detailed technical write-up explaining the process, from kernel memory layout to timer initialization and debugging compiler issues.

Comment Re:We probably would end with two Brazils (Score 1) 68

Same kind of "scenario", land rich in resources being taken over by europeans, people being imported to it by force and eventually being transformed into it's own country, with it's own system and such.
But in the US, the founders of the country came up with a novel constitution and system because they were weird outcasts with different ideas, while Brazil just had "more of the same of the time".
The US was never a monarchy for example, never had a king. that was very weird for 1500ish, it was a country of lunatics.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is the quality rather than the quantity that matters. - Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 B.C. - A.D. 65)

Close