@thdxr Appreciate the honesty here. “Hosted near the old price” only means something after sustained tests on throughput, failures, and real task cost.
@AndrewCurran_ Routing plus payments is a strong combination. The user question is what happens to provider neutrality, markup, and portability once one company owns both layers.
@thsottiaux The useful part is making this an explicit workload choice. A million tokens can help an investigation, but I would still want the session to show the active window, compaction point, and cost tradeoff.
Personal software gets interesting when it runs every day against the accounts you already use. Its value comes from removing repeated work between signed-in tools without forcing you to migrate the whole workflow.
The strategic layer in AI may be routing plus billing. A service that decides provider access, fallback, pricing, and spend controls much more of the workflow than the model picker suggests.
@Grummz The 36-second builds are impressive. I’d also love to see a second developer take over the code for a week. That would say a lot about how maintainable it is.
@AlexFinn The PostHog example is the one I’d actually use. Find the risky accounts, draft the emails, then ask before sending. Simple and still under control.
The best agent UX removes configuration without hiding control. Defaults can choose the model, computer, and workflow. The user should still see what the agent can access, what it is spending, what needs approval, and what changed.
AI makes bespoke software cheaper. That changes build vs. buy. A small team may be able to replace a bloated general platform with a narrow system built around one real workload. The proof is not lines of code. It is whether someone else can maintain it six months later.