Asher Cohen 🤖🤳 @code_tank_dev

@hunvreus Yeah, no i don't buy that.

@mcsquared_ttv @BrianRoemmele Now they just appear to be pretty.

@kailodee Based on experience: - it's fascinating and amazing, you'll discover a new universe - it's tough and requires a lot of time - they're very sensitive and it's your job to understand the causes and remediate - swarming season is a nightmare I highly recommend it as a hobby!

@vlad_mihalcea No, larger companies won't pay larger bills. Usage has drastically dropped to the point that last year's innovation has been wiped off. Some companies simply can't change providers and might only be able to build alternatives and switch to owned models and GPUs.

@mjblacker How do you use Codex 5.3 effectively?in my experience it's useless, never gets the full picture and ignores details.

Formal Complaint: GitHub Copilot Token-Based Billing Model @GitHubCopilot Subject: Critical Issue with New Token-Based Billing — Product Has Become Unusable Summary of the Issue I am writing to formally complain about the recent shift to token-based billing for GitHub Copilot, which was rolled out this morning. This change has fundamentally broken the value proposition of the product and is rendering it unusable for paying subscribers, including myself. Specific Problems Observed Within just a few hours of the new billing model going live, the developer community is already reporting alarming consumption patterns: Pro+ subscribers paying $39/month are reporting that 60% of their monthly credits were depleted in only 2 hours of normal usage. One user reported losing 20% of their entire monthly allowance from a single file review — no code generation, just a review. At this rate, a paying customer will exhaust their plan in less than a single working day, despite paying a premium subscription fee. This is not "normal usage at scale" — this is a broken pricing model that punishes the very developers who rely on Copilot daily for their work. Why This Makes the Product Unusable The core promise of Copilot was a predictable, always-available AI coding assistant integrated into the developer workflow. Token-based billing destroys that promise because: Developers cannot predict costs. Every keystroke, every file review, every refactor becomes a financial calculation rather than a productivity boost. The tool actively discourages use. Users will hesitate before invoking Copilot, defeating the entire point of an AI assistant. The $39/month Pro+ tier is misleading. Customers signed up expecting reliable access, not a pre-paid metered service that runs out mid-morning. Heavy users — your most loyal customers — are penalized the most. The Competitive Reality While GitHub Copilot is moving toward a restrictive metered model, competitors are moving in the opposite direction: Cursor offers Composer 2.5 with unlimited usage once token limits are reached on their plans, ensuring developers can keep working without interruption. Other tools (Windsurf, Cody, Continue) offer flat-rate or far more generous usage tiers. Developers will not stay on a platform that runs out of credits before lunch when alternatives offer uninterrupted productivity at the same or lower price point. My Demand If GitHub does not revise this licensing model, the product is effectively dead. I am requesting: Reinstatement of a flat-rate unlimited (or effectively unlimited) tier for Pro and Pro+ subscribers. Transparent, upfront communication of what each interaction actually costs in tokens. A grace period or credit refund for users who burned through their allowance under the new model without warning. A long-term commitment that core IDE-integrated features will not be metered into uselessness. Without these changes, I — along with a growing number of developers — will be canceling our subscriptions and migrating to Cursor or competing alternatives. The decision to monetize aggressively at the expense of usability will not be remembered as a successful pivot; it will be remembered as the moment GitHub Copilot lost its market. Please escalate this to the product and pricing teams immediately.

@OrenMe @GitHubCopilot Every story is a plan/iterate/code/test/review. With or without subagents those are loops and are expensive. It's never just: write code/write test. The most important optimisation and now it's too expensive.

@shadcn I was literally describing this concept to a friend last night and how I decided I won't parallelize agents no more. Piling up their work sounds like a good alternative though.

@DavidKPiano @mattpocockuk So what's the place for that?

@godofprompt This is the way...

@yegor256 Nah, OpenApi and swagger are one of the most effectful specs an ai can use to manage logic. It's true these can modernize and offer better suited descriptors for what's next but they won't be lost.

@plainionist Not by themselves, most of what they write is slop. No matter what model you use. But once you introduce a plan - iterate - review flow it kind of gets it right 99% of times.

@devXritesh Except you have a category of engineers that know what they're doing, plan their time carefully and still leave at 5pm sharp.

@CFDevelop Full automation only works at the edges. Either: high quality systems (tested, docs, owned end2end, disciplined engineering) or low stakes systems (MVPs, pet projects ship “good enough”). The middle is where it fails: legacy code, partial ownership, weak tests, tribal knowledge

@housecor And reducing cost...

@csharpfritz Most models I tried work once you have a paid subscription to ollama (if we're talking cloud). Meanwhile has anyone found a solution to replace GitHub (cloud) agent? I use it from mobile and hit rate limits fast, would like to swap it like it's done with the chat extension.

@mwaseemzakir VPS + agent framework+ GitHub integration. That's what I'm building right now...

@zuess05 There's a massive gap, nothing changed: the difference has never been about the code. Both write variables&loops in a constructed syntax for the language they know. One role can judge the code, the other role can judge the consequences of the code. Massive, massive gap.

@WindowsLatest I got 64gb just to be on the safe side.

I don’t usually share things like this, but I think it’s important to be honest. I’ve been looking for a full-time role since September. I’m a senior iOS engineer + product designer with 10+ years experience, and I’ve spent that time building and shipping real products (most recently: @ateiq_app, @naturalis_app, @getuppapp). Despite interviews and ongoing work, I’m now about a month away from needing something stable for my family. If you know a team that values someone who can both design and build, I’d really appreciate an introduction. Thank you! ❤️