pull down to refresh
Billable hours -- that probably makes a big difference between you and me.
As a researcher on a fixed wage without productivity incentives, other than my personal drive and/or passion, my employer is not really pushing me to be more productive. If/when I eventually become a civil servant, the carrot that is the permanent academic post will disappear as well.
Still, I want to be the best at what I am doing now, advance the field, publish impactful work, etc, so incorporating AI in my workflow is non-negotiable. So, that's what rationalizes me to pay out-of-pocket, but I do hope that at some point I can use some of my grants to pay for it. Especially when I get back to heavy development work, it was painful when I was reaching my limits more often than not.
It's a different situation, but if you're talking about fixed cost subscriptions, this is often easier to manage when you have fixed income than when you don't; less risk. So I'd stick with whatever is affordable.
For my example above, I was getting a bit restless. So I said "okay Fable... propose a fix." (in expansive, precise instructions.) It burned through my 5h allocation + $19 in extra credits. I get the result, read it, it feels wrong. Fire up GLM and GPT concurrently to do an assessment. Both find the same error I thought I found, and extras. No clean solution. $30 down the drain plus a 4.5h pause on my subscription, no progress and thus no billables because no results. No offset to this cost. I just have to bear it, find another solution. Plan a refactor instead. Which is even more expensive and carries heightened risk, but it has to be done. So I'm doing that now.
Still, the bots found bugs that otherwise would be on other people to fix. It is still better this way. The quality of the final result will have to make up for it and at least I'll be able to sleep well, not worried about what bugs I may have introduced. Bottom line, I'll not make a loss on the token cost, but just worked to get rather inefficient, yet hopefully really high quality, results
My time is way more valuable than AI time.
Most costs for me are sunk into poor quality results, and then my main cost is my own time spent more than token spend. Also me getting it wrong is annoying, like I did yesterday when bot review questioned my decision and I was clearly wrong. Setback of 5 hours of think/design/work time, truly wasteful, and shame on me. I've declared those hours non-billable and thus lost more than all the bot monthly subscription costs combined at ultra levels would set me back for.
That said, it can also happen the other way around and then the bots waste your time, which is why I only have 1 minimum subscription left (would have another one if they weren't forcing me to buy a whole year before evaluation.) The most part I PAYG on ppq and it helps thinking things through before I send it off for processing (but apparently not enough.)
I got multiple offers from clients to pay for my tokens but I honestly don't want to be locked in like that, and I like having my bespoke tooling that is fit-for-purpose for me personally.