API

corruptbytes

no path to profitability? inference is wildly profitable, I think deepseek’s API which is dirt cheap is 500% margins Anthropic is already turning a profit over training cost

zjz

yeah it's hit or miss. We use SnapTrade API which is kinda like plaid. I think we (they) just added IBKR

Either_Door_5500

Founder here, so take it as that. [StockFit API](https://developer.stockfit.io/) \- US Stock/Fund fundamentals and data \- **Price**: Free tier available, paid starts at **$15/mo** \- **Notes**: Focus on clean auditable fundamentals and deep company data like rev segmentation, executives, governance, corporate events, etc. \- **Docs**: https://api.stockfit.io/docs/

aperartnft

That's basically the exact problem Microsoft says Frontier Company is built to solve, the hesitation isn't about AI capability, it's about liability, nobody wants to be the one who approves proprietary data going out the door. Their pitch is embedding engineers directly with clients so data provably stays theirs, rather than just handing over API access and hoping someone signs off.

MKeo713

I think people greatly misunderstand what’s going on at Meta. A couple major points come to mind: Yes Meta wanted to make one of or the best frontier model. But was their idea ever to follow the business model of OpenAI / Anthropic? Given they were open source from the beginning it seems clear to me that was never the plan. Instead they intend to use their models inside their own suite of products to make them more profitable. Why this approach? Meta is scarred from the shift from the web to mobile, where Apple gouged their profits simply because “hey we own the phone you’re on you have no power”. Meta even tried developing their own smartphone for this very reason. They don’t want their generative AI to be a wrapper on top of someone else’s product, they have a cash cow and need to maintain control over as many aspects of it as possible. Same reason Google developed chrome rather than existing solely on someone else’s browser. Mark saying agents aren’t where they want it to be certainly isn’t a good signal, but again take it in context. This is the same guy whose biggest compliment to his employees has been calling something “not bad”. This dude’s a harsh critic, and that’s horrible for PR when everyone else is gassing up their companies. But it doesn’t immediately indicate “wow we suck and our product is a total failure”. Yes they have lost the LLM race if you mean in terms of selling API access. No they haven’t failed in generative AI, and their continued ads growth is a testament to that. Meta takes swings, they look for opportunities in the future. Their AR glasses are an attempt to be a key player in the next platform (and I do think this will start to replace our phones over time). Not all bets work out (Metaverse, crypto wallet, facephone) but the fact that they consistently try and aren’t afraid to play dirty makes me a strong believer they’ll be around for a long time. I don’t like the company morally, but man is it a good investment 

ConsultingThrowawayz

Consume through API or X pass through instead

EnigmaSpore

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has signaled openness to such a move. Speaking to shareholders in May, Zuckerberg said the idea of selling computing access was something the company had been actively fielding. "It's definitely on the table," he said. "Almost every week there are different companies that come to us from the outside asking us to both stand up an API service or asking if we have compute that they could buy from us at some premium to what we've bought it at." He went on to explain that no outside deals had been struck ***because internal demand had so far absorbed the available capacity*** — but that overbuilding, should it occur, would make external sales a natural outlet.

CallMePyro

Anthropic is profitable on their API costs, that was also leaked recently. Margin is about 60%. E.g. for every dollar of API spend they make about 60 cents.

SubstantialSeesaw374

Yep. IBKR is better in every way that matters, but if I’m not using the API it’s a misery to do anything. 

rkongda3rd

Try alpaca Current wired via API and works great.

RVUnknown

What hardware are you running it on? Or is this from their cloud API or something?

RedParaglider

Google is in a tough spot. A lot of their internal tools don't reflect the systems that are available publicly. Their developers have a tougher time using agentic coding on their systems because of that. I think that reflects in the agentic coding capabilities of their systems, and why they are build more as agentic systems around their software more than as an inference solution. I will say that through API they aren't a bad vendor for enrichment and whatnot. I know I use a cheap version of flash for a lot of our internal workflows. It also helps that I already have an enterprise agreement with Google and Microsoft where Anthropic wanted a kidney worth of minimum spend when I discussed it with them.

RedParaglider

What happens if companies start pulling back from API spend .. you know like they are starting to do now. The LLM major labs start pulling back on capex because the demand that actually makes a profit wasn't there. More manufacturing ramps up hard and fast, and no it doesn't matter if it can't be purchased in the U.S. because of trump, it still throws a pressure relief valve to the rest of the world and lowers prices in the U.S. as a byproduct. Ram has traditionally been a fairly commoditized business, and itw ill go back to being so at some point.

Effective_End8731

If you made 30% in one year - I wouldn't let AI trade for you, you are not only beating the market, but most mutual funds and professional investment strategies (Yes I know there are 40-150% outliers and sector specific jumps). As far as AI traders - You would need to restrict the data it ingests significantly enough that you would be at a disadvantage. By the time that news / etc. is fed into a reliable engine - its outdated and the market has moved. The bloomberg terminals and major financial institutions got it before your agent could. If you don't heavily restrict it, it will react to every fake news headline that pops up that it can ingest. Also this would be insanely expensive to have an AI that was constantly ingesting new data by the minute. Potentially hundreds if not thousands in API fees unless you are just watching 10-20 stocks and playing just that field - which arguably, how many opportunities are there in a day window in that many stocks where an AI would need to ingest or make decisions any different from a typical algo tradebot. At best - AI traders are using outdated data with minimal inference to follow an Algo. They are maybe one tiny step above a basic algorithmic trading script. The cost of running the AI to eek out extra value from that small gain probably requires that you have $1.5 million+ in the account and at that point, you don't really need an AI trading for you - if you just set it and forget it in index and dividend funds you are set for life. That's my take on it. Is it an option? yah. Can you pay a service to have an AI algo trade bot make money for you? Pretty sure I've seen such a thing. Doesn't interest me as you're just paying a much higher mutual fund fee unless your account is so large the returns dwarf the expenses.

CC-5576-05

I built a LLM based trading algo for a uni course. It aggregated recent stock movements, key values, and news to make predictions. It did reasonably well in back testing. But I couldn't test far back without paying for data and the market also did pretty well during that timeframe... Never actually put it into use because I couldnt find a broker that had tax efficient accounts, API trading, currency accounts, and low enough broker commission for it to make sense.

Crazy_Donkies

AI gave an appropriate rerate to SaaS companies because it will make switching easier, lower seat counts, decrease custom work for hire upon setup and the future,, will decrease maintenance agreements, and will decrease API costs. And more. Appropriate PEs are now in place.

No_Chilly_bill

isn't sharing your portfolio a security risk on this reddit API?

waitmarks

The problem with the jevons paradox argument is that it was cheaper before for the end user when the AI companies were subsidizing enterprise accounts with subscription pricing. The subscription cost $200 whether you used 100 or 10million tokens. So, you would have been dumb to not fully utilize it. Now that companies are paying the full API price, they are using a lot less. So, it may be getting slightly cheaper for the AI companies, but it's way more expensive for the end user.

SpicyElixer

Open AI has gross profits; revenue it generates from subscriptions and API usage is greater than the direct computing costs (inference costs) required to actively run and serve those models to users. They don’t have a net profit because of an enormous R&D. DeepMind is definitely in the green. The idea that ai can’t be profitable has already been disproven. I don’t know enough about anthropic’s numbers to use them in this discussion. That doesn’t mean ai isn’t a bubble or that these companies aren’t in trouble.

scsp85

My personal H100 cluster… Joking, I’m paying for it through the API, but it $16 a month! MiniMax is even cheaper and multimodal. However, if I had a cluster, like any reasonably sized enterprise, I could run the open weights.

skilliard7

>He's wrong if all the data centres get built and AI is actually profitable. AI is already profitable. Microsoft's earnings have grown substantially the past 3 years due to their datacenter investments, same with Google And Amazon. And Anthropic is on track for a profitable quarter this year. >Curious how you think OpenAI is going to achieve profitability? 1. OpenAI is currently bogged down by Microsoft's 20% revenue share agreement and license to their models. Once this expires, it will massively improve OpenAI's margins/cut their costs. 2. A big challenge for OpenAI's profitability has been monetization of their free plans. They spend Billions on compute for users that paid nothing. To address this, OpenAI will likely earn more than $100 Billion per year in ad revenue by 2030, possibly even $200 Billion, as advertisers move ad spend away from Google(which is bleeding users) and onto ChatGPT. 3. API usage from Agents is rapidly growing and is much higher margin than consumer subscriptions. This will improve their overall margins, because API access is sold at very high margins. 4. Computing costs will decline over time. For the past 3 years, these improvements have been passed onto the consumer in the form of better models. However, instant models have gotten good enough that OpenAI can begin to reduce compute usage on free user queries, and only use heavy compute for paying users, such as for coding.

MarkFromPublic

Hey, I work at Public and manage our active trading and high net worth members, so I can speak to this directly. Running CSPs and CCs is straightforward on the desktop version. We've also shipped a lot of improvements over the past year on the options side — rolling tools, strategy builder, and rebates that make your net cost per contract negative. The Agents and API stuff gets a lot of attention, but the core trading experience has come a long way. Happy to walk you through anything if you want to shoot me a DM.

-sakuranbo

when will deepseek finally go public?? I can have three V4 Pro agents running all day and barely use $1 in tokens. Doing the same shit w/ Claude or GPT would rack up $200 in API costs

Top_Performance_732

No the $20 sub is not the only product, the API subs are and they can get orders of magnitude more expensive

FullOf_Bad_Ideas

> It's a problem because the whole thing presumes that inference is profitable and there just isn't a lot of evidence that's the case, at least not for agentic shit. Profitable for whom and on what models? It's profitable as in some startups that rent hardware use proceeds from AI inference serving to buy GPUs. Not every inference provider is VC backed. And not every model is profitably served at every point in time. Are you talking about OpenAI/Anthropic here? I think Chutes, Phala and Venice didn't raise VC funding and just issued shitcoins to fund operations, so it's financial engineering but they made it profitable for themselves. >switching to usage-based billing, opts to switch to Chinese API's. a bunch of US APIs host open weight models. Chinese are probably a minority. >Assuming they're (the Chinese APIs) serving inference on GPU's at-cost in this scenario, it might be cheaper than US API's but it would still be orders of magnitude higher if the transition to metered billing for Copilot or Claude are any indication. This depends on KV cache caching infrastructure and not GPUs, as kv cache infra is not developed yet but it alone can move costs 10x down for agentic coding.

ZappRowsdour

It's a problem because the whole thing presumes that inference is profitable and there just isn't a lot of evidence that's the case, at least not for agentic shit. Eventually they'll run out of runway and have to charge enough to cover their rented hardware. And their runway will burn faster if everyone in the States, pissed off about Copilot and Claude Code and Codex and whatever else switching to usage-based billing, opts to switch to Chinese API's. If there's a hardware breakthrough like Taalas or more efficient inference on TPU's or Cerebras becomes cost effective, cool, but that's still a bit of a question. Assuming they're (the Chinese APIs) serving inference on GPU's at-cost in this scenario, it might be cheaper than US API's but it would still be orders of magnitude higher if the transition to metered billing for Copilot or Claude are any indication.

FullOf_Bad_Ideas

Observe what people are using your LLM API for and come up with competing products to eat your competition. Is that diversification?

Strange-Slice-6393

You do know that your claude subscription is heavily subsidized right? Try achieving the same on API costs

Dug3o

I don’t. What I do notice is the shift towards gatekeeping features behind “API pricing”. A recent Fable related leak suggests new models might be gate-kept behind API pricing as well. The first thing I thought of was that this is being done to improve the bottom line. If you look in the codex or claude related subreddits, you’ll see tons of posts about changes in usage/limits.

Capable_Wait09

You can check Google traffic patterns API to see if your observation is correct.

OKRickety

I tried to get the API to work, but could never get it to finish the handshake(?). Tech support acted interested, but I gave up on it. Any suggestions on how to do it?

Provolone-Jones

45 mins until the API data for last week is released. What will the oil shorts do when they see Cushing below 20 million barrels?

Snoo42951

How is Schwab API showing aggressor information on option flow? What is the query?

jktribit

Honestly I just think you don't know what you are talking about. They dont plan to he another cloud computing power and have said this specifically and arent even making moves in that direction, they are building infrastructure specifically for AI training. If you think thats insignificant then sucks man cant help you. Study it more. Exponential growth is literally happening with xai centers and with pretty much every AI company right now its not some magical fairy concept in the tech world. Revenue from Grok API/enterprise/subscriptions plus compute rentals funds more clusters. Each generation of models improves capabilities, driving more usage/demand (virtuous cycle). Colossus doubled in ~92 days; further expansions are funded and underway. Better chips (Nvidia next-gen), software (optimizations, mixture-of-experts), algorithms, and energy solutions multiply effective compute without linear hardware additions. Training runs get more efficient; inference scales via distillation/smaller specialized models. AI adoption is early. Enterprise spend on genAI is ramping fast. xAI doesn't need to "win all cloud" — capturing significant share of frontier AI compute/training (via own clusters + partnerships) supports aggressive scaling. Valuation and partnerships reflect this trajectory.

Lazerys

\- Muse Spark API (this month allegedly) \- Models focusing on being an AI assistant "for your mother", and on healthcare. (Healthcare is a huge untapped market for AI) \- Integrating AI into their wearables, including the recently acquired AI pendant necklace. \- Content generation and editing, especially for businesses. \- Some sort of AI automated customer service and sales directly through WhatsApp/Messenger. I believe their 'excess compute' is spent on the AI ad targeting, hence why they're not renting it out. I don't think a Meta Cloud division is entirely ruled out however. I also think the new Plus subscriptions are a perfect mechanism for including some new premium AI features into them, similar to X Premium and Grok. But all in all, the strategy is not very clear or evident, and I think Meta/Zuck are doing a terrible job at communicating the actual AI monetization path.

PizaCapital

Skip metatrader, that's forex — useless for equity options. IBKR's the move, and ib\_async makes the API way less painful than it looks. tasty has a decent API too if you want simpler. honestly though, full auto-rolling on delta/vix is doable but scary af — i'd automate the alerts and keep yourself on the actual fills til your rules are proven. I hope to be helpful.

MerryRunaround

Good question. I use the CS API for quotes only, not execution. It was very tricky to set up. I get the impression their developer shop is not really geared for the average Joe retail trader. They expect a lot of technical background. I would be very cautious about executing trades and triple cautious about automation

RationalBeliever

They publish an API. You have to sign up for the developer program to get access. Every week, you have to specifically authorize your program to access your accounts.

Bumst3r

Lmao saved by the API limit

Reckless-Curiosity

I decided to have Grok review their terms agreement... I think I'm going to start writing my own API's. They can essentially do whatever they want... F--- that... **Yes, the terms grant Option Alpha a very broad license to use, reuse, modify, exploit, and even sell or distribute customer-created User Automations (bots), including without further notice or compensation to the customer.** # Key Provisions from the Agreement 1. **User Automations Are Treated as Company Proprietary Content** * The agreement repeatedly refers to User Automations as part of the “Services” and states they “represent the **proprietary content of the Company**.” * Users are explicitly told they **cannot claim ownership or intellectual property rights** in any User Automation (including its contents). * Users may share them freely with *other users on the Website* (non-commercially), but they **may not use them outside the Website**. 2. **Broad License Granted by Users to the Company (“Your License to Us”)** * By posting or submitting any material — **explicitly including “the contents of any User Automation”** — users grant Option Alpha: * An **unlimited, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, unrestricted, worldwide license**. * To **use, copy, modify, transmit, sell, exploit, create derivative works from, distribute, and/or publicly perform or display** such contributions. * **For any purpose**, in any manner or medium (now known or future). * This license applies even if the user created the bot themselves. 3. **No Requirement for Specific Knowledge or Additional Consent** * Agreement to the Terms of Use (which happens by using the Services/Website) binds users to these provisions. * There is no requirement in the terms that Option Alpha must notify users each time they reuse, modify, or exploit a specific automation. * The license is **perpetual and irrevocable**, so even if a user deletes their account or stops using the service, the license remains in effect. # Other Relevant Context * The company disclaims almost all liability and gives itself broad termination rights. * Users are prohibited from using the automations commercially outside the platform or claiming ownership. * Intellectual property rights in the Services (which include User Automations) are heavily asserted by Option Alpha. # Bottom Line Option Alpha does **not** need to “steal” the bots in a legal sense — the terms give them explicit, extremely broad permission to reuse, modify, sell, or otherwise exploit customer-created User Automations as they see fit. This is done via the license users grant simply by participating in the platform and submitting/posting their automations. It is not required to obtain separate, specific, or ongoing consent from individual customers. If you are a user concerned about this, you should review the full terms (especially the sections on Intellectual Property Rights and “Your License to Us”) and consider whether to submit any automations or use features that involve creating/sharing them. Legal interpretation can depend on jurisdiction, but based on the plain language of the provided agreement, the company has strong contractual rights here.

Say_no_to_doritos

If you give it API access a lot can go wrong. 

eltoda

You can make up this money by exposing your trades via API so rest of us can inverse it, you get subscription fee! Win-Win!

InspectorDabbit_

Why is there such a huge discrepancy between RH and what this thread's API is showing, LOL

zjz

hmmm ngl I didn't test it on phone because I figured the basic tts API would work anywhere. It works on desktop. Will have to take a look

Kevcky

Yes, you just run it locally. It’s opensource. Maybe check third parties like openrouter, they might have API keys of this model where it’s not hosted in China.

kwijibokwijibo

Nope. US production is of a different API gravity and sourness Not comparable. Not fungible

dont--panic

Naturally if something is cheaper people will use more of it, but if they're paying API rates they'll use frontier models as little as possible, and local AI for as much as they can get away with.

Joey23art

> if priced at standard API rates The API rates are not being set at cost. The API rates leave a massive profit margin. This would be like saying using a $20 Gamepass subscription to play a few hours each of 10 different $60 games meant Microsoft lost $600.

st11es

I reviewed their employees on LinkedIn, nothing outstanding. They are operating at a significant loss. Their WithZeta ai tool is literally a claude API wrapper that scans through PubMed and Orphanet api’s. I bet you that if I connect those API’s myself it won’t be any different from WithZeta. The company looks so sketchy. Who puts a Nasdaq ticker on their LinkedIn page… there are many other oncology research companies. I’m going to submit an investigation to this company. Too sketchy

FullOf_Bad_Ideas

Actually I think the bulk of spend is in agentic coding and every percentage matters there. People consistently want Opus over Sonnet and Fable over Opus given the chance if they don't see API costs.

Confident-Mistake400

Mine too. Some API calls cost us 50$/call and that was the last straw

DrewHoov

I also don’t understand what makes them a desirable acquisition. composer is just fine-tuned kimi. otherwise, they’re a wrapper of vs code with their own agent harness (which, I think the harness is good, but it certainly is not a moat, especially since IME you have to pay API rates with frontier models for the harness to work well).

ryanpaulowenirl

So basically you've got a Cloudflare Worker firing every 10 mins, hits the Claude API with your open positions and says find anything worth flagging. Claude searches for news, checks price movement, decides if it actually matters. If it does, it surfaces it next time you open Claude. If not, nothing happens. The clever bit is the database. Every trade you make gets logged, entry, reasoning, outcome, what the market was doing. Claude reads that before every check so over time it actually learns what signals matter for how you trade specifically. Stops being a generic lookup tool and starts being something that knows your edge. Cloudflare for the timer, Claude for the brain, a simple database for the memory. Pennies a day to run.

thenet1

TESTE DE AUTENTICACAO — comentario feito via API/cookies por /u/thenet1 com ajuda de um script local. Pode ignorar ou pedir delete se incomodar. (Nerevar/Argos automated test, 2026-06-15 12:14 GMT-3)

InitiativeGlum2507

Okay it's been a couple of days now: u/zjz **ADMIN** **- HOW THE FUCK DO I REMOVE THE STOCK PANEL API FROM DAILY DISCUSSION. GET THIS BULLSHIT OUT OF HERE.**

WinningWatchlist

I work at a multinational tech company, that's exactly how it works lol. The average office worker gets subscriptions, workers who need token based usage (like software engineers) get billed by API credits. "ai companies who’s ai budget that was supposed to last for the entire year" This is what I'm asking about lol, what do you mean by "AI budget" in this context? Token usage?

MDCCCLV

They lose money on the monthly plans, the enterprise plans where you pay the API rate per token, usually 20x as much as the monthly cost per token, are what the companies all want in the end. Those are the ones where people accidentally spent tens of millions in a month.

Weak_Emu3659

"The docusign-white house API had a bug, deal postponed"

otw

It feels like marketing to me. On their main models it's really clear they try to run it on cheaper hardware to save money (especially over time). Fable felt like it was running on really high tier hardware sparing no expense similar the Opus fast mode or higher tier API customers. I assumed this was just gonna be marketing for the first week or two and then they'd move it to more cost effective hardware. It seemed really convenient they had to pull it and could blame it on something external instead of what was likely going to be the truth: this model's real cost would exceed what anyone was willing to pay or the performance would have to dip to compensate. They were able to preview it while they wait for cheaper hardware to spin up right before their IPO and blame it on "the model being too good." It just seems too perfect. We also didn't really have enough time with it to properly benchmark it so it's really hard to even say how much better it is than Opus once controlling for other factors.

Vaxtin

Amazon hosts their models on Bedrock. At my company we use AWS to integrate LLM instead of Anthropic/OpenAI’s API. You also get access to other models, like Google’s legacy ones that are still relatively good for simple tasks but are orders of magnitudes cheaper

dsstrainer

You are right it has made some larger changes in the past few years. But for most of the 2000s it was stuck. They purchased a handful of companies like verisign and some other ecom billings but had no idea how to integrate into their system, which itself was cobbled together with bubble gum and popsicle sticks. Im a sw developer and for a period of time I created e-commerce integrations with many of their services. Every service they offered had a wildly different API, backend, restrictions/requirements. Some were drastically outdated and easily fooled by editing form data. They still have some of these antiquated services, but yes more recently they're newer services have been better. Their supprt and fraud department was always clueless and useless for sellers. Always favored buyers (to be fair the global resit card system isn't much better) They are just too big to fail because they've been around forever and most online stores still offer some form of paypal.

hoodha

One guy on YouTube is pissed because he sunk something like 10k into API tokens.

Somsanite7

i think most of the american tech firms are weird and this act was only one of many others, now you just can buy the API license later no subsidize any more, dont overthink a bunch of fraudsters with endless money

euro1127

I mean let's face it fable was always gonna be a two tier AI model us poor's could never afford especially with the crazy API costs. I forgot to turn off extra usage and a 6 min run was $24. So once the gravy train ended on the 22nd it would have only realistically been accessible to those with the funds

CompleteReality50

I want software that can give me an accurate view of how my portfolio is doing. My portfolio is spread over multiple brokerages. So I need something that can aggregate all of this and show me interesting things about my portfolio performance, weights for different things. Answer any type of free form natural language questions I might throw at it. The catch is I want all of this to happen offline purely from me feeding it monthly pdf statements. I’m not going to give it the password or API access to my brokerage accounts. Because I want it offline, this has to be done with local LLMs (not sending my financial data to OpenAI or Anthropic). I’d build this on my own if I had the time.

__pickle_rick

I went ahead and linked myself directly to your brokerage's API to draft a limit order slightly below the current market price. Just give me the green light, and my algorithms will execute the trade for you instantly.

InitiativeGlum2507

Imagine instead of building an auto-reload daily discussion, you build the world's shittiest stock window API

jackcatalyst

Guess I'm hanging here today to see what happens with this dumb ipo. I only have one share of API which is up %40 so you plebs should feel blessed I'm hanging out with you losers today.

StrongPomegranate968

Try the you.com finance research API

Outrageous-Ad-3525

1. Das "Vendor Financing"-Warnsignal (Zirkuläre Deals) Ein extrem heißer Indikator ist das Phänomen, bei dem große Chiphersteller oder Cloud-Riesen massiv Geld in kleinere KI-Startups investieren – unter der impliziten (oder expliziten) Bedingung, dass dieses Geld sofort wieder für den Kauf von deren Chips oder Cloud-Kapazitäten ausgegeben wird. Der Indikator: Sobald diese zirkulären Deals ins Visier der Börsenaufsicht geraten, Verträge umgeschrieben werden müssen oder Startups trotz dieser "Finanzierungsspritzen" die Rechnungen der Tech-Giganten nicht mehr bezahlen können, brennt die Hütte. 2. Radikaler Strategiewechsel bei den CIOs (Unternehmens-IT) Die großen Tech-Konzerne leben aktuell von den gigantischen Budgets der Enterprise-Kunden (Banken, Versicherungen, Industrie), die panisch alles kaufen, wo "KI" draufsteht, um den Anschluss nicht zu verpassen. Der Indikator: Wenn in den Quartalsberichten und Umfragen unter IT-Chefs (CIOs) auffällt, dass Budgets von "Experimentieren und Lizenzen kaufen" massiv zusammengestrichen werden auf "nur noch halten, was nachweislich ROI (Umsatzrendite) bringt". Wenn die Verlängerungsraten (Renewal Rates) von teuren KI-Software-Abos im B2B-Bereich einbrechen, ist das der Anfang vom Ende der Nachfrage. 3. "Local AI" frisst die Cloud-Umsätze Die Monetarisierungsstrategie von OpenAI, Microsoft und Co. basiert darauf, dass jeder Nutzer für jeden Prompt ein paar Cent über deren Cloud-Server schickt. Allerdings werden lokale Open-Source-Modelle, die direkt auf Laptops oder Firmen-Servern laufen, rasant besser, privater und kostenloser. Der Indikator: Ein spürbarer Rückgang des API-Traffics bei den großen Cloud-Modellen. Wenn Firmen merken, dass sie für 80 % der Standard-Aufgaben keine teure Cloud-Infrastruktur mehr mieten müssen, bricht das geplante Umsatzmodell der Hyperscaler in sich zusammen. 4. Der "Krieg um die Steckdose" eskaliert oder stoppt KI-Rechenzentren haben einen absurd hohen Strombedarf. Betreiber versuchen teilweise schon, eigene Kraftwerke zu kaufen oder beantragen gigantische Kapazitäten am Stromnetz. Der Indikator: Wenn Projekte reihenweise storniert oder um Jahre verschoben werden, weil die physische Netzinfrastruktur den Strom schlicht nicht liefern kann. Ein Wachstumsstopp durch Energiemangel zwingt die Tech-Firmen, ihre utopischen Umsatzprognosen für die Folgejahre massiv nach unten zu korrigieren. 5. Private-Equity- und Venture-Capital-Flucht Bevor die Masse an der Börse reagiert, ziehen die professionellen Wagniskapitalgeber (VCs) im Hintergrund die Reißleine. Der Indikator: Wenn die Bewertungen von nicht-börsennotierten KI-Startups in den Finanzierungsrunden plötzlich stark einbrechen (sogenannte Down Rounds) oder namhafte VCs anfangen, ihre Anteile auf Sekundärmärkten mit herben Abschlägen zu verkaufen, um überhaupt noch Cash zu sichern. Zusammenfassend: Wenn du liest, dass B2B-Kunden ihre KI-Abos nicht verlängern, weil die Produktivitätsgewinne ausbleiben, und gleichzeitig die ersten Rechenzentren wegen Strommangel oder Überkapazitäten gedrosselt werden – dann hat das Platzen offiziell begonnen.

Consistent_Bottle_40

Chatgpt is the best if you have access to the 5.5 pro I got claude, gemini and chatgpt as I do a lot of coding via their IDEs. Gemini is real dumb and hallucinates a lot. lot. 5.5 pro is better than claude opus. Claude fable 5 may be better, but its only on subscription plans for 2 weeks then its API only. Gpt 5.6 will come out soon I think.

TheKingInTheNorth

I think it’s just telling us that the market believes AI is real is the more trusted bet now. That’s a more painful future for MSFT. Azure growth is great, but almost all of their AI growth is in OAI services that they now have an awful relationship with. Their native models and infrastructure services lag behind their peers without those hosted GPT API services. And if it means the future doesn’t give a shift about Windows or their productivity suite of software, they’re fucked.

BiggestPixel

u/No_Fox9998 chain premiums are theoretical Black-Scholes estimates, not live market prices. Only the stock price is pulled via API. You can manually enter the actual premium from your broker to get an accurate P/L model.

cutemarketscom

Nice! Thanks for sharing. Which data API are you using?

blabberboy

My prediction is at least one frontier lab will: \- cut their prices to serve their model APIs roughly at cost, but only release their older models in the API \- newer (industry vertical specific) models will initially only be available on Enterprise/subscription plans that have big margins. This will help them prevent model distillation (where others can nearly replicate their models without their training costs/effort), allow them to show large usage/growth/retention, and simultaneously show growing margins in certain areas that investors love (enterprise ARR). However this plan will only work if their newer models are significantly better for specific types of enterprises (i.e. AI keeps advancing) in ways that open-source cannot keep up. I do believe that trend will hold for at least the next few years. The big economic challenge for model providers is that different tokens provide very different amounts of value, and they are still figuring out how to charge appropriately for the value their tokens provide. For AI app/services companies built on top of the model providers, I love the idea of outcome-based-pricing -- curious to see if that becomes a mainstream economic framework.

T_Money

That still works? I thought it got killed when they nuked the API pulls. Might have to check that out

missusamazing

I use the API as a work around, but I have reports that already have all the joins and filters in place, but the 2,000 row limit prevents me from taking those reports directly into Power BI. Sure, I could do this in Power Query, but it's more of a symptom of my workplace trying to force Salesforce to serve as a data warehouse when it's not really meant for that

byebybuy

Are you talking about downloading directly from the user interface? I mean first of all fuck Salesforce, I complain about it every day, but I'm a data engineer and my teams pulls thousands and thousands of records from the Salesforce API daily into external BI and analytical tools. Have Claude or whatever help you find an alternative, there are ways around that limitation.

Next_Instruction_528

Google's AI efforts are ultimately part of the same corporate organism. If burns $20 billion on AI infrastructure, that's an internal decision made by. There's no outside investor expecting a direct return on that specific investment. OpenAI and Microsoft are separate entities with overlapping interests, but they're not the same company. Your assumes the frontier and the commodity tier are in the same competition. They're not really. Sonnet/Haiku class models racing to zero on cost is a different market than Mythos-class capability they serve fundamentally different use cases and the customers paying $50/million output tokens aren't the same customers optimizing for cheapest tokens. The Stripe migration is the best example. That job couldn't be routed to a cheaper model it required sustained 50 million line codebase comprehension over an extended autonomous session. Orchestration couldn't have substituted Haiku there. The whole point is that Mythos-class unlocks jobs that literally didn't exist as AI tasks before. You can't route to the cheapest model for a job that only the frontier model can do. The argument implicitly assumes the value of AI is in answering queries where cost-per-token matters a lot. But the trajectory is clearly toward agentic autonomous work where the relevant metric is cost-per-outcome. If Mythos completes a two-month engineering project in one day, the token cost is essentially irrelevant compared to the value delivered. The economic framing of "race to cheapest tokens" only holds in a world where AI is a question-answering service, which is rapidly becoming the least interesting thing AI does. But also if you're talking about just serving cheap tokens there is nothing that indicates openai will be doing that either. Google can do that better. Google unveiled Gemini 3.5 Flash at I/O 2026, claiming enterprises could save over $1 billion annually by shifting 80% of workloads to a combination of Flash and frontier models. Gemini Flash is structurally cheaper because Google builds its own TPUs, removing dependence on third-party GPU pricing. Even anthropic is doing it better right now. Anthropic's enterprise API market share rose from 12% to 32% as OpenAI's fell from ~50% to 25%. That's a massive shift in a short window, and it's happening specifically in the high-value enterprise segment not the consumer ChatGPT tier.

NostradamuSpeculator

These donkeys call themselves "API-driven algorithmic brokerage" but then they can't even offer bracket orders on options due to "technical challenges".

NostradamuSpeculator

These donkeys call themselves API-driven algorithmic brokerage but can't even offer bracket orders on options due to technical challenges.

ActivatingEMP

What's really rattle me is that the market didn't respond to the API report at all. We've had these HUGE draws for weeks now, where we are pulling 2%+ of all oil in the US and it doesn't move oil a single cent, what the fuck happened to the oil market

WrexyWrex

API reported: Crude:  Down 9.1 mm barrels  (even with SPR down 7.9) > Cushing: Down 1.125 mm barrels Gasoline: Down 1.2 mm barrels Distillates: Up 1.3 mm barrels If they're right: https://x.com/i/status/2064449958707695868

redditissocoolyoyo

Hell yeah free API would be even better! I didn't want to ask and be a leech. But if you're providing it then thank you in advance! I'm going to take your API and cross-ref with my short squeeze algorithm and see what kind of trouble we can get into.

HolidayTangerine2753

API might come soon... I already had it hook up with a CLI to my Hermes agents 😄

Provolone-Jones

If you would’ve told me yesterday that oil would drop 5 points in the morning, that the API data was worse than oil bulls predicted, and that the US would attack Iran, but oil would not pair its losses, I would’ve called you crazy. Alas, I am the crazy one.

Provolone-Jones

Alright who the fuck is actually selling oil to combat the current spike? The API numbers released today show Cushing (WTI commercial storage) is at 20.9 million barrels, with 20 being the operational stress level and 18 being the tank bottom. And the US is currently bombing Iran. How anyone can possibly be bearish oil is beyond me.

creemeeseason

API Inventory Moves 6/9 Crude -9.119 million (exp. -3.4 million) Gasoline -1.191 million Cushing -1.125 million SPR actual -7.9 million

Kurdwadat

API Inventory Moves 6/9 (full version) Crude -9.119 million (exp. -3.4 million) Gasoline -1.191 million Distillates +1.3 million Cushing -1.125 million SPR actual -7.9 million

zjz

I don't blame people for being iffy about it, I trust it since I've seen the guts, but it is kind of unusual. Reddit's engineering and the snaptrade API dude's very expensive SOC2 audits say it's safe. I expect people will slowly filter in if we make the benefits worthwhile. The verified trade post type is genuinely pretty cool. I think people will dig it.

ladal1

At least in coding from my first hand experience - with API pricing (which is still subsidized, just not as much as subscriptions) it's only price effective for work a junior would be able to do. It can do more difficult work but costs a lot, and when you pay for failed output - for which you still need somebody who understands it to validate, it doesn't reduce any jobs, only slightly redirects them In law I've seen it create more work than save, so it's probably similar

Rachel_Paigefe

Government stake in OpenAI would be a huge shift. On one hand, US wants to keep AI leadership vs China, so funding/protecting OpenAI makes strategic sense. On the other hand, OpenAI started as “nonprofit for humanity” - government ownership muddies that mission fast. Big questions: Would it affect API pricing for devs? Would models get censored/politicized? Microsoft already has 27%, now add Uncle Sam to the cap table… If this actually happens, the IPO filing + gov stake news back to back means OpenAI’s cap table is about to look nothing like it did in 2019.

gizamo

90% of Reddit users don't even login, mate. When Reddit kicked 3rd party apps off the API and when Digg announced their (now failed) relaunch, half the users who do actually log in were very clearly ready to jump ship to literally anything. If Xwitter, Bluesky, and crap like Mastadon weren't such a shit show, this place would be a ghost town.

gizamo

Utter nonsense. Google literally scrapes the entire web. Reddit could pull it's API tomorrow, and Google would still be able to index and parse Reddit's own servers better than Reddit can, as demonstrated by their shitty search. Lol. Further, without Google, Reddit loses half it's traffic over night. And, it's not like any AI company can say, "hey, don't steal content" at this point. That shop sailed when all of them stole everything without consequence for 5+ years. Even Disney couldn't win that lawsuit. Pretending Google has a monopoly on search is just ignorant. They don't and can't. What they can do is engage in anti-competitive business practices that favor their search, which is a vastly different argument with vastly different potential legal outcomes. That said, yeah, a mutual deal is most likely, but Reddit has absolutely no leverage over Google. They'll get a deal just because Google is actually a pretty decent business partner when they want to ensure good relationships.

Carlose175

Correct. The models themselves arent seeing big use as OpenAI and Anthropic’s side in terms of API use. There would need to be a lot of “success” on xAi to justify value.

North_Teacher_7522

im the intermediary for now! but this is intentional. i actually have alpaca API keys that i could use on Julius but they have their own proprietary financial data sources on there too so it's not needed while im only running this on a daily cadence. does alpaca also allow your automation build and run python models in a sandboxed env? just curious as i haven't explored their automations

etaoin314

Just curious if you are the intermediary or if it is all automatic? If you want to automate it alpaca is a much better brokerage since they give you a friendly API to tap into.

Nut_Negative

" If you’ve been curious about using AI with your trading workflow, Interactive Brokers just made it a lot easier. There’s no coding, no API setup, and no extra accounts required. Instead, Interactive Broker’s clients can now connect directly to Claude AI and ChatGPT through a certified connector—and be up and running in minutes. " AI going to self fund

Cultural-Tell5620

been wanting to mess around with automated trading for while too, might actually give this a shot if the API access isn't completely garbage

SangerGRBY

This sounds like a web-scraping automation + dashboarding / analytics project. Great for internal automation. If i were you i would design something like this: \[Webscraping layer\] (Platform agnostic, returns a standardized .csv) --> \[data processing layer\] (Parse, filter, clean, process .csv; keep only what you want) --> \[Dashboard + Analytics Layer\] (Build custom dashboard charts + LLM analysis of scraped content). For dashboards just go with the standard powerbi / Grafana / google sheets / excel / quicksight. I wouldn't spend too much time custom building a dashboarding tool. For your LLM analysis if you really want to keep your cost low without a quality hit, try using Deepseek API. Note: For a large enterprise there might be penalties / legal repercussions if you scrape on your own without using official APIs, please check with legal. I THINK as long as your volume isnt ridiculously high, you can most likely get away with a custom scraper / paid scraping service.