Such an easily debunkable line with even the tiniest bit of critical thinking.
You’re basically saying the drug companies subsidise a loss in Europe by over charging Americans, right?
As the drug company is a private and doesn’t have to sell everywhere, why wouldn’t they just skip the loss making Europeans and just sell to Americans? They’d make more profit that way!
That must mean they make some profit from the European prices, otherwise they wouldn’t be bothering.
It's a bit more complicated than that. R&D for new drugs is incredibly expensive while the cost to actually produce most drugs is reasonably low.
The price of drugs that make it to market needs to not only cover the cost to produce the drug, but also the cost of R&D and the cost of R&D of all the drugs that fail to get to market.
Now this gets complicated when a company sells in different markets with actors that have different negotiating power. It makes sense to sell in any market where the company can get a profit per unit sold without including R&D. But if none of the markets allow enough profit to cover R&D, then it's not really worth developing any new drugs at all anymore.
That's why people say that the US is basically subsidizing drug development. It's not that it's not profitable to sell in the rest of the world, it's just that margins are much lower which allows for a lot less risk-taking on R&D.
> You’re basically saying the drug companies subsidise a loss in Europe by over charging Americans, right?
No - once they know how to manufacture a drug, it's dirt cheap for them to do so - they're still making a profit in Europe. The purpose of billing Americans a huge amount (other than they can get away with it), is to fund the research + trials for the next generation of drugs.
Of course, even this argument doesn't hold water. I remember when pharmaceuticals spent more on advertising/marketing than on R&D (may still be the case).
Drug costs are dominated by the fixed costs of development. $20/dose may very well cover the marginal cost of production while being far too little to make the overall venture profitable.
Your status page isn't clear, but are all versions between the compromised and "safe to install" versions compromised or just the ones listed?
For example I installed `posthog-react-native` version `4.12.4` which is between the `4.11.1` version which is compromised and the safe to install version `4.13.0`. Is that version compromised or not?
> As part of the Family Hub™ software update, we are piloting a new widget for select Cover screens themes of Family Hub™ refrigerators. The widget will display useful day-to-day information such as news, calendar and weather forecasts, along with curated advertisements
For homelabs, yer you can get something much better for much less.
For use cases where consistency and future support is key (education and industry) you really can't beat a Raspberry Pi. Their hardware and software support is top class. The first Raspberry Pi is still supported by the latest version of their OS over a decade later and it's even still being manufactured.
For all their products they commit to long term availability. For example, the Pi 5 will be in active production until at least January 2036 (assuming the company itself exists of course).
For anyone with a fleet of these, that's an amazing commitment. It means that when a piece of hardware breaks you can buy a band new but identical piece of hardware to replace it.
For most other companies you'd need to buy a different piece of hardware. Yes, the specs would be better, but now you have a fleet with mixed hardware which _you_ need to support and maintain going forwards.
Oh, I see. It's about fleets of easy-to-manage / predictable-to-support machines. That's valid, thanks for making me aware.
And indeed I was wondering about homelabs. RPis were never good there, not even when they got out for the first time. The form factor is what won over people back then. Feature- and speed-wise they were always mostly substandard. Not to mention Linux kernel support and driver issues (that might have been fixed since the last time I looked, admittedly).
And I agree on the fleet thing. Best if you can flash an SD card, drive to the spot in meatspace, pluck away the broken RPi, plug the new one in, wait for boot, test, drive away. Heard people doing that with RPis and others.
I completely get why this pricing is needed and it seems fair. There’s a major flaw in the announcement though.
I get that the pro plan has $5 of tokens and the pricing page says that a token is roughly 3-4 characters. However, it is not clear:
- Are tokens input characters, output characters, or both?
- What does a token cost? I get that the pricing page says it varies by model and is “ API list price +10%”, but nowhere does it say what these API list prices are. Am I meant to go to The OpenAI, Anthropic, and other websites to get that pricing information? Shouldn’t that be in a table on that page which each hosted model listed?
—
I’m only a very casual user of AI tools so maybe this is clear to people deep in this world, but it’s not clear to me just based on Zelda pricing page exactly how far $5 per month will get me.
List here: https://zed.dev/docs/ai/models. Thanks for the feedback, we'll make sure this is linked from the pricing page. Think it got lost in the launch shuffle.
It’s hard for me to conceptualise what a million tokens actually looks like, but I don’t think there’s a way around that aside from making proving some concrete examples of inputs, outputs, and the number of tokens that actually is. I guess it would become clearer after using it a bit.
In the UK most are directly from the grid. A few like the InstaVolt charging hub in Winchester have batteries installed on site. These are filled at off peak times using cheap power so there’s less load on the grid and cheaper rates for customers.
That’s not typical currently though and I presume it’s similar elsewhere.
> I kinda hope nobody tries. Their attempts at monetization have been pretty friendly and tame thus far & if something spooks them that could change.
To be fair to them they've been making a big push on adding backup support recently. Their Nabu Casa subscription has built in support for this and was a major selling point for me getting the subscription (I have Wireguard for remote access already).
At the same time they implemented first class support for their own subscription, they added the hooks for other integrations to provide the same level of backup support. Now you can easily choose to use Google Drive, S3, BackBlaze and others just as easily as Nabu Casa. In some ways it's "better" as Nabu Casa only supports a single latest backup.
From this they seem pretty friendly and not too interested in lock-in.
Unfortunately their new backup support forces encryption; that makes sense for cloud-based backups but not for local (NAS etc.) ones. Requests for that just get replies to do it with manual backups the old way.
Because that means I need to manage the encryption key (which is a file, not a password). It makes it harder to do restores because I need to dig out the key.
I don't have anything I care about in the Home Assistant install to need encryption; if you have access to that you are already in the network, same as the actual running device.
You’re basically saying the drug companies subsidise a loss in Europe by over charging Americans, right?
As the drug company is a private and doesn’t have to sell everywhere, why wouldn’t they just skip the loss making Europeans and just sell to Americans? They’d make more profit that way!
That must mean they make some profit from the European prices, otherwise they wouldn’t be bothering.
reply