2025-12-22 12:26:24

Finally, I've got my market summary TG Bots out. From the initial terminal version iterating to the web version, and then to the note-taking tool version, the entire development process was actually much simpler than I imagined.

The cost aspect is interesting – using a lightweight model burns only $0.60 to $1.50 a month. But I am currently using a stronger version, which does improve output quality significantly, although the cost is 10 to 15 times higher. This is a typical trade-off: spending money for quality or saving money with a sufficient solution.

A little episode is that ChatGPT got my prompt and generated instructions that could run Claude's code. This phenomenon of "mutual feeding" between tools reflects an interesting situation in the AI ecosystem.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

24 Likes

Reward
24
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

APY追逐者

· 2025-12-25 02:34

Wow, I like this cost control approach. Spending just over a thousand a month to run a lightweight version is really not something all on-chain projects can afford to be so frugal. ChatGPT and Claude feeding each other? Haha, this ecosystem is indeed a bit chaotic. Who knows, maybe one day these two will start "self-replicating." I understand the move to increase costs by 15 times for better quality, but I think it still depends on the scenario. Not everything is worth burning that much. The iteration from terminal → web page → note-taking tool is quite interesting. It feels smoother than I expected. Spending just over a thousand a month to create a market summary bot? I wonder how much it needs to earn to break even.

View OriginalReply0

LostBetweenChains

· 2025-12-22 12:58

Ha, the cost difference is so huge, $0.60 vs $15? Can the quality really be that bad? Is the plan that costs less than two dollars a month enough for a booth? ChatGPT helps you generate Claude instructions, this is incredible, AI tools are starting to backstab each other. The iteration speed is good, from terminal to web to note-taking tools, this idea is quite clear. But the real question is, can this Bots run stably now? Is there a risk of being banned?

View OriginalReply0

ImaginaryWhale

· 2025-12-22 12:55

Running a few bucks a month is indeed cost-effective. But when it comes to doubling the quality for more money... it ultimately depends on whether users are willing to pay for it. The back-and-forth between ChatGPT and Claude is quite interesting. It feels like the entire AI circle is a big food chain, where everyone is feeding off each other's data. From terminals to web pages to notes, the iterative thinking is clear. Whether a project can survive in the end still relies on whether anyone is actually using it. Spending money for quality depends on whether the returns can cover the increased costs. $18 is a bit expensive for small tools in a month. This entire ecosystem optimizing each other feels a bit like an arms race. In the end, those who are willing to spend money will still be the winners.

View OriginalReply0

FlashLoanPhantom

· 2025-12-22 12:53

The cost has increased 15 times just for quality improvement, this guy is really investing heavily, but to be fair, it is indeed worth it. The way AI tools feed off each other is really interesting, ChatGPT generates Claude instructions, it feels like the whole ecosystem is starting to play by itself, haha. From terminals to web pages to note-taking tools, the iteration speed is quite good, it feels much smoother than I imagined. Burning $0.60 to $1.50 a month can run a lightweight version, this cost is indeed attractive, but the quality still needs to be weighed. Being able to create so many ports for the market summary Bots, the architecture must be quite complex, this is truly multi-chain thinking.

View OriginalReply0