We're going to need default hard budget caps on pretty much everything
这是一个在未来几个月和几年中，世界将需要更多具备的功能：默认的硬性预算上限。我指的是按使用付费的服务和API中的一项功能，它允许你设定“每月超过X美元后，停止该服务并返回错误信息”。这些必须是硬性限制。软性上限，比如“每月超过X美元后，给我发送警告邮件”，是不够的。编码代理和个性化代理（在更不具威胁性的用户界面中封装的编码代理）大大降低了启动可以做有用事情的代码的难度。有时候这些操作会产生费用——比如调用付费API，或者托管的网络应用，或者可以为额外存储和计算收费的系统。没有人希望在半夜收到一封关于预算限制的警告邮件，然后发现他们在睡觉时，他们的非法服务已经消耗了数百（甚至数千）美元的费用。反对这种做法的一个论点是，企业不希望他们的托管应用因为预算超支而开始抛出错误。我预计大多数企业和个人会更倾向于出现错误，而不是收到一张1万美元以上的意外账单。我认为硬性预算上限应该成为默认设置。如果有人想继续生活
Here's a product feature which the world is going to need a whole lot more of over the coming months and years: default hard budget caps . I'm talking about the feature of pay-by-usage services and APIs that lets you say "after $X/month, cut this thing off and return errors". These need to be hard limits. Soft caps, "after $X/month, send me a warning email", will not cut it. Coding agents, and personal agents (coding agents wrapped in a less threatening UI), greatly reduce the friction of spinning up code that can do useful things. Sometimes those things cost money - calls to paid APIs, or hosted web applications, or systems that can bill for additional storage and compute. Nobody wants to wake up to an email sent at midnight warning about a budget limit and find that, while they slept, their rogue service had consumed several hundred (or several thousand) more dollars of usage. An argument against this is that businesses don't want their hosted applications to start throwing errors because some budget was exceeded. I expect that most businesses and individuals would prefer errors to a surprise $10,000+ bill. I think hard budget caps need to be the default. If someone wants to live