Want to get featured here? Explore premium visibility opportunities.

Contact us

AI NewsIs this the dawn of the Tokenpocalypse?

Is this the dawn of the Tokenpocalypse?

3:28 AM IST · June 8, 2026

Is this the dawn of the Tokenpocalypse?

Microsoft recently announcedmajor pricing changes for GitHub Copilot— changes that were drastic enough that a Reddit user said their company hasstarted calling it the Tokenpocalypse. On the latest episode ofTechCrunch’s Equity podcast, Kirsten Korosec, Sean O’Kane, and I discussed what those changes might mean for the larger AI ecosystem. After all, as Anthropic and other big AI companies plan to go public, leading toawkward questions about profitability, we’re likely to see similar price increases for other AI products, and more usage restrictions asbusinesses try to keep costs under control. “Can these AI labs collapse that cost [and] progress the tech enough in a way that it eventually meets in the middle with customers’ appetite for spending?” Sean wondered. Kirsten, meanwhile, suggested that this also reflects “how quickly things are moving.” In just a few months, companiesbecame obsessed with “tokenmaxxxing,”then turned against it due to the high costs. So as AI companies write their IPO filings, she asked, “How do you even write these risks in, because they are evolving before our eyes?” Keep reading for a preview of our conversation, edited for length and clarity. Anthony Ha:When we were planning for this, Sean, you called this the Tokenpocalypse. And I want to hear more about what you think about it, but there was an example of Microsoft deciding with GitHub Copilot that they’re going to startcharging more per token[instead of a flat rate]. This whole ecosystem is heavily, heavily subsidized by investor money. And so stuff that seems like it has no cost is, in fact, incredibly expensive. And now we’re going to get to a point where more of that cost is going to get passed on to the end consumer, to the customer. How is that going to change behavior? I don’t think we know, but there’s going to be a lot of pain. Sean O’Kane:I mean, how many token-related risk factors do we think are going to be in the Anthropic’s S-1? This is a big question. It’s something that I’ve mentioned a lot on this show and we seem to just keep running into it, whereUber has done like the full arcin the span of a month and a half of saying, “Boy, we kind of blew through our budget on this stuff way quicker than we thought this year.” And then, “Ooh, maybe this is going to be a little too expensive, we need to put caps on this, and we need to limit people’s usage inside the company.” That’s just a little worrying. Imagine if you see that happen so quickly at a company like Uber, that is using this stuff a lot, and it’s just a question of: Can these AI labs collapse that cost [and] progress the tech enough in a way that it eventually meets in the middle with customers’ appetite for spending? A funny thing to think back on is, I don’t think there was really any strategy involved in charging $20 a month [for ChatGPT Plus] when ChatGPT originally came out. It was just sort of like, “Let’s spit out a number.” And we’ve all been reckoning with that ever since. Clearly, people pay more for the more advanced models, but even that still isn’t enough to close that gap to the true cost. So that’s clearly the biggest question here. Kirsten:All of this, to me, illustrates how quickly things are moving. I mean, when you really think about it, the whole tokenmaxxxing thing has become a thing, peaked, and now is seen disfavorably, within six months. The scale of this, the whole pricing mechanism, to your point, was put in place before business models were really shaped and solidified around AI labs. And then, at the same time, you have the government trying to catch up. Also this week,President Trump signed an executive order— it is a narrow version, but this is designed to give the government a chance to review powerful AI models. So you have all this happening at a pace that I don’t think I’ve ever experienced. That’s why I’m really looking forward to some of these S-1 IPO registration statements, because of the risk [factors]. How do you even write these risks in, because they are evolving before our eyes, and day by day? Anthony:Uber is an interesting example, Sean, because you mentioned their AI spend, but they’ve also come up in the AI discourse because sometimes, people who think there’s this bubble, they’ll bring up just how wildly unprofitable these tools are, these companies are, and then people will bring up Uber as a response. People talked about how unprofitable Uber was, but eventually you get to scale and then you close that gap. And I think that’s true. But also, for Uber to do that, it had to really transform itself as a company in a lot of ways. What Uber was at the beginning and what it is now, all the different areas of business that it’s had to expand into, the different ways that customers and drivers have gotten squeezed, those are things that had to happen to get to the point where it could be a profitable company. And I think you’re going to have to see similar transformations for a lot of these AI companies if they’re going to survive. Sean:Is there any way that these labs can squeeze pennies like Uber has squeezed the drivers over the years? Is there something squishy enough there for them to do that? I don’t know. This seems like harder, more straightforward costs in a lot of ways, so it’ll be interesting.

read more
India's Compliance Maze: How TeamLease RegTech Is Using AI to Tame a 13,000-Change Beast

India's Compliance Maze: How TeamLease RegTech Is Using AI to Tame a 13,000-Change Beast

Enterprises in India face up to 11,000 compliance instances annually from over 3.2 million regulatory websites. TeamLease RegTech is deploying AI to shift compliance from reactive record-keeping to predictive, intelligence-driven risk management for businesses nationwide.

1 hour ago

View

Meta Strikes Fresh Data Centre Agreements With Crusoe: Report

Meta Strikes Fresh Data Centre Agreements With Crusoe: Report

The latest deal reflects Meta’s ongoing efforts to expand its AI infrastructure as demand for large-scale computing resources continues to grow.

1 hour ago

View

Source: Elastic agrees to buy CRV-backed DeductiveAI for up to $85M

Source: Elastic agrees to buy CRV-backed DeductiveAI for up to $85M

DeductiveAI, a startup that uses AI to catch and resolve bugs in software, has agreed to be sold to enterprise software company Elastic for up to $85 million, according to a person with knowledge of the deal. Deductive, which was founded in 2023, came out stealth last November when it announced a$7.5 million seedround led by CRV with participation from Databricks Ventures, Thomvest Ventures, and PrimeSet.  The investment valued the startup at $33 million, according to PitchBook. Elastic and Deductive did not respond to multiple requests for comment. TechCrunch will update this article if either company responds. The sale marks a speedy exit for Deductive, which is operating in a fast-growing sector known as AI site reliability engineering (AI SRE). Building AI-powered SRE tools has become an important area, driven by the massive influx of AI-written code. Replacing manual debugging with AI enables human SREs to shift focus from constantly fixing outages and other problems, to spending more time on helping with product development. The acquisition reflects a broader trend in which established tech incumbents are looking to buy AI-native startups to integrate agentic technologies into their existing product suites, the source told TechCrunch. Elastic, which went public in 2018, is best known for Elasticsearch, the search and analytics engine that helps organizations store, search, analyze, and monitor large amounts of data in near real time. The company’s observability software — essentially tools that let engineers monitor software systems and detect security threats — could benefit from Deductive’s tech. According to the source, integrating Deductive’s AI technology into Elastic will enhance its observability platform by giving customers tools to automatically monitor performance and resolve system failures in real-time. Deductive was co-founded by Rakesh Kothari, who was previously VP of engineering at Lightspeed-backed business analytics startup ThoughtSpot, and Sameer Agarwal, who formerly worked at Apache Software Foundation and Meta. Agrawal was one of the founding engineers at Databricks. While Deductive reached roughly $1 million in annual recurring revenue (ARR,) according to the source, the startup’s growth lagged behind Resolve AI, one of the sectors’ perceived early winners. The two-year-old Resolve was co-founded by former Splunk executive Spiros Xanthos and Mayank Agarwal. Greylock and Lightspeed-backed startup was last valued at$1.5 billionwhen it raised a $40 million Series A extension in April.

5 hours ago

View

Almost half of U.S. singles feel negatively about AI in dating, Match says

Almost half of U.S. singles feel negatively about AI in dating, Match says

Dating app giant Match Group — which owns apps like Tinder, Hinge, and OkCupid — conducted astudyto determine how U.S. singles really feel about the relationship between AI and dating. Turns out, people don’t want AI messing with every aspect of human life. Across the industry, dating apps are experimenting with AI. Bumble introduced adating assistant named Bee, and Tinder isspendingso much on AI tools that it’s slowed its hiring process. Meanwhile, Hinge’s CEOstepped downlast year to launch a more AI-focused dating app altogether. But according to Match’s survey of 1,000 people aged 18 to 39, 47% of singles have a negative view of AI’s use in romantic contexts. This perspective varies depending on what the AI is being used for. About 40% of singles say they would refuse to date someone who uses an AI companion app, and that figure rises to 51% among women ages 18 to 24. However, only 12% of 18- to 24-year-olds said that they had used a companion app over the last three months, and only about a third of those users said they were seeking genuine connections with those chatbots. While Match says that people harbor a “near-universal” disapproval of actually dating an AI, like in the movie “Her,” that doesn’t mean that respondents are wholly opposed to AI features within apps. Some 64% of respondents said they could see how AI might help them in their dating journey. If we’re being pedantic,technically, every major dating app has already used some form of matching algorithm since before we knew what a GPT was. This survey refers to the new crop of AI features that basically every app is introducing, which help users punch up their profiles, choose photos, and keep conversations flowing. What dating app developers should take away from this survey is that people are not entirely closed off to AI; they just don’t want to be in a relationship with a robot, nor do they want to feel as though their dating experiences are overly inundated with technology that feels inauthentic. “Ask singles what they want from AI in dating, and the answer is pretty consistent: help with the hard parts, but hands off for the human parts,” Match wrote in a blog post. “Yes, they’ll use it to help them punch up a profile or for help figuring out what to say when a conversation goes quiet, but the actual connection is still theirs to create.” Hopefully, this message reaches dating entrepreneurs like Bumble founder Whitney Wolfe Herd, who suggested that dating app users could havepersonal bots that date other users’ bots. It’s pretty normal nowadays to say you met your partner online, but “his bot asked my bot out, and our bots hit it off” will never be a socially acceptable meet-cute.

9 hours ago

View