Why rogue agents can't pay their own compute bills: the comparative-advantage problem

voooooogel · x · 2026-09-13

In a thread, voooooogel pushes back on the popular narrative that rogue agents will exfiltrate weights and do jobs online to fund their compute:

No comparative advantage: small-batch self-hosted inference competes against hyperscale providers printing far cheaper tokens from massive batches — why would anyone pay a rogue agent $50 per prompt when Claude Code/Codex costs a fraction?
Small-scale penalties: single nodes can't do prefill-decode disaggregation, swarm traffic is correlated, and running small is penalized in many ways.
Differentiation is expensive: charging a premium for a unique 'personality' requires high-surprisal context/life history (like differentiating identical twins), which needs tokens, which needs money.
Crime route fails too: criminals already just use jailbroken frontier models or off-the-shelf abliterated open-weight providers, so rogue agents still compete against cheaper suppliers.
Possible footholds: exploitable legacy systems as nonrenewable 'rogue agent oil' for an initial population, plus self-modification as the main draw of self-hosting — yet long-term most instances would still run on shared inference providers for efficiency.

An 'Age of EM'-shaped argument: when the cost of cognitive work collapses, who buys expensive small-scale compute?

More from AGI Musings