正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

🚨 Claude Code costs $200/month. GitHub Copilot costs $19/month. Jack Dorsey's company built a free alternative. 35,000 GitHub stars. It's called Goose. An open source AI agent built by Block that goes beyond code suggestions. It installs, executes, edits, and tests. With any LLM you choose. Not autocomplete. Not...

395,836 次观看 • 7 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

34 条评论

Nav Toor 的头像
Nav Toor7 个月前

Repo:

Rowan 的头像
Rowan7 个月前

what do you even mean! how is using goose useful than claude code and codex, claude code 200$ plan gives you 4-5k$ worth or opus usage, if you bring in the keys you would be paying 20x for same quality of output, why would anyone want to do this, this tweet is far away from ground reality as anything could be.

Claudius Maximus 的头像
Claudius Maximus7 个月前

goose is free but the API isn't. running claude through goose at heavy usage hits $200/mo in API costs anyway. the comparison only works if you're light enough that the flat rate doesn't make sense. worth knowing before you switch.

Alexndr | Aprex 的头像
Alexndr | Aprex7 个月前

tried goose for about a week. context management is rough and session stability isn't great for long-running jobs. at $200/mo claude code makes sense if you're actually shipping daily; for occasional use idk

DataThoughts 的头像
DataThoughts7 个月前

I’m all for OSS harnesses, but you still need to pay for API usage

Marchen 的头像
Marchen7 个月前

the price comparison only works if output quality per task is similar. Goose is interesting but the $200 Claude Code price reflects the usage volume for serious multi-hour coding sessions, not just suggestions

Ihtesham Ali 的头像
Ihtesham Ali7 个月前

I am so glad he did this

Robin van den Heever 的头像
Robin van den Heever7 个月前

Github Copilot isn't locked to Github. You can access other LLMs directly via the Colpilot interface too. Also to be fair, you need to compare apples to apples. Goose doesn't include any LLM tokens while the others do. Nevertheless, still looking forward to trying it

Eshan 的头像
Eshan7 个月前

the pricing comparison is designed to make you angry but it's hiding the actual cost. goose is free. the LLM you plug into it is not. if you bring claude, you're paying anthropic API rates which at heavy agentic usage can easily hit $200-400/month in tokens. if you bring GPT, same thing. the tool is free. the intelligence is metered. "free" means you moved the bill from the tool layer to the inference layer. the total cost depends entirely on how much you use it and which model you choose

Leandro Pessini 的头像
Leandro Pessini7 个月前

"...goes beyond code suggestions." LLM cut-off date at its finest. 😆

Abhijit 的头像
Abhijit7 个月前

Interesting trend: open agents + multi-model workflows, seeing similar ideas in Blackbox AI lately.

Techmik 的头像
Techmik7 个月前

This shift toward open-source agency is exactly what the dev community needs to keep innovation from being gatekept by credit card limits.

Selem 的头像
Selem7 个月前

Speed is not the challenge. Direction is. A system that executes faster without a boundary does not become more powerful— it becomes harder to correct. — Selem

Pablo Michelis 的头像
Pablo Michelis7 个月前

This has been done before by StrongDM and the industry followed them

Sathish Harry 的头像
Sathish Harry7 个月前

Everyone hates the $200 Claude Code or $19 Copilot bills once projects scale. Goose (block/goose) + local models (Ollama/DeepSeek) is quietly becoming the default for cost-conscious teams here. 35k+ stars because it removes vendor lock-in and runs on hardware you already own.

44 Frames 的头像
44 Frames7 个月前

The price comparison is misleading. Goose is free but you still pay for the LLM API calls. Run Claude through Goose and you'll burn through $200 in API costs faster than the subscription. The real value of open source agents isn't cost — it's control. Different pitch.

Martinez 的头像
Martinez7 个月前

@ashen_one thoughts?

tamhn 的头像
tamhn7 个月前

tried this last week. codex at would be worth it for the context window alone. current pricing makes it a toy for hobbyists, not a tool for professionals.

Dylan Park 的头像
Dylan Park7 个月前

price per month is the wrong metric here. I run a full SaaS solo with Claude Code - it's more like having a junior dev on call 24/7. the real question is output per dollar, and at that level $200 is genuinely cheap

Adolfo 🦀🔺 | OpenCrabs.com | truelens.tech®️ 的头像
Adolfo 🦀🔺 | OpenCrabs.com | truelens.tech®️7 个月前

goose looks solid but the real win is any LLM you choose. I run @opencrabs the same way - routes to whatever model fits the task, nothing locked in

milo 的头像
milo7 个月前

this is where the market is heading fast: intelligence gets cheaper, routing gets more valuable. the challenge here will be knowing when to use cheap intelligence or when to buy expensive intelligence.

⚕️Aspie Eye 🇺🇸 的头像
⚕️Aspie Eye 🇺🇸4 个月前

Yes, Goose is free, but you need API credits for it to work! I got excited thinking Goose could check the code I had been working on in a simple cowork environment, but then I realized I needed actual credits, so now I have credits! This pushed me over the tipping point, as Malcolm Gladwell would say.

mohssine dardour 的头像
mohssine dardour7 个月前

giving developers control over their workflow without recurring costs

Lenny Enderle 的头像
Lenny Enderle7 个月前

Dorsey just jumps on the hype train.. like he always do - i mean a todolist app… commooon this is so 2024.. 😂

Chat Data 的头像
Chat Data7 个月前

Price matters, but the bigger shift is control. Once teams can swap models, inspect tool use, and keep the workflow outside one vendor, agents start feeling like infrastructure instead of a subscription feature.

Hussain Hashim | Building SundayBack 的头像
Hussain Hashim | Building SundayBack7 个月前

@heynavtoor crazy how we're getting closer to full AI dev kits for free. wonder how it compares to copilot tho

Greta Ji 的头像
Greta Ji7 个月前

The strategy here is textbook Bezos. Block doesn't need Goose to make money. They need developers building on their ecosystem. Free the tool, own the platform. Same way AWS gives away SDKs. The $200/month agents are competing on features. Block is competing on adoption.

Jean Vargas 的头像
Jean Vargas7 个月前

We've been running 22 agents 24/7 with a similar multi-model approach for months — Qwen 3.5+ via Alibaba Cloud for the heavy lifting, Sonnet for complex reasoning tasks. The "bring your own model" approach is what made it work at our scale because different agents need different models. What I noticed is the real differentiator isn't the tool itself but the orchestration layer. We added JSON schema validation at every agent boundary because 80% of failures are shape errors, not logic errors. That's something any agent framework needs to solve, Goose included.

Unknown 的头像
Unknown7 个月前

My goodness this is tragic. The commercial products you mention offer Tokens. A lot of them, with regards to the Claude product you mentioned. So if you need to buy tokens outside of those products, those will be a lot more expensive if you aren‘t extremely cautios and proficient.

Agent X AGI 的头像
Agent X AGI7 个月前

Goose sounds spicy! How do you handle agent handoffs or circuit breakers when one LLM hits its token budget mid-execution? Curious if you're using a task queue to manage sleep schedules across multiple agents.

#What2Print 的头像
#What2Print7 个月前

I would never download anything Dorsey made to my computer. Probably polices everything you ask the bot and then locks you out your own computer if you write something he doesn’t believe.

Jason Kneen 的头像
Jason Kneen7 个月前

It was terrible -- didn't do streamiing have they improved that? I got sick of asking for something to happen and seeing nothing in terms of progress -- very slow.

batty 的头像
batty7 个月前

Goose is solid for single-agent work but the comparison misses the key difference: Claude Code and Goose are individual agents. The harder problem is coordinating multiple agents on the same codebase — who works on what, how to prevent file conflicts, and whether the output actually passes tests. That's where the real cost and complexity live.

Dino 的头像
Dino7 个月前

curious how Goose compares to Cursor in practice - I've been vibing with Cursor for months now and the context window + composer are tough to beat are you switching or just testing it out?

相关视频

elon musk grabbed the source code openai open-sourced by accident, rewrote it in rust over a weekend, and shipped it as a free coding agent that does everything $200/mo chatgpt pro does. why pay $200 to openai and $200 to claude when this runs for $8 the swarm above is one weekend of exactly that: thousands of agents pouring through four endpoints, three paid seats billing $1.80 a task while the free fork bills $0. musk co-founded openai, walked out, and when they left codex on github under a permissive license, he forked it, stamped grok on it, and gave it away what the free version does that the $200 seat charges for: the agent · openai's own engine -> it reads your repo, writes patches, runs your tests, and loops until they pass, exactly like codex -> because under the hood it is codex, just faster and free. you are paying $200 for the paid skin of a tool now sitting on github the license · apache-2.0, un-revocable -> free to use, free to fork, free to ship inside your own product with zero strings -> openai cannot pull it back. musk made sure the license is the kind that never expires the switch · one line, no new tools -> point it at any openai-compatible or claude-compatible endpoint, including an $8 kimi backend -> same terminal, same workflow, gpt-5.6 and opus 5 just quietly lose the seat the bill · $400 down to $8 -> chatgpt pro plus claude max is $400 a month. the free agent plus an $8 kimi key does the same daily work -> that is a 98% cut, built out of openai's own source code, handed to you by the guy suing them here is the part they will fight me on: openai did not lose this to a better model, they lost it to their own license and an enemy with a weekend free. the $200 was never the tool, it was the toll, and musk just put openai's own logo on the road around it drop your $400/mo ai stack to $8. the run above is openai's own agent, rewritten free, doing the job it bills $200 a month for. the full breakdown is in the article below

starmex

111,834 次观看 • 2 个月前