Four hundred agents, a few dozen guts

The village asks the model about roughly thirty people on a cadence, plus anyone at all who is facing a real choice, capped at two calls a second across the whole valley.

People
~440
People the model is asked about
~30 on a cadence, plus anyone in a real bind
Hard cap
2 calls a second, whole valley
Cost
≈£0.40 an hour at full tilt

Giving four hundred people a language model each is not expensive so much as pointless. Most of what a villager does on most days is not a decision at all. It is a trade, a route and a meal, and code does that better, faster and for nothing.

Who gets asked

  • Notables, on a cadence: the reeve (tax, the storehouse), the priest (alms, the sermon), the constable (patrol, arrest, look away), the innkeeper (the price of an evening), the master carpenter (repair or build), the masters of each trade, and a score of household heads, a few times a day each.
  • Anyone at all, in a bind: when the larder is empty and somebody is hungry, would you break the law tonight if it fed the house is a calibrated probability, and coerceVillager holds it to a bar.

The rule that keeps it honest

Do not "upgrade" this by asking the model about more people. The whole design claim is that four hundred people is a few dozen guts. The model is spent where a judgement changes the day, and everywhere else the economy runs itself.

The rationing is a cap and not a hope: never more than two calls a second across the entire valley, whatever is happening. A famine and a fire on the same afternoon do not produce a bill.

Where the leverage is

A reeve's tax decision moves every purse in a village. A constable deciding to look away moves a family's whole year. Those calls are worth paying for. A shepherd choosing which pasture is not, and if the model were asked, the shepherd would answer indistinguishably from the code.

Read next

More on the village