Ozzie_osman

I would personally love to see an end to the universally existing bait-and-switch of brokers listing unavailable units just to get you on the phone, then when you contact them, saying "Oh sorry that unit just got rented (or sold), but, I have another one that might suit you"

AI can make individuals 2x or 5x or 10x (?) faster. Lack of trust, alignment, and ownership can make _teams_ 2x or 5x or 10x slower.

Decisions are special things. One of the golden rules of life is that a person (or entity) making decisions is somehow impacted or otherwise getting feedback on the repercussions of those decisions.

When you cognitively surrender to AI, or to another person (be it a leader/manager, or a subordinate/report), you are asking for trouble.

One thing that changed reading for me was Readwise. One of my favorite products. Super simple concept, I just highlight quotes I like, then I get a daily email of random things I've highlighted. Great way to retain info from non-fiction books, and to retain the feeling of special parts of fiction ones.

This is really cool. Can it play nice with gdrive or Dropbox? For better or worse, that's just where my data lives now but I'd love this layer.

Anecdotal and more for unskilled than skilled workers, but having traveled to Germany a bunch, I found that taxi drivers and delivery drivers seem pretty unhappy there. They mention not feeling accepted, feeling constantly looked down upon, etc. There's a bit of that in every country, but generally, the immigrants I've found in Germany seem a lot less happy than the ones I've met in other countries.

"writers who wrote the most in history"

Proceeds to ignore Eastern writers (Arab, Chinese, Persian) who wrote just as much or more.

An org that big doesn't "see". A triager with very little context and authority is probably the one making this call and my guess is the process is failing to direct or escalate it to the right person.

AI has caused a lot of leaders to overreact. Great leaders find a balance between overreacting and waffling. It's often wise to dampen your response a little bit, without dragging your feet.

100% this. This is why it's so hard to trust AI on code reviews, at least for now.

The main thing is the old forums were sorted by recency (how new a post was or how recently it was replied to) rather than some AI-driven engagement mechanism. They were structured (you'd have several rooms for different topics on the same forum).

Notable is that this in Fureidis, which while in modern Israel now, was part of British Mandate Palestine, and was one of the only Arab towns left in tact (and is still primarily Arab and Muslim). It accepted a lot of refugees from neighboring villages after 1948, for example Tantura, in which a horrendous massacre took place (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantura_massacre, https://archive.org/details/tantura_2022).

There's a quote from an old Mos Def song that does it for me:

"More, and more, and more, and more, More of less than ever before, Just too much more for your mind to absorb."

I mean yes, for a single DB it's large, but if you're thinking about sharding you're probably in the tens of TBs, and if you're a company offering sharding you've prob sharded larger workloads.

I like the mix of management/leadership/structure. I do think leadership is an important aspect, and leaders who are uncompromising can have a big impact.

It's funny we both land on Google as a main example. I had this quote "I’m going to pick on Google a little bit here, but I do love that company. I think there’s a lot it can improve on, but it’s still one of my favorite and least “evil” large tech companies.", and honestly and sadly, I don't even know if I'd agree with the latter part of that statement anymore.

Just dropping in to thank you for writing this book and raising awareness around it. A lot of builders are really disillusioned by how "corruptible" the tech industry has been.

I wrote a blog post called "Revenue Model is More Important than Culture" (it made the #1 spot on HackerNews a few years ago) arguing that the way to avoid that corruption is by making sure the business model is immune to it, but having read your thoughts, I'd say your argument (structure being the dominant term) is even stronger.

  We sharded over 20 TB that we know about.

The ironic thing is I know several legitimate humans who have lost access to their accounts years/months ago, and have been dealing with support hell trying to get access back.

Maybe they should have hacked themselves.

It's not just domain expertise. Sustainbly great work is done by people with expertise _and_ ownership/accountability.

The Ouoroboros (serpent) eats its own tail, feeling satisfied and full in the short-term but ultimately, there is nothing left to eat.

The farmer, rather than feeding his livestock so they can keep producing milk/eggs/etc, decides to greedily eat all the corn himself.

This is a racket and should be illegal.

Grafana had a very similar incident: https://grafana.com/blog/grafana-labs-security-update-latest...

If the team is here, would love to understand how it compares to something like Amplitude's agent analytics (https://amplitude.com/ai-agents).

Surprised to see no mention of Chinese cars, which are currently taking over the rest of the globe (EVs, REVs, hybrids). For half the price of a US or European car, you get a car with a lot more bells and whistles, which of course, include multiple large screens inside, software that controls everything (seat positions, lights, etc), LED matrix lighting on the front, and an app to control the car remotely.

I think the antidote is ownership. Every part of a company or product needs some person or small group that owns it, understands it, and feels ownership over its long-term health. They review or decide what level of review changes to it can take.

So much of what makes high-functioning teams work is a sense of ownership and stewardship, and what makes low-functioning teams break is a lack thereof. Someone with pride, drive, and a high standard feeling responsible for a particular area or thing.

In the past, that ownership could be individual or collective, but with AI and a lot more lane-crossing, ownership should tend toward smaller groups (or individuals).

A developer can design, but a designer needs to review it. A designer can code, but the owner of the code must review it.

This might feel like gatekeeping, but it's the only way.

"Private Equity"

Well, there's a good way and a bad way to do this. Embedded AI (vs standalone AI) can do a lot of interesting things. For example, a good teacher will watch students and identify when someone is struggling (or thriving), and carefully offer to help, vs just waiting for students to approach them and aka questions.

This resonates. I know that if I don't exercise on the 2-3 hour window right after I wake up, it'll be near impossible to do anything physically taxing that day.

Agreed that the upload queue solves this problem, but, one thing about the current system is it lets people choose where on the continuum they want to be depending on their risk/reward profile.

I met my manager when I joined once, then every 6 or 12 months for performance review (which was aggregated feedback from my peers that he took 2 minutes to talk through: "looks like you're doing fine, if you need anything, my EA can schedule more time").

PMs and Engineers made the prioritization decisions.

If someone was severely underperforming, it'd probably take at least 6 months to notice.

Projects would get shut down with very little notice (though I guess that's been a Google constant).

Within two years they had added 3-4 more layers though, after realizing the managers were, after all, needed.