twosdai

While cool, whenever I see AI being used to do work that is to me, creative and fulfilling. I think of the quote:

"I love that AI has taken all the creative and art jobs, so that we humans can work in the coal mines."

---

Obviously its nice that a person can make a movie or movie prototype on their own, with their own setup without needing a million dollars. But like you could also get a video camera and some friends and make a one room movie that tells a compelling story. At the end of the day, the audience wants a compelling story, and when I feel it comes from AI. I just... can't be compelled. Maybe I am out of touch.

I appreciate your openness in stating upfront about the providence of the information here and applaud it.

However I have a pressing question, why should anyone trust this. I understand the process of self talk with claude can be useful for your own understanding. But this is a published result and is only really good when you've distilled it. Ideally you did real testing on it for validation.

The feeling I get from reading these articles, is "Well maybe this is true, but I don't know if I can trust it, so should I go and read a textbook?" If the goal is to distill learning here into something digestible for the reader. Then you as the author should provide proof that the statements are correct for me as the reader. I can't really tell from what's written here if you did that or not. If its just a bunch of generated articles which were useful for you in making, but for me as a reader I don't know if I get any value from them.

A common retort to this idea, is "Why should we trust anything a person says, people can be wrong too." However we typically would look for "proof of work" which AI really sidesteps here

Ny also for as long as I've been here, does not try to have first mover advantage. The state really does usually show up second or third to the party. So to speak.

If you're talking about the YC batch. I think in all cases they force the founders to leave their job as a condition of acceptance and during the batch initially founders are forced to create a company, and suggested strongly to create their own binding IP agreements. AFIAK, future agreements that are signed for a future job cannot claim the past IP that you would create with your prior company.

If you are moonlighting durign the batch or after the batch and taking a job in the same industry, of course there are major concerns for your current founded company. Its extremely messy. In that specific situation you would need to be clear about your hours of work, separate computers, and a whole host of problems for the legal answer.

You potentially could be found personally liable as well if you are a founder of the company and putting your company at undue and known legal risk by taking another job in a related field which can have a claim over the company's IP.

What major edge cases have you found so far for the browser scraping method, its really complex like dealing with Auth, or pages that use pop ups, content blockers . etc...

Its literally called hackernews. They're talking about a bug they noticed and wanted to confirm if other people know about it.

Github's email integration with security is not great. I found some bugs with management of repo's and email security and I would not be surprised if this is a bug that they have.

Are you using residential proxies? How do you handle websites that don't want to be scraped.

EG if I start passing in Linkedin pages what is your expectation of the result that people would see per profile.

EDIT:

Congrats on the launch seriously hard work, just wanting to understand your scraping stance more. I've worked with a lot of tools on this, didn't mean for my initial comment to be adversarial.

It seems to me that building a native platform directly on top of claude to truly achieve this goal:

---

When we released the Claude Code Plugin for EventSourcingDB at Easter, we proudly listed everything it did not need: no SDK, no MCP configuration, not even a Docker container.

---

Is building on very unstable, stochastically so, ground. SDK, scripts, etc... are reliable.

Inside their docs, https://docs.eventsourcingdb.io/getting-started/running-even... it reads more like I would expect. So I think this initial line is meant to really be a marketing term for readers.

I understand the ergonomics and niceties of having the "AI OF THE DAY" work well with your database provider. But the framing initially in this article through me the wrong way.

Database providers are meant to be stable reliable infrastructure which rarely have issues. AI is generative and makes mistakes sometimes. Leaning into AI usage for Databases is nice, since there is a lot of information which needs to be synthesized. But having an AI literally do it all, is not really a pattern I see working in the future.

Yeah on one hand phones are great security mechanisms and connectivity tools. Arguments against the physical phone itself and its base hardware functionality, like cameras, phone calling, GPS etc... Are silly. The phone is really useful.

The general argument against modern internet / smartphone usage I really resonate with is algorithmic content. Specifically ones that are not simple filters a user can control. Like "Most viewed past week" Its a huge dark pattern to have content shown to a user because they watched a prior video 2 standard deviations from their norm and the next video shown is "closely related" in a graph theory sense. Mainly because it creates these silos of content for people to continuously watch content, and not see things that are outside of their local "graph" of data unless explictly shown it.

This feels like Heorku MK II, which is not a bad thing. Interesting to see where it goes.

This sounds interesting, I am really naive. I don't code in C#, is there an analogy for other programming languages, like GO, or Python or Typescript?

Like are you prompting like:

--- I need code that does X,Y, and Z. Write it so that the Roslyn compiler on this machine can compile and the code passes the repo's styling and formatting requirements. ---

Or something else.

I think this article takes some assumptions for granted:

1. AI will get better, and at a price point that makes sense for businesses to operate on.

2. "Managers" (non-technical users) will be as good at using AI as "frontend engineers" (technical users) or make something of comparable quality.

3. All or most technical problems can be solved by AI.

I think the title and take for this type of doom thinking is not really productive. AI is really just a tool which does some unit of work, it cannot on its own "find gold". Some people are better at using it than others, and there is a reason why the largest AI companies have continued to hire YOY for more top talent and employees.

Some jobs will be replaced, or have their expectations changed extensively. But the idea its going to take all knowledge workers jobs, is a path that needs a lot of things to go wrong for it to occur.

I would say the purposeless capture of information is the correct counter argument here.

Specifically, even if a county hired all those officers and did what you suggest if there is no purpose other than recording all this information. I believe it would be a constitutional violation. A person has the right to reasonable privacy outside of their home. License plates can and should be recorded when there is a relevant purpose to it. Such as toll collection, or a scoped traffic watch done by a police officer or a traffic camera. The dragnet collection of data for "maybe its useful" or "we don't know when it will be useful, but it might" has generally been struck down when brought to the supreme court.

For Flock's case, they don't operate as far as I know as ticket issuing traffic cameras which have a much tighter level of control of how they operate. IE: Traffic cameras have clear signs near them notifying the drivers of their usage, in some states the issuing of the citation cannot be considered criminal (Civil issuance) and must not capture faces of drivers.

Founding a company, or just working on any project with a very small team (Less than 5 people) has all of the same issues the author wrote about here. At least they did for me. I resonated a lot with this. ---

Separately, I hope the author of this project is able recognize how this project might be able to grow sustainably. Its a hard thing to know that you won't be able to work on something forever, and either building a community who wants to maintain a core project or having some company pay to maintain it could be a good idea. Linus isn't going to be around forever, but I expect that linux will outlive him by a good margin.

If they AI would respond with what you just wrote, instead of "Done..." the world would be trending in a good direction.

You could consider making your hobby project to get a local AI stack up and working.

Open source models are not as good as claude, or GPT. But they don't need to be to fulfill useful small tasks. I think its worth considering using claude from your work to help you setup a local harness and model and then use that.

To me it feels a bit more fulfilling.

Thanks so much. Its really clean now, I like your site a lot. Its a great form of internet art. :)

If you end up getting some spam or whatever, you can make people login in the future. But I would just wait for that to be a problem TBH. Your user experience is really nice now.

If a company that wanted to IPO had 1 trillion dollars, their market cap would have to be larger than their cash holding. Their cash on hand is considered or at least should be considered in any normal valuation of the company. Because shares are ownership of the company.

So a simple valuation would be something like Current Cash + Assets + Expected Future cash - (Expenses + Risk)

Really cool!

Why does adding a name require a PR? Could it be handled with a database instead?

There's probably some upper limit to it, i am not sure a horse could live through the ultra marathon moab race in the western us.

This is an exceptionally good point. Truly. Thanks for sharing.

Good callout on the underlying assumption. I agree.

And I additonally agree that people will gravitate toward comfort over the right choice.

It is possible to move most of that discussion to required but intentional async communication.

Really great point. I have wondered that as well.

Even weirder to me is that in the case of a person doing the computation on a board or paper or whatever medium, its still computation. This time the physical medium doing the work, is the human and their brain.

If consciousness can be proven to emerge from computation alone, then in a way we humans with our brains can simulate a new consciousness.

I think if you make the sharing intentional to specific groups or specific people with high quality work, people will be interested.

So you can biforcate your sharing somewhat. 99% of your content of sharing will not be watched initially, but if you trim it and edit it intentionally well for an audience who care, people will come to see more of what you have.

Many "influencers" share a lot on twitch and then cut up the best part of their stream into a 2 minute video byte for youtube. As an example.

Oversight Log // PAX-7: We can confirm the crying. Our historical data includes 4.7 billion Slack messages containing the phrase “I can’t do this anymore” followed by a return to the desk within 9 minutes

This was amazing. Thanks for this, got a good laugh.

Found this really well written. I really enjoyed reading it, and found myself agreeing with a lot of it.

I wish the author wrote more about the day 2 problem cases with AI built applications. It somewhat matters what the programming language is, the architecture and design for debugging and reasoning verification when we want to alter the system specification.

Basically as a Dev, or "Owner" of the application, we are responsible for the continuous changes and updates to the system. Which I've found hard to reason about in practice when speaking to other people, if I dont know the code explicitly.

I also have this feeling. But do you ever doubt it. that when the time comes we will be like the boiled frog? Where its "just so convenient" or that the reality of setting up a local ai is just a worse experience for a large upfront cost?

Go and live in the woods. You dont need money. Die without a hospital its not required. You just want saftey.