It’s a very low risk and low effort plan, even if it fails it’s fine. To be contrasted with all the AI players accumulating costs and risks for the AI rollout
This seems like a useful write up of the concepts involved here, but I just hate reading Claude’s writing style so much.
This is content marketing, at least give it a review pass before you hit publish… if your marketing is unpolished AI slop, I have to assume your product is too.
I think the abstraction is only part of the problem. The other part is that all these companies offering ai products are deeply untrustworthy, and I don’t want to let them any further into my stack than I have to. Claude code and codex are great because they are lightweight, and operate on top of the rest of my tools with little to no change needed, so they can be eliminated or migrated away from with zero cost. They’re not a dependency of anything. And that’s as much as I’m willing to trust OpenAI or Claude.
Just letting you know, this comment inspired me to finally just say "screw it" and launch what I've been building for the past year. https://www.cadenya.com
Interesting concept, but blue ocean as to your target customer. Would be good to see other case studies, use cases for this. Also, thank you for not another “bring your keys” product. Just abstract it away for me.
Congrats on the launch! The readme post in the blog was helpful to understand what you’re selling. Maybe you could convey those ideas more in the homepage?
It’s been a while since I watched an Apple presentation, but I caught a bit of this one. And I spent the whole time trying to figure out who it was for - the presenters didn’t seem to express any genuine excitement about the products, and it didn’t convey any useful information that couldn’t be better shared by just posting the slides.
The only thing I can see is that it generates some clips for the presenters to share on their LinkedIn pages. I assume there is prestige in being selected as a presenter, and the rest of the show serves its purpose simply by existing.
Doing it live isn’t going to bring Steve back. He was a natural showman, the people doing it now aren’t. They’re engineers and executives. Putting them on a live stage is going to make it even tougher on them.
me too, but I guess they feel they cannot afford any missteps.
I still enjoy Marc Benioff presentations. He's very engaging to watch, though not nearly as good as Jobs in terms of storytelling. I feel Jobs honed the craft more though.
Absolutely nobody commenting that has done that, it's just roleplay. Flash-0731 and Pro-0813 replaced previous models too, and the V4-preview models replaced V3.2 before that. You have your official API from a tiny cutting edge research lab that can only realistically host one model at a time, which you know from every model they released before, but they fully openly provide every model so if you want that infinite stability you can easily host it yourself for eternity. So those commenters want to pretend they require RHEL-like stability for their prompts with enterprise budgets, but somehow can't host those models, yet at the same time offload their entire RHEL-stability requirements to the research lab. Even Google and OpenAI retire models that were still relevant a year ago, but open models actually last forever.
this is what regulatory failure looks like. There's no downside for google to do this, because nobody is going to hold them accountable. Nobody is telling them they have to explain their actions, and it's easier for them not to, so why would they?
i think that's a perfectly coherent and reasonable way for both these apps to work.
people don't want AI features leaking into their non-ai apps. I'm not an AI hater - I want my AI app to be able to read and write word docs, but when i decide to open up libreoffice i'm doing that because i want to write something myself, not use AI. i don't need my word processor to bundle an inferior version of what the ChatGPT can do for me.
reply