I have never used mastodon, but why is it so much better than X (twitter)? I also follow a small group of people on X that I find interesting and I get a chronological feed of their posts in the “following” tab. I know that the “For You” tab abyss is right there. I opened it once, was shocked by all the crap the system assumed I would like, and never went back. The good thing is that nobody forces me to use it. I am perfectly fine in the “following” feed and not exposed at all to recommender systems trying to grab my attention. Only the ads in the feed annoy me - and they are so bad that I wonder how X makes any money.
> I get a chronological feed of their posts in the “following” tab
Which is broken for 2 weeks now. The small drop down to change it to "most recent" have been disappeared for a lot of people both on web and iOS/Android so you see ALL tweets from accounts you follow, even replies you don't care about.
Sounds Like you rediscovered the “opportunity solution tree” (Teresa Torres) and were skipping a crucial step in product management / UX which is product discovery.
I would suggest not to generalize your learnings by saying “why most product planning is bad…” and rather use a more humble title “why our product planning was bad and what we did about it”.
Why is everyone so sure that technology can’t be the moat? Why are you convinced that all AI systems will be very similar in performance and cost, hence be interchangeable?
Isn’t Google the perfect example that you can create a moat by technological leadership in a nascent space? When Google came along it was 10X better than any alternative and they grabbed the whole market. Now their brand and market position make it almost impossible to compete.
I guess the bet is that one of the AI companies achieves a huge breakthrough and a 10X value creation compared to its competitors…
ChatGPT isn't ten times better than Gemini or Claude, is it? Even if they magically released such a model, the competition would quickly catch up. The competition has similar or better resources.
This is key. I remember when Google came out. It was amazingly better than anything else I'd tried up to the point. By contrast, I'd argue that OpenAI's advantage is smaller today than it was when they launched GPT3 in 2020.
Stock price is a bet on the future:
- intel:
uncertain future for their X86 business lines. AMD caught up and even overtook Intel in desktop, laptop and SERVER.
Extremely high Capex on Fab business with uncertain outcome. Can they really compete with TSMC, Samsung, etc?
No real AI growth story to tell, (yet).
- AMD: took the X86 crown from Intel in some areas. Also suffers from big threat of ARM processors.
The bet with AMD is that they will be able to compete with NVIDIA to become a major GPU provider in the AI boom.
Government should force google to give competitors access to its search index so that they have a real opportunity to build a competing service on top of it, AI or search. The same way monopoly telcos were forced to open infrastructure to competing service provides.
Google products are getting increasingly crappy. Would be great to see what others could build with their information monopoly.
It’s a fair point. Especially for the new Mac Pro they could have implemented a more robust thermal solution and clock the whole thing higher. That’s one advantage of a bigger chasis, isn’t it?
The current Mac Pro is kind of pointless. Before you got a powerful workstation (power consumption was irrelevant), now you get a Studio Mac in a new package. I feel they just launched it for “compliance” not because it is a great product. They hit a wall with scaling the M chip architecture. Building an even larger chip than the Ultra would be insane and going multi socket is not possible.
They need a product for people who need expansion slots for non-GPU things, and it fits that.
I agree that it’s likely they wanted to use the quad M2 chip (jade 4 C die, if I remember the term correctly), which would have given them far more PCIE lanes and made it more desirable.
But that doesn’t seem to have worked out. And the lineup had a whole they needed to fill for some of their top end customers. So here we are.
I talked to a fair share of late stage VCs and they like to think of themselves as “category king makers” - the term itself reflects the general sense of humbleness in the VC community. Besides the “venture predation” described in the paper “category king making” also entails cutting off potential competitors from funding. The theory is that once a Softbank or Sequoia have chosen their horse other VCs will be discouraged to invest in the same category as it “is taken”. And many times the VCs actually act behind the scenes and actively discourage their peers to seek an investment in a competitor of their “category king”. It truly is a disgusting game to watch once you have been close enough. VCs for better or worse are the essence of the tech ecosystem. Make the world a better place. my a* :)
If you are a ChatGPT Plus user you can also use ChatGPT 4 with the AskYourPDF plugin. The advantage is that you can just feed the PDF through your own URL and don't have to upload it to a third party.
I mean I'm assuming the plugin would still download the PDF from your url to process it and create embeddings, right? I don't see how it's any different from uploading it.
