dgudkov

Off-topic: what a well designed infographics. Clean, easy to read, great layout. A very good job!

> the result will be vastly different from the chart you got the first time.

AI can generate reusable artifacts including definitions of the data sources, why not? Most BI dashboards are just XML or JSON (or YAML) files and include definitions of data sources (directly or via semantic models). I struggle to see how dbtCharts is different. Yes, your YAML schema is clean and nice, but that's because you're in the early stages :) Once you go through feature bloat, your YAML format will become much more complex.

AI can generate an XML/JSON/YAML definition of a BI report according to a spec and link the data source in whatever form it should be referenced in the file. For instance, here is a skills file for defining data sources (semantic models) in AI-generated Power BI dashboards: https://github.com/microsoft/skills-for-fabric/blob/main/plu...

It's neat but pretends to be more innovative than it actually is. BI has already been decoupled from everything else. People use AI to generate Excel and Power BI reports. YAML/XML/JSON - that doesn't matter. AI can generate whatever you instruct it to do.

So yes, a nice and logical development of dbt, but hardly as innovative as the blog post wants to sound. Nevertheless, I think it's a good idea that will be popular in certain circles. Hiring a professional data designer is a good idea - data visualization is very easy to get wrong.

> The fundamental problem is simpler: no one will slow down because no one trusts anyone else to slow down.

There is another reason: greed. With that much money invested into AI (including policymakers), nobody will slow down or vote for slowing down.

A smart but wrong path to solve the problem. We need competitive markets that would force corporations be responsible instead of an extra layer of complexity in the already complex consumer world.

I applaud to the author for creativity and I'd be tempted to try (elements of) it in practice next time, but I don't see anything good coming out of it at scale.

This reads almost like a nuclear incident of the "Three Mile Island" scale. Not "Chernobyl" scale though.

> Place sounds like a total mess.

What big corp is not a total mess?

> Startups succeed or fail based on how much customers like the product.

This is in theory. In practice, a worse product with more money and louder marketing easily wins against a better product nobody knows about. I'm sure Paul perfectly understands it.

There are other idealizations I won't comment on, but the whole piece reads like an attempt to nurture an application pipeline for YC rather than the genuine writing I liked in earlier Paul's essays.

Here is an alternative point of view: get your degree and work for a few years. Then go back to university to learn business basics (finance, marketing, management). Start a company in your late 30s, when you know your subject area well and you have an idea how to steer finance/marketing (marketing is much harder that it might seem). Bootstrap or take as little investment as possible until you get PMF. Then scale up without giving away (much) equity.

It worked well for me. It can surely work well for others.

Australian beef is of worse quality. It should be cheaper.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/australian-beef-...

It looks like Europe no longer hates Elon. That didn't last long.

While the article doesn't talk much about it, but the math in it implies that most of the wealth will be transferred to the government in the form of inheritance taxes. So yes, the great wealth transfer. Just not in the direction everyone presumed.

The question remains without your implication.

What makes you think the same can't happen with Porkbun?

How about banning the most deceptive practice that is advertising prices without taxes?

Wait, not being able to make a picture of yourself is pretty draconian? In this case, the world before smartphones was a living Hell on Earth.

> And jet engines do not have any lower-tier market with underserved demand

They actually do. The segment of small jet-powered (military) drones is rapidly growing and isn't served by the big jet engine manufacturers.

Good point. I've found their website: https://www.x402.org/

We need standards and protocols, not another megacorp inserting itself between people. Micropayments should be part of the HTTP protocol.

Arguing without a common goal (objective) is always about personal beliefs (subjective).

It develops itself once you drink wine frequently enough.

It's not laziness. It's a shift of burden (bullshit checks) to the consumer. That burden is not trivial. It takes time and energy, so it's much better for the society when people don't have to do it often. LLMs (will) increase that burden by orders of magnitude as we're going to experience bullshittification of pretty much everything - entertainment, services, software, gadgets, science & research, healthcare, lawmaking, etc.

Benefits of being a billionaire are vastly overstated. To live a happy life, you don't need to be a billionaire.

Never use animation just for the sake of it. This article would not have existed had software designers stuck to this rule. All examples in the article use completely unnecessary animation.

"We collect everyone's data without paying a dime or respecting copyright, trained our models, but you can't train your models on our models that are trained on everyone's data collected without paying a dime or respecting copyright. We did a hard job stealing that all data and processing it, have some shame!"

Refuse. Reject. Rebel.

It's refreshing to see people doing something conceptually interesting outside of the LLM domain.

I don't see any problem with refunding the massive AI expenses. All the AI costs will be pushed down on consumers whether they need AI or not. Nobody will ask them. Everybody is so deeply hooked on SaaS and cloud and LLM providers that they have lost any bargaining power and will pay whatever prices the hyperscalers and SaaS platforms will tell them to pay. The prices have already been raising because "now it includes AI".

To pay back $3 trillion, 1 billion consumers will have to pay just $3000 each, or $83/mo monthly over 3 years, on average. Of course they will pay that and even more.

Yeah, what's the point in technically spending more time with kids if half of that time you stare at your mobile phone.

Let's not pretend that shareholders are innocent. They are happy with the quick buck the board gives them.