https://idlewords.com/2007/04/the_alameda_weehawken_burrito_...

Google did the same thing with Transformers 2 I think. It still shows up as Purchased for me even though I absolutely did not purchase that. Good way to ensure I never ever watch any Transformers movie!

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48232248

Points: 1

# Comments: 2

I have no idea about the eye thing taking off. But I think your comment is very HN and a bit out-of-touch with regular people. What "you're seeing" is a bubble and not representative of the general population. The eye thing is a slow frog boil and it will be commonplace before you can blink.

I've encountered two major problems while building AI-powered sites: 1) Most agentic tooling doesn't have a enough of a targeted approach to edits to existing files, and will make extraneous edits, 2) Many users will want to try things casually but not spend on each LLM-powered webapp they want to use.

The first problem of targeting edits was a much bigger issue previously, where, before agents, ChatGPT would just delete a chuck of code and replace it with `// existing code goes here`. Simply editing existing files was a pain. This is mostly solved now as Cursor et al. do a much better job by replacing specific lines and such. However, they still go off the rails a lot (especially gemini cli I've noticed) and make unnecessary and unwanted changes.

I'm hoping to solve that by using my Abstract Syntax Tree approach: when editing a file, the LLM is actually instructed to write code that will modify the data structure backing the source text, rather than the source text itself. For example, to edit an HTML file, we instruct the LLM to write python that imports beautifulsoup and then modifies the data structure underneath it.

I hope to solve the second problem (of token usage costing real money but users not wanting to sign up for every site they might want to use) by running a token margin sharing system. Here's how it works: I charge 2x for token usage based on the LLM provider (Anthropic and OpenAI support so far). This creates the margin. A developer can then publish their LLM-powered webapp to a subdomain, where I will proxy all the LLM requests to capture token usage. Then when an end-user lands on their site, the user is charged at the 2x rate, where the developer earns 80% of the extra margin and I earn 20%.

Yes, end-users would still have to sign up and pay via stripe, but only once, on Code+=AI. Then they can use any site published on our subdomains that calls LLMs without having to pay for each one.

Curious what you think about all this. I've just opened guest-usage on the site so you can build a project without signing up (guests have $2 to spend, and you get $3 more when you make a free account).

Thanks and cheers!

- Jacob

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47990395

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943420

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

It's an LLM-webapp-builder, sure, but different from the rest! I have the LLM write python code when it needs to modify an HTML file for example (it'll use beautifulsoup; then I run the code: it parses the source into a data structure, modifies the data structure, and then outputs the resulting html).

It's also a marketplace where you can publish your llm-powered webapp, and earn $ on the token margins (I charge 2x token rates) when people use your site.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47610336

Points: 198

# Comments: 221

BS.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47443158

Points: 4

# Comments: 0

I'm interested in the idea that LLMs writing raw code and doing line-or-diff replacements will not be the future, but that having the LLMs modify the structure of the code may end up being the best.

Also, I think that building LLM-powered webapps should earn the dev per token call; so I've built a margin into token costs where the end user is charged 2x the provider's token costs, and then I get 20% of the remaining and the dev gets 80%.

Plenty of work has been done on this front, and it can be demonstrated that you can assimilate the smartphone pressures into weather models and get some good results. It is hard, of course, and I’m not sure personally how much better the forecasts get. But it’s absolutely possible.

There are like, billions of internet-connected barometers in the world that are not used in weather models. I don’t know if Acme has any of that in mind, but there is plenty of good reason for a weather app to collect data from phones. I know @counters may disagree with me, but I believe there are opportunities to improve short term forecast accuracy using data collected from phones.

Also, pretty much every day, all the apps and all the sites will tell me the incorrect current conditions at my location, much less the forecast. It’s 2026 damnit. Why doesn’t my phone know what the weather is outside right now?

I haven’t got the app yet, but I plan on it (gotta upgrade iOS first I think). Acme seems to have a lot of ideas I agree with, so, definitely following this.

One more thing. Weather apps have not been “solved”. Not even close. They all suck, there’s billions in untapped opportunity, and a stale existing market of bad solutions. People die all the time from severe weather. There is so much more work to be done in forecast accuracy and communication.

Also, it seems a common misunderstanding about some weather apps: yes, most of them just package free data and steal your privacy, but some are really much more than a “weather app”. Some are attempts at building next-generation weather forecast models, which if successful are of course worth billions.

I’ve spent a lot of time building innovative weather apps, most of my career actually. And it’s always shocking to me when people say I’m wasting time or wasting my life or look at me like, “really? You’re dedicating your life to weather apps?!”

No dawg, I’m trying to improve short term forecasts to save life and property from severe events at scale!

I’m not sure what the Acme end goal is, but surely this isn’t just a “weather app”.