I just about fell out of my chair laughing at your cloud hosted tier with the tagline "We have to eat somehow™" aka "please pay us"

I signed up for the paid tier and I'm hopeful this can help us integrate legacy CRM's with our company's unified communication sales tool.

Either way good luck!

I imagine soon you'll be able to ask it what the world is talking about today and get some interesting responses.

Examples... What time zone should we be following up in or offering times in What salesperson should be assigned (aka whose calendar are we using) Does the prospect ask a question in the form, do you trust an AI to answer that question? Do you need to place a phone call? Do you need to send a text (B2C) How are you gonna do risk management (aka removing people who don't want more contact) How does this interface with the existing systems Are you going to let users change the prompts, how, what happens when they make a mistake

Many of these are messy sequential problems where solving each one reveals two more, and trial and error is the only way to get it right.

Which brings up the ultimate question, do you want someone to train their AI system on your sales leads?

Put $10,000 in an account, put your tool to the test, and post the results in real-time.

https://techcrunch.com/2025/01/27/ai-startup-deepseek-pauses...

I don't believe it was a cyber attack; I think it's just usage overload. If I'm right, the next steps will be for them to throttle usage by price increase or some other method. Or they will have to find another order of magnitude of efficiency, and then that will be gobbled up and maxed out days after they introduce it.

The theme here is the demand for AI is nearly limitless and the supply (for now) is constrained by Nvidia.

Taiwan and other nations are smart, ambitious, and not interested in being enslaved by China.

If China tries to enslave these other nations with a mechanized war, I think you can expect their opponents to play a different game.

For example, by crafting a virus that targets their opponent's families.

The concept that a war with China would just be about manufacturing capacity does not appropriately consider the creativity and viciousness of their potential opponents.

To get suppressors to approach the kind of quiet operation you see in the movies in real life, the shooter needs to use subsonic ammunition. That's because suppression of the firing noise isn't beneficial if the bullet immediately breaks the speed of sound, making a loud crack.

9MM rounds (the caliber used in the United Healthcare CEO Killing) are supersonic by default. Subsonic ammunition can be purchased or made for 9MM guns, but the way to make the round subsonic is to use less gunpowder on a heavier round.

A downside of this is that using these rounds in a standard unmodified semi-automatic pistol will often result in the gun not cycling. That is to say, the kinetic energy of these lower gunpowder bullets leaving the weapon is not enough to cause the gun to eject the spent round and load the next round.

So, the round will fire, but to eject the spent casing and load the next round, the shooter needs to manually cycle the firearm, as seen in the surveillance video in the recent incident.

Welrods are bolt action, they intentionally don't attempt to cycle automatically after each firing. The weapon in the video shows gas escaping the chamber, something a bolt action weapon would not do.

Someone with serious firearms training and expertise would have modified the weapon to cycle with subsonic ammo or used a .45 caliber weapon that is subsonic by default.

I'm just trying to think out loud about a different way forward, and I tried to highlight my bias.

I haven't seen a serious plan put forward for peace, and maybe the problem is not solvable.

Anecdote... I function as a product manager, and I have a lot of fun with the developers I work with (and have a lot of respect for), and they enjoy working with me. I come to them with complex, interesting problems and my framework for potential solutions, and we talk through whether they think it's the right direction and, if so, what I've missed... or they propose alternatives. It's like a chess game where we can both win.

I hope the OP and anyone feeling this way tries working with other projects and people.

When a lease is advertised at X price, it is not legal to offer one monthly price to one tenant and a different one to another, so no negotiating can occur. This also allows smart landlords to price fix without software because all rates are known since the posted rate is the rate. This inhibits true price discovery.

The cheat code is to ask for free months and spread that discount over the lease term. However, this creates a situation where, at the end of the lease, the landlord has you set at the regular month price (or higher), and you have little leverage. Also your good deal is unknown to others who will continue to overpay.

Attacking a software is an easy out, attacking the system that artificially increases rents in the whole system by outlawing more aggressive tenant negotiation is the hard problem.