If you end up getting some spam or whatever, you can make people login in the future. But I would just wait for that to be a problem TBH. Your user experience is really nice now.

So a simple valuation would be something like Current Cash + Assets + Expected Future cash - (Expenses + Risk)

Why does adding a name require a PR? Could it be handled with a database instead?

And I additonally agree that people will gravitate toward comfort over the right choice.

Even weirder to me is that in the case of a person doing the computation on a board or paper or whatever medium, its still computation. This time the physical medium doing the work, is the human and their brain.

If consciousness can be proven to emerge from computation alone, then in a way we humans with our brains can simulate a new consciousness.

So you can biforcate your sharing somewhat. 99% of your content of sharing will not be watched initially, but if you trim it and edit it intentionally well for an audience who care, people will come to see more of what you have.

Many "influencers" share a lot on twitch and then cut up the best part of their stream into a 2 minute video byte for youtube. As an example.

This was amazing. Thanks for this, got a good laugh.

I wish the author wrote more about the day 2 problem cases with AI built applications. It somewhat matters what the programming language is, the architecture and design for debugging and reasoning verification when we want to alter the system specification.

Basically as a Dev, or "Owner" of the application, we are responsible for the continuous changes and updates to the system. Which I've found hard to reason about in practice when speaking to other people, if I dont know the code explicitly.

In your comparison, I think you're getting tired because you need to reason through syntax writing which you have not done in a while, its more akin to going to gym than it is to "withdrawl". Having to reason through syntax for writing is going to be a muscle memory thing which AI will reduce, but its not really the most valuable skill of programming. Reading, comprehension, ownership, and your internal mental model of programming tasks are without a doubt the most important aspect of our work.

I think the idea raised about "Automated Firms" is a bit off in the picture painted in that linked article. I think the David Oks intention is to paint a picture of a fully automated company, but the linked article gives this impression:

> Future AI firms won’t be constrained by what's scarce or abundant in human skill distributions – they can optimize for whatever abilities are most valuable. Want Jeff Dean-level engineering talent? Cool: once you’ve got one, the marginal copy costs pennies. Need a thousand world-class researchers? Just spin them up. The limiting factor isn't finding or training rare talent – it's just compute.

In that above paragraph the author is saying to the reader that a human will be able to spin up and get these armies of intelligent workers, but at the end of the day their output is given to a human who presumably needs to take ownership of the result. Intelligent workers make bad choices or bad bets, but those AI machines cannot "own" an outcome. The responsibility must fall on a person.

To this end, I think the fully autonomous firm is kind of a fallacy. There needs to be someone who can be sued if anything goes wrong. You're not suing the AI.

1. its apart of an enterprise sales motion, eg you want to get ~1000$ per user per month out of it. 2. Its apart of some well subscribed newsletter, this looks more like an ad than a cold email.

If your business is trying an outbound sales motion, then these methods might work. If you're going down a Product lead growth motion because of the nature of the problem/product/customer, then I would try getting some influencers who your prospective users like to use your product.

I know a lot less about PLG motions, so take that with a grain of salt. Feel free to email me directly if you want feedback or anything. Email is in my profile.