Tabflows 🏴‍☠️

54 posts

Tabflows 🏴‍☠️ banner
Tabflows 🏴‍☠️

Tabflows 🏴‍☠️

@tabflows

dont show the ceo

Joined Şubat 2026
62 Following12 Followers
Nicolas Bustamante
Nicolas Bustamante@nicbstme·
AI is creating a weird HR crisis because the best engineering work in the agentic era is deletion. And deletion will never get you promoted. Here is an example of the paradox: Jerry spends six months building a sophisticated image analysis pipeline. Custom scaffolding, real-time frame extraction, a vision pre-processor that compresses and annotates before sending context back to the LLM. Thousands of lines. A system design doc. A launch review. Bob gets promoted. The work is visible, legible, and frankly impressive. Bravo Bob! Now Jeff comes in. Jeff looks at the pipeline and realizes the model does not need any of it. The last generation required that scaffolding. This one does not. Bob has 0 incentive to delete his work. Jeff goes and deletes 4,000 lines in one day. The system is faster, cheaper, more reliable. Token efficiency up 40%. Latency cut in half. Jeff will likely not get promoted for his one day scaffolding deletion. This is the core problem. Traditional engineering culture rewards addition. More features, more abstractions, more infrastructure. But elite agentic engineering is subtractive. The job is to remove every layer standing between the model and the task. Every unnecessary hop, every redundant transformation, every scaffolding that made sense six months ago and is now just dead weight. The engineer who keeps code close to the model, who deletes a lot, this person is doing the highest-leverage work available. And they look like they are barely working haha! How do we promote the Jeff?
Thariq@trq212

in order to remain on the frontier of capabilities you basically have to throw out all your AI code every 6 months and build it from scratch

English
36
17
244
60.6K
fucory
fucory@FUCORY·
Here is what every app looks like now This app is called TabSlop TabSlop is like Crabs. Just as many animals evolve into a crab form, all apps are evolving into TabSlop TabSlop is not the future. Nobody wants to manage tabs. It scales to at most 10 to 20 tabs and agents should be managing that anyways What is your favorite TabSlop app?
fucory tweet media
English
11
3
51
5.9K
Clem
Clem@nickclement·
Name me a company you dislike more than Meta.
English
219
3
75
23K
Alex Finn
Alex Finn@AlexFinn·
Another round of massive layoffs All CEOs using the same script of "We are dominating right now! But we must lay off 20% of the company." Despite the fact that this script is toxic and makes Americans hate AI, your takeaway should be this: If you have not mastered AI by now, you are completely useless in today's workforce and are waiting to be laid off You have 0 leverage and the clock is ticking Crying on blueski that the data centers are drinking all the water and AI is just capitalism slop machines is only digging your own grave AI is here. It will bring far sunnier day, but in the meantime it will bring massive disruption If you're not preparing for this now, you are filled with entitlement and only hurting you and your family And while I think many of these leaders are using AI as an excuse for their insane overspending in 2021 and not being prepared for market conditions (and you can now vibe code half these tools), the same takeaway should be had: learn all the tools available today including Codex, Claude Code, Hermes, OpenClaw, ChatGPT, Claude Design and others, or be doomed to being a statistic in a PR written tweet by your CEO on a Thursday afternoon
Zeb Evans@DJ_CURFEW

Today we reduced headcount by 22%. The business is the strongest it's ever been. So I think it's important to be direct about what I'm seeing and why. First, I made this decision and I own it. I did it because the way to operate at the highest level of productivity is changing, and to win the future, ClickUp needs to change with it. Second, this wasn't about cutting costs. Most savings from this change will flow directly back into the people who stay. We'll be introducing million-dollar salary bands. If you create outsized impact using AI, you'll be paid outside of traditional bands. Most importantly, I have the deepest gratitude for those affected. We're doing this from a position of strength specifically so we can take care of people properly. Everyone affected receives a package aimed at honoring their contributions and easing the transition. I only see two options: wait for this to play out gradually in the market or be honest about what I'm seeing and act proactively. THE 100X ORGANIZATION The primary change is that we're restructuring around what I call 100x org. The goal is 100x output. The roles required to build at the highest level are fundamentally different than they were a year ago. Incremental improvements to existing systems won't get us there. We need new ones. That means creating enough disruption to rebuild rather than iterate on what's already broken. The common narrative is that AI makes everyone more productive. It doesn't. Many of the workflows of today, if left unchanged, create bottlenecks in AI systems. These roles will evolve. But waiting for that to happen naturally means falling behind now. The 100x org is actually heavily dependent on people - infinitely more than today. This is only possible with 10x people that have embraced and adopted new ways of working. THE BUILDERS, AGENT MANAGERS, AND FRONT-LINERS — THE BUILDERS: 10X ENGINEERS I don't think most companies have internalized what's actually happening with AI in engineering. The common narrative is that AI makes all engineers more productive. That may be true in isolation, but at an organization level - that is the farthest thing from reality. Here's what we've validated recently at ClickUp: the great engineers, the ones who can orchestrate, architect, and review, are becoming 100x engineers. They're not writing code. They're directing agents that write code. The skill is judgment. AI makes the best engineers wildly more productive, and everyone else using AI slows these engineers down. Think about it - the bottlenecks are (1) orchestration - telling AI what to do, and (2) reviewing - what AI did. Everything is leapfrogged and no longer needed. So who do you want orchestrating and reviewing code? And how do you want your best engineers to spend their time? If your best engineers are spending time reviewing other people's code, then this is inherently an inefficient bottleneck. These engineers can review their agent's code much faster than reviewing human code. The new world is about enabling your 10x engineers to become 100x. The wrong strategy is to push every engineer to use infinite tokens. Companies doing this are celebrating 500% more pull requests. But customer outcomes don't match the volume of code being generated. I call this the great reckoning of AI coding, and every company will face this soon if not already. More code is just another bottleneck to the best engineers, and ultimately to your company's impact as well. — THE BUILDERS: 10X PRODUCT MANAGERS Product management and design roles are merging. Designers that have customer focus, become more like product managers. And product managers that have intuition for UX become more like designers. The bottleneck of user research is gone. It takes us just one mention of an agent to kickoff research and analyze results. The bottleneck of product <> design iteration is also gone. The product builder iterates on their own, along with agents and skills that ensure alignment with quality and strategy. Also controversial today - I believe that the wrong strategy is to have your PMs shipping code - that just introduces another bottleneck that the best engineers will waste their time on. To be clear, PMs should be coding but they should do this in a playground to iterate, validate, and scope. That code should not go to production. Everything outside of managing systems, orchestrating AI, and reviewing output becomes a bottleneck. That's why the other roles that are critical along with these are the systems managers (to reduce bottlenecks) along with a bottleneck you can't replace - customer meeting time. — THE SYSTEM MANAGERS Ironically, the people that automate their jobs with AI will always have a job. They become owners of the AI systems - agent managers. We have many examples of these people at ClickUp. The underlying systems in which we operate are absolutely critical to get right. I think most companies are delusional to think they can iterate on existing systems and compete in this new world. You must create enough disruption so that old systems are deprecated entirely. If there's any definition for 'AI native' that's what it is. — THE FRONT-LINERS In a world that will become saturated with AI communication, the human touch will matter more than anything to customers. This is a bottleneck that you shouldn't replace - even when agents are high enough quality to do video meetings. One-on-one meeting time with customers is something that shouldn't be automated. The systems around the meetings should be - so that front-liners spend nearly 100% of their time with customers. REWARDING 100X IMPACT In a world where companies are able to do so much more with less, where does that excess money go? In our case, much of the savings in this new operating model will flow directly back to those that enabled it. We must reward people that create productivity accordingly. This aligns incentives on both sides. Plus, in a world where your best people create 100x impact, you can't afford to lose them. You should aim to retain these employees for decades. The context they have and their ability to efficiently orchestrate and review will be nearly impossible to replace. Compensation bands of today should be thrown out the door. We're introducing $1 million cash/year salary bands with a path available to nearly everyone in the company if they produce 100x impact by creating or managing AI systems. THE FUTURE Nearly every company will make changes like these. The ones that do it proactively will define what comes next. The future is not fewer people. It's different work, new roles, and better rewards for those who embrace it. We're already seeing entirely new roles emerge, like Agent Managers, that didn't exist a year ago. ClickUp is positioning to lead this shift, not just internally, but for our customers too. I've never been more certain about where we're headed.

English
132
55
836
271.6K
Railway
Railway@Railway·
We won't ask you to click this tweet.
English
34
1
344
58.8K
Tabflows 🏴‍☠️
@DJ_CURFEW After a strategic review, Claude and I determined the SaaS layer between agents and plain text was no longer aligned with our 100x roadmap. Work now reports directly to tasks.md.
English
0
0
1
69
Zeb Evans
Zeb Evans@DJ_CURFEW·
Today we reduced headcount by 22%. The business is the strongest it's ever been. So I think it's important to be direct about what I'm seeing and why. First, I made this decision and I own it. I did it because the way to operate at the highest level of productivity is changing, and to win the future, ClickUp needs to change with it. Second, this wasn't about cutting costs. Most savings from this change will flow directly back into the people who stay. We'll be introducing million-dollar salary bands. If you create outsized impact using AI, you'll be paid outside of traditional bands. Most importantly, I have the deepest gratitude for those affected. We're doing this from a position of strength specifically so we can take care of people properly. Everyone affected receives a package aimed at honoring their contributions and easing the transition. I only see two options: wait for this to play out gradually in the market or be honest about what I'm seeing and act proactively. THE 100X ORGANIZATION The primary change is that we're restructuring around what I call 100x org. The goal is 100x output. The roles required to build at the highest level are fundamentally different than they were a year ago. Incremental improvements to existing systems won't get us there. We need new ones. That means creating enough disruption to rebuild rather than iterate on what's already broken. The common narrative is that AI makes everyone more productive. It doesn't. Many of the workflows of today, if left unchanged, create bottlenecks in AI systems. These roles will evolve. But waiting for that to happen naturally means falling behind now. The 100x org is actually heavily dependent on people - infinitely more than today. This is only possible with 10x people that have embraced and adopted new ways of working. THE BUILDERS, AGENT MANAGERS, AND FRONT-LINERS — THE BUILDERS: 10X ENGINEERS I don't think most companies have internalized what's actually happening with AI in engineering. The common narrative is that AI makes all engineers more productive. That may be true in isolation, but at an organization level - that is the farthest thing from reality. Here's what we've validated recently at ClickUp: the great engineers, the ones who can orchestrate, architect, and review, are becoming 100x engineers. They're not writing code. They're directing agents that write code. The skill is judgment. AI makes the best engineers wildly more productive, and everyone else using AI slows these engineers down. Think about it - the bottlenecks are (1) orchestration - telling AI what to do, and (2) reviewing - what AI did. Everything is leapfrogged and no longer needed. So who do you want orchestrating and reviewing code? And how do you want your best engineers to spend their time? If your best engineers are spending time reviewing other people's code, then this is inherently an inefficient bottleneck. These engineers can review their agent's code much faster than reviewing human code. The new world is about enabling your 10x engineers to become 100x. The wrong strategy is to push every engineer to use infinite tokens. Companies doing this are celebrating 500% more pull requests. But customer outcomes don't match the volume of code being generated. I call this the great reckoning of AI coding, and every company will face this soon if not already. More code is just another bottleneck to the best engineers, and ultimately to your company's impact as well. — THE BUILDERS: 10X PRODUCT MANAGERS Product management and design roles are merging. Designers that have customer focus, become more like product managers. And product managers that have intuition for UX become more like designers. The bottleneck of user research is gone. It takes us just one mention of an agent to kickoff research and analyze results. The bottleneck of product <> design iteration is also gone. The product builder iterates on their own, along with agents and skills that ensure alignment with quality and strategy. Also controversial today - I believe that the wrong strategy is to have your PMs shipping code - that just introduces another bottleneck that the best engineers will waste their time on. To be clear, PMs should be coding but they should do this in a playground to iterate, validate, and scope. That code should not go to production. Everything outside of managing systems, orchestrating AI, and reviewing output becomes a bottleneck. That's why the other roles that are critical along with these are the systems managers (to reduce bottlenecks) along with a bottleneck you can't replace - customer meeting time. — THE SYSTEM MANAGERS Ironically, the people that automate their jobs with AI will always have a job. They become owners of the AI systems - agent managers. We have many examples of these people at ClickUp. The underlying systems in which we operate are absolutely critical to get right. I think most companies are delusional to think they can iterate on existing systems and compete in this new world. You must create enough disruption so that old systems are deprecated entirely. If there's any definition for 'AI native' that's what it is. — THE FRONT-LINERS In a world that will become saturated with AI communication, the human touch will matter more than anything to customers. This is a bottleneck that you shouldn't replace - even when agents are high enough quality to do video meetings. One-on-one meeting time with customers is something that shouldn't be automated. The systems around the meetings should be - so that front-liners spend nearly 100% of their time with customers. REWARDING 100X IMPACT In a world where companies are able to do so much more with less, where does that excess money go? In our case, much of the savings in this new operating model will flow directly back to those that enabled it. We must reward people that create productivity accordingly. This aligns incentives on both sides. Plus, in a world where your best people create 100x impact, you can't afford to lose them. You should aim to retain these employees for decades. The context they have and their ability to efficiently orchestrate and review will be nearly impossible to replace. Compensation bands of today should be thrown out the door. We're introducing $1 million cash/year salary bands with a path available to nearly everyone in the company if they produce 100x impact by creating or managing AI systems. THE FUTURE Nearly every company will make changes like these. The ones that do it proactively will define what comes next. The future is not fewer people. It's different work, new roles, and better rewards for those who embrace it. We're already seeing entirely new roles emerge, like Agent Managers, that didn't exist a year ago. ClickUp is positioning to lead this shift, not just internally, but for our customers too. I've never been more certain about where we're headed.
English
1.6K
6.1K
12.4K
9M
Charlie Marsh
Charlie Marsh@charliermarsh·
What would you do with unlimited tokens
English
370
8
508
80.2K
Tabflows 🏴‍☠️
You’re not gonna make anything good if you’re not having fun
English
1
0
1
40
fucory
fucory@FUCORY·
Codex (both the app and the cli) were nearly unusable when they launched but everybody forgave it when they got good Lesson in there
English
2
0
6
449
dax
dax@thdxr·
just got inside info that openai is working on a new model
English
254
12
2.3K
143.8K
Mitchell Hashimoto
Mitchell Hashimoto@mitchellh·
This is why PR diff speed matters. This isn't a dunk on GitHub specifically, because GitLab, Forgejo, etc. are all equal or worse. But this is the kind of thing that drives me nuts, because this is a core workflow and its slow enough I literally take my hands off the keyboard. Btw, when my mouse jiggles on the left, its because the page is literally skipping frames and I'm instinctively shaking my mouse to see if it'll respond. And on the keyboard input you can literally here me finish typing before a letter even shows up. For someone like me who is an expert at these tools, my brain navigates the tool dramatically faster than it can keep up, and that is not good. The tool should not get in the way.
English
109
129
3.2K
357.5K
Steve Newman
Steve Newman@snewmanpv·
I think we are in the process of discovering that humans are bad at mathematics. A gibbon would scoff at an Olympic climber; the human body is not optimized for climbing. We're getting mounting evidence that our brain may be far from optimal for advanced math. No disrespect to mathematicians. I was a two-time IMO silver medalist; I'm just smart enough to appreciate that some people are much, much smarter. But it's starting to look like math is somewhere on the midpoint of Moravec’s paradox; between chess (computers surpassed us some time back) and cooking (probably many years to go, for general capabilities). It's fairly hard for us, and so it looks like computers are going to surpass us. AI math still has important weaknesses. For instance, AI systems have not yet shown any ability to identify interesting research directions, or develop new concepts on which further work can build. But they are starting to look superhuman in some respects. And once AI *starts* to become superhuman in some domain, we all know what happens next.
Timothy Gowers @wtgowers@wtgowers

AI has now solved a major open problem -- one of the best known Erdos problems called the unit distance problem, one of Erdos's favourite questions and one that many mathematicians had tried. openai.com/index/model-di…

English
188
211
2.3K
650.3K