Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Barun Pandey
3.5K posts
Barun Pandey
@barunbuilds
building @kelpiai: let your agent send email | prev: founder of Naamche (acquired: reAlpha $AIRE)
New York Katılım Haziran 2019
533 Takip Edilen1.3K Takipçiler
@championswimmer a friend's company set a limit of $240 for 10 employees - and that's monthly
English
I'm not gonna say this is a bad thing without looking at the limit first.
If it is like $10/day limit, it is stupid. If it is $200/day it is probably okay
If someone is hitting $200 everyday, they should have a good explanation, or they are just creating shovels for lulz.
Dharmesh Ba@dharmeshba
A friend told me his Bangalore startup has allocated Claude Code limits for every engineer. If an engineer hits the limit faster than others, he is expected to give an explanation. We are not losing to AI. We are losing to f**king bureaucracy.
English
Nice. The agent stack is coming together ... compute, filesystem, now auth ...
Ian Livingstone@ianlivingstone
Incredibly excited to announce Keycard for Coding Agents - no more copy & pasting credentials or approving individual tool calls. Agents get task-scoped access, so you can stay in flow and actually build. You’re only pulled in when it matters. Yolo mode, without compromise.
English
we just published the definitive guide to writing good prose with your AI
read it on @every: every.to/guides/ai-styl…
English
@trq212 as long as you keep that $200 plan- we’ll just keep spending compute until everything gets solved
English
i guess the PG theory of “don’t go for absolute numbers”, go for growth is at display here
Anton Osika – eu/acc@antonosika
Introducing Lovable for more general tasks. Lovable has always been for building apps. Today it also becomes your data scientist, your business analyst, your deck builder, and your marketing assistant. This is a big step toward what Lovable is becoming: a general-purpose co-founder that can do anything. See examples below.
English
@edsim its funny how openai is turning back its focus into coding, while lovable is doing the opposite
English
fantastic release!
We now have The Law of Agent Cannibalism:
Get super successful → raise at a huge valuation → now you must expand into everything.
Lovable went from app builder to data science, marketing & decks. Everyone’s eating everyone else’s lunch.
When shipping new features costs near zero, every company becomes every company. And when switching costs are also near zero - who wins?
Next few months gonna be interesting.
Anton Osika – eu/acc@antonosika
Introducing Lovable for more general tasks. Lovable has always been for building apps. Today it also becomes your data scientist, your business analyst, your deck builder, and your marketing assistant. This is a big step toward what Lovable is becoming: a general-purpose co-founder that can do anything. See examples below.
English
@hthieblot building kelpi.ai: lifecycle marketing for founders who don’t know lifecycle marketing!
kelpi provides tools so agents can send emails based on what customers do - and don’t do- in your app!
English
Looking for obsessed builders.
I invest up to $250K first checks in:
• Robotics, drones, space
• Applied AI/ML, models
• Dev tools and infra
• Manufacturing & logistics, and more...
DMs open or just reply here what you are building.
Early > polished.
English
i had a few automation workflows i did initially with claw, which worked OK.
then tried doing it with Claude (esp. after the 1M context update) and it was just so much better at it. I still use my Claw for trivial stuff- like finding a good plane ticket, but more complicated stuff - I just find it easier to do it with Claude Code.
English
if the moat in software was cost of building software, Craigs List wouldn’t be where they were, and not certainly, Salesforce.
Software is a good business to be in: because its high margin. Just like sugar water is. But it isn’t the moat.
Todd Saunders@toddsaunders
I heard an incredible analogy from a VC friend that I can’t stop thinking about. “The moat in software was the cost of building software. And Claude Code just mass produced a bridge.” It’s wild when you think about the impact of this. The SaaS boom produced a few dozen billionaires and a bunch of zero sum winners. But the AI SaaS era will mass produce millionaires. There will be fewer ServiceTitans hitting $5B valuations, and instead there will be 50,000 companies doing $500K-$5M each, run by 1-3 people with deep expertise and huge margins. To be clear, I believe that the total value of software goes up, and the number of companies created goes up exponentially. But the number of people who capture the value also goes up 100x. I don’t believe in the “SaaS is dying” headline, I think it’s missing the point. It’s simply that the power of SaaS is changing hands.
English
@swyx so this is essentially, someone looking over the agent while it’s performing the task?
English
btw emerging consensus is that identity-based authz for ai is the most important solution for security, esp if you want to break the binary decision between HITL-everything and —dangerously-skip-permissions
keycard is the leading voice in this and now supports all koding agents
Keycard@KeycardLabs
Your coding agents inherit your credentials and your permissions. No identity system in the stack can tell the difference between you and the agent acting in your name. Today: Keycard for Coding Agents 🧵
English
@swyx its pretty annoying having to click on allow 20 times whenever i have to give my agent permission to chrome
English
@levelsio people are getting reactionary over Meta again. They did the same with Google
English
IMO, the analysis misses one key point.
any game fought against Google in their core competency is most likely to fail.
but the VC bet is on an one-off chance that Perplexity might just outdo Google and becomes the next trillion dollar company.
my qualm with the analysis would be that: it's talking about optimization of outcomes in two separate games.
English
You just made my point for me.
VCs know distribution is the constraint and are betting billions anyway. That makes it worse, not better. You’re saying “they understand it’s nearly impossible but they’re funding it as a lottery ticket on regime change.” That’s not a thesis. That’s hoping Google trips.
The “future search market” bet has a 100% failure rate. Neeva had the exact same thesis with a better team. Microsoft had it with infinite capital. They all knew distribution was the problem. They all bet on breaking through anyway. The constraint didn’t change because they acknowledged it exists.
Engineers voted Perplexity most likely to fail because they can see the unit economics don’t work even if you somehow solve distribution. Running LLM inference on every query while Google serves cache is backwards at scale. The people building AI products understand that slick UX doesn’t fix structural cost disadvantages.
But I’m still rooting for Aravind and team. This isn’t hate. It’s analysis.
English
This post is such a ridiculous over simplification of how venture works. No VC is giving @AravSrinivas millions of dollars because he has a slick browser. They are betting on a possibility to capture the future search market. The example of Arc is absolutely short-sighted. No one but a bunch of nerds used Arc. Arc never managed to break through real normie distribution.
As a former engineer, I wouldn’t take what engineers think about companies very seriously. Engineers are generally obsessed with technical challenges (as they should be). No one is saying @perplexity_ai is a technical feat.
The attempt here is going to be about building an AI native search & browsing experience that will maybe someday replace the old guards.
Yes, it’s an uphill battle due to existing distribution & that’s why VCs give him money. Not because he has a slick product.
This post is ridiculous.
English
Zoom really hires uncultured idiots
Antonio García Martínez (agm.eth)@antoniogm
At the last office happy hour, a pack of Zoomers was struggling to open a wine bottle. They didn't know how a corkscrew worked. I opened it for them, and they looked in awe when I explained the double rachet and pulling in two steps. 'Ohh....' they all said in unison.
English