Jonas Terning

@levie Really resonates. We’ve been experimenting with this in content/marketing workflows, and found that breaking things into subagents (research, ideation, validation, brand guard, writing) gives far better results than one big “do-it-all” agent.

The paradigm of AI subagents is going to be super interesting. There was probably some hope or belief that a universal agent would be able to handle everything you needed in a workflow by stuffing all the relevant context into the context window. But even with larger context windows, this isn’t a panacea, and we see context rot which leads to worse results for long running tasks. So just as we divide labor up in an organization to maximize effectiveness, the same makes sense for agents. The kind of instructions you give a lawyer to review contracts is entirely different from the operations team that processes the contract for a deal. The tools that a security engineer will leverage for testing code are different from the agent that’s creating the code. And so on. Thus, the specific instructions, domain understanding, tool use, and context engineering is necessarily different depending on the unique roles or tasks that you need an agent to do. There are still a ton of questions, like what is the right atomic unit of a subagent - does it get as specialized as jobs are today, or do they own general parts of a workflow (like an agent per section of a codebase)? What’s the best way to have shared state or memory across these agents? How do we ensure “lead” agents can appropriately hand off work to the right subagent to be most effective? Ultimately, we’re in the earliest phases of this paradigm but it’s clear that this will be a major unlock for AI agent effectiveness.

AI companies are literally being kept afloat by cheating students

@businessbarista AI (for marketers/marketing). We are creating a suite of marketing/content agents, and use some of them daily with our clients. Would love to discuss use cases.

The best AI tools & tactics are stuck in private chats and buried Slack threads. So I'm spinning up a few WhatsApp groups for folks who are actively using AI in their day-to-day. First is an AI group for ceos/founders. Second is an AI group for engineers & engineering leaders. Third is an AI group for marketers & marketing leaders. No sales pitches. Just smart people sharing how they’re using AI to move faster, do more, and stay ahead. If you want to join one of these groups, reply with "ai" and I’ll DM you an invite.

@VibeMarketer_ Swipe

I used this n8n workflow to scrape X for top-performing posts in my niche (it's a big part of how I went from 600 → 6k followers in 13 days) most creators scroll for hours to find content ideas that work... whereas I just run this flow and get a full swipe file in minutes - organized by likes, comments, shares and URLs. here’s what it does: - drop in a keyword - scrapes X for top posts - pulls engagement data + content - auto-sorts it all into a Google Sheet now you've got data-backed insights ready to plug into your tweets, ads, or even video scripts. workflow takes 5 minutes to set up want the full JSON? comment “SWIPE”, follow, + repost and I’ll send it over (must be following so I can DM)

@balajis Great way of putting it. We’re running content engines for our clients, and are looking into ways of automating research/prompting/production of content, and then leave the last steps editing/publising (or ”verifying”) to the human brain.

AI PROMPTING → AI VERIFYING AI prompting scales, because prompting is just typing. But AI verifying doesn’t scale, because verifying AI output involves much more than just typing. Sometimes you can verify by eye, which is why AI is great for frontend, images, and video. But for anything subtle, you need to read the code or text deeply — and that means knowing the topic well enough to correct the AI. Researchers are well aware of this, which is why there’s so much work on evals and hallucination. However, the concept of verification as the bottleneck for AI users is under-discussed. Yes, you can try formal verification, or critic models where one AI checks another, or other techniques. But to even be aware of the issue as a first class problem is half the battle. For users: AI verifying is as important as AI prompting.

@businessbarista Creating custom agents that support the day-to-day workflows you have with your clients expands margins AND stickiness. Its the best black box you can have. Created for your client, and does magic for your client, but built and owned by you.

Agencies are underrated as hell with AI. 1) Agentic workflows will expand margins significantly 2) As work becomes more decentralized, demand for specialized agencies will grow 3) Agencies will be ground zero for internal AI tools that can ultimately become software products 4) Don’t have to raise money. Can cash flow from day 1 and control your destiny.

@businessbarista Charter 8: Struggle to hite great writers and strategists because - with a few exemples - they are not thriller to stick with one brand and one brand only.

I'm watching tech companies go through the same mental gymnastics. Chapter 1: We need to grow faster Chapter 2: Let's spend a fuckton on paid marketing Chapter 3: We can't, we need to be default alive Chapter 4: Let's just spend on performance marketing Chapter 5: Most of our prospects aren't ready to buy Chapter 6: Let's do good content. Builds top of funnel. Nurtures leads through the funnel. Chapter 7: Hire great writers & strategists The end. Literally why we built @storyarb.

@Investeraren Intressant att många reagerar på klippet och samtidigt säger ”jag kommer inte se klippet för hon är värdelös!” Iaf. Den här storyn har väl synts förut, hon lyfter ju bara fram den igen (på ett för många polariserande sätt). Och hela storyn.. snacka om ”en fjärils vingslag”.

Såg det här klippet från The Rachel Maddow Show på TikTok om hur Trump blev besatt av tullar. Ligger det något i detta⁉️😳 Jag har inte koll på programmet sen innan men så här säger ChatGPT om programmet: The Rachel Maddow Show är ett politiskt nyhetsprogram som sänds på den amerikanska kabelkanalen MSNBC. Programmet leds av Rachel Maddow, en prisbelönt journalist och politisk kommentator med en doktorsexamen i statsvetenskap från Oxford. Showen hade premiär den 8 september 2008 och har sedan dess blivit en av MSNBC:s flaggskeppssändningar. Vad handlar programmet om? Programmet fokuserar på amerikansk inrikespolitik, särskilt frågor som rör regeringsmakten, rättssystemet, val, konstitutionella frågor och ibland även internationella relationer. Rachel Maddow är känd för sin noggranna research, långa inledande monologer (“A-blocks”) där hon ofta berättar en historisk bakgrund till en aktuell nyhet, och för sin skarpa kritik mot auktoritära tendenser, korruption och maktmissbruk – särskilt under Trump-eran. Stil och ton Programmet är känt för sin analytiska och berättande stil snarare än korta soundbites. Maddow blandar ofta humor, sarkasm och allvar i sina analyser, vilket gett henne en lojal tittarskara – särskilt bland liberala och progressiva tittare i USA. Framgång och inflytande The Rachel Maddow Show har varit mycket inflytelserikt, särskilt under politiskt turbulenta perioder som Rysslandsutredningen (Mueller-utredningen), riksrättsprocesserna mot Trump, och stormningen av Kapitolium den 6 januari 2021. Maddow har vunnit flera priser, inklusive Emmy Awards, och betraktas som en av de mest profilerade nyhetsankarna i USA. Vill du ha ett exempel på något särskilt avsnitt eller tema som tagits upp i showen? #PrataPengar #Finanstwitter

@iamaheron_ …. and it’s never books, music or arts…

new employees at our company have to list three interests and it’s always: travel, hiking, working out cooking, soccer, gardening camping, running, travel climbing, skiing, basketball

Struggling to create a custom GPT that actually has an impact? Here are the 8,000 characters that make all the difference for our clients. linkedin.com/pulse/here-800… via @LinkedIn

@gregisenberg @levelsio I’ll bet $67K/month that it didn’t take 3 hours of work to get to $67K/month.

Will the first solo founder to hit $100M ARR be an AI game creator?? Probably... @levelsio just built a flight sim in 3 hours that's now making $67K/month. using grok3, cursor and a cocktail of ai tools. History keeps compressing: 1) The web era gave us Million Dollar Homepage (1 guy, 1 month, $1M). 2) Mobile brought us Flappy Bird (1 guy, few days, $50K daily). 3) Now AI delivers Levels' flight sim (1 guy, 3 hours, $67K monthly and growing). The traditional game economics are brutal: AAA games cost $100M+, indie games need $100K+, and mobile hits demand teams of 10+ devs plus $250K to build and another $100K monthly in marketing. The barrier to entry was skill, capital, distribution, and time. No wonder 99% of them failed. Now, you just use Grok3, Cursor, Midjourney, Cling AI etc to build your games. And you just tweet it out when it's live. Don't need to get into BestBuy lol. "BuT PiEtEr'S GaMe iS so UglY and BugGy" Well, what if people prefer it that way? Like how amateur YouTube videos outperform polished productions, these games create genuine communities. Players suggest features and see them implemented in real-time. They're participants, not just consumers. Couldn't be more different than a Call of Duty and maybe thats what people are seeking. And what's cool is these AI game studios will operate at 80%+ margins whereas typical studios are in the 15-20% after costs. Sam Altman predicted the first billion-dollar solo founder. I'll go further: the first solo founder to hit $100M annual revenue will be an AI game creator who launches 50 concepts in the time it takes traditional studios to build one. The AI games gold rush has begun?

It’s not often, but when something like this drops you miss the days working at a lifestyle magazine.

@charbrew @mignano I’ve been in the media industry for 10+ years, but never seen the ”software is a media”-take. I guess you just flipped my switch. Very interesting way of looking at it, thanks!

You’ve made a really profound observation. Two of them, in fact. The first is the biggest: Software is a form of media, not technology. This explains things more clearly and is a significant reframing. The second follows from that: The democratization of access (and deflation of costs) that has hit other forms of media is now rolling through software.

People are underestimating what will happen to software as a result of AI. Most are focused on how it'll make creating software incrementally easier, faster, cheaper. Few are discussing just how vast the universe of software becomes when this happens. We will have 100x more software (at a minimum!) as a result of AI. There will be a gigantic long tail of every type of application you could ever imagine. Most will have few users, if any. But a lot of it will be super niche and customized to very specific use cases. Some huge hits will break out. People who make software (without ever actually knowing how to code) will emerge as "creators". Most of these people will be dismissed by purists for not making "real software". And some of these people will become very wealthy. And an entire ecosystem will spring up around it. Marketplaces, tools, entertainment, media, etc. The same thing that has happened to every other form of media is about to happen to software. It'll look like a joke at first. But then it will be far too big to ignore.

@ToriiRowe Stick to your core (either service or market), watch the customers/projects profitability closely and be wary of dabbling into adjacent services/markets. It drains your focus and resources and stops you from growing - but you wont notice. Also, think even bigger.

AGENCY OWNERS: If you could give any advice to an agency trying to scale, what would it be?

This wildly misleading tweet, and the mostly hateful replies, is like entering an alternate version of reality. If anybody is interested in the truth behind this claim, and what that Swedish poll actually asked, I'll go through it. Probably banging my head against a wall. 😂

@helloitsolly It’s also the fact that these types of questions forces one channel to take full responsibility of the combined work of all other channels - which they lack control/influence over. A bit of a tough spot to be in.

We asked our SEO consultant to report on sign ups and upgrades from search They quit

With a certain amount of trepidation, I'm posting this open letter to @elonmusk, someone I have admired, but who, right now, is causing me concern. I know I'm not alone in thinking these thoughts. Please like or repost if you're willing... And Elon, if you're listening, please know this is offered in a constructive spirit. ----- Dear Elon, A thought hit me this morning. On top of all your achievements in technology and entrepreneurship, you have become this century's single most influential writer.  You have more than 200 million followers on a powerful platform that you yourself control. And the words that you write flow well beyond just those followers into almost every user of X and far beyond courtesy of extensive media coverage.   This makes Rupert Murdoch at his prime seem inconsequential. It must feel exhilarating. You made a huge gamble buying Twitter and it seems to have paid off spectacularly to the point that you can use it to massively impact the world, including changing governments.  You believe that X can largely replace most mainstream media. It is the new platform for citizen journalism, and you are citizen number 1.  You don’t need the hassle of editors and fact-checkers. Every single thing you post garners millions of likes and reposts. In a heartbeat you can change the global conversation.  No one in history has had this much power. So there’s a lot at stake here, and, as it happens, journalism is something I care deeply about. I began my career as a journalist because I believed that good journalism was essential for the healthy functioning of democracy. Today I am worried — quite deeply worried, actually — that in your triumphant seizing of the global conversation, some of the core tenets of journalism are being forgotten. Without them, I think your efforts to make X the respected home of citizen journalism will fail. There are numerous journalistic principles that matter — Grok can summarize them quite nicely. But there’s one in particular that’s been troubling me. It’s the fairness doctrine. The one that says that before you publish savagely critical claims about an individual, or an institution, you reach out to them for their side of the story. After all, just possibly, you may have missed a key fact or two that would change how people assess what has happened. Just possibly your sources were motivated to cause damage to that individual. Just possibly there’s an alternative explanation of what happened. So, for example, when you tell hundreds of millions of people that someone should be hanged or jailed for outrageous crimes against humanity, just possibly you should first sound out what those who know those people really well would say about them. Some of your recent posts could literally get someone killed. Do you really want to risk that? How is it possible that you can do this at the very same time that you’re calling on people to make X more positive, more beautiful?  You say you want to maximize un-regretted user-seconds on X.  By far the simplest way you could do this, Elon, is simply to thoughtfully edit what you yourself post. I get that from your eyes the issues you are championing are unbelievably important and worthy of extreme efforts. But the way you are presenting them is not citizen journalism. It's playground bullying. It’s crass and it’s cruel, and it’s therefore not nearly as effective as it could be.  You’re hearing the cheers of your most loyal followers, but missing the fact you’re making yourself a laughing stock among many who you really want on your side. Long-term that’s going to damage X, your other businesses, and indeed your long-term dreams for humanity.  No one wants to follow a playground bully to Mars. I miss the old Elon. You can be funny, interesting, insightful and inspiring. You've fought incredibly hard for what you've built. And you may feel you're entitled to do whatever the hell you want with it. But I also know that you understand the danger of holding too tightly to the ring of power, how it can distort someone's judgement and turn them ugly. I’m hoping you can loosen that ring just a little. For the love of humanity that you profess, I really urge you to embrace the fairness doctrine and showcase a better face of X. Thanks for listening. Chris

@itsolelehmann Always inside out, never outside in.

it's mindblowing how much most founders suck at describing what their product does

A decade ago I published my surf novel Lineup and one of the scenes took place at Mavericks and Half Moon Bay and this is very much why. Crazy.

@miralizain what tool?

it’s never been easier to build distribution for b2c i started this page 6 days ago and i’m already averaging 15k views all with just AI UGC videos