Fran Caballero

@anshnanda This feels the most crypto bro post in a long time

Someone needs to build a simple cloud provider for the AI era. - search & buy domains - deploy static sites for free - deploy backends - manage DNS - provision infinite SQLite DBs - simple storage buckets The key here isn’t being hyper-scalable. The key is being simple and cover the 0-1.

El error con los agentes de IA es pensar que reemplazan a una persona. En realidad reemplazan coordinación mal diseñada. La mayor parte del trabajo en una empresa no es creatividad heroica. Es leer un email, extraer una obligación, buscar un archivo, actualizar un CRM, pedir una aprobación, recordar una fecha, detectar una contradicción y dejar trazabilidad. Hoy eso lo hacen humanos caros pegando pantallas entre sí. Un buen agente no es un chatbot simpático. Es software con permisos limitados, memoria verificable, logs, escalado y responsabilidad. Si no sabe quién autorizó qué, si no puede explicar por qué actuó, si no distingue entre leer y ejecutar, no es un agente empresarial. Es una demo peligrosa. La oportunidad no es que todos hablen más con máquinas. Es que las empresas tengan menos reuniones, menos burocracia interna y menos trabajo invisible. La productividad no vendrá de otro dashboard. Vendrá de delegar procesos completos sin perder control.

I think that is the approach. I ask 2-3 approaches. Sometimes I read some articles about the diff of if I’m not sure. At the end, you can have code review. The problem I see more often tho, is that situation 1 happen less because the “other” engineer also says “what Claude said?” or PR is too “boring” too read

Situation 1: dev A thinks approach X is correct, dev B thinks Y is the right way. They argue and try to convince each other. Situation 2: dev A thinks approach X is correct, tells the LLM to implement it. There is SO MUCH learning in Situation 1, lost when using LLMs....

LLM APIs need to return cost information in their response alongside tokens literally everyone is using models[dot]dev data to approximate this - we see so many reqs to its api but this is just sticker pricing, won't reflect discounts, etc so it doens't really work

It isn't unexpected that the focus of the Bun Rust rewrite is on the anti-Zig side more than anything, since the internet loves to hate. What is unexpected and unfortunate is that leadership within Bun hasn't tried to steer the conversation away from that at all. There are so many positive and interesting takeaways from this and I'm not really seeing any of them pushed as the primary message. A positive thing that hasn't been talked about at all is how far Bun came thanks to Zig. And even if you dump it now, its meaningful for how good Zig was to even build a product to this point and impact by any metric. I would've loved to see anyone in leadership say this. On the interesting side is how fungible programming languages are nowadays. Programming languages used to be LOCK IN, and they're increasingly not so. You think the Bun rewrite in Rust is good for Rust? Bun has shown they can be in probably any language they want in roughly a week or two. Rust is expendable. Its useful until its not then it can be thrown out. That's interesting! There's been a lot of talk about memory safety and no doubt Rust provides more guarantees than Zig. But I'd love to see a better analysis of why Bun in particular suffered so much rather than take the language-blame path. How could engineering as a practice been more rigorous to prevent this? What were the largest sources of crashes other programs should watch out for? How does Rust prevent them? How could Zig theoretically prevent them? That's interesting. I know the official blog post hasn't come out yet from Bun. But they're smart enough to know that that PR would stir up controversy the moment it opened, or they should've been. And plenty in the company have been tweeting and writing about it. Its somewhat telling to me in various dimensions what they chose to talk about first. I tend to think I'm pretty good at corporate PR/comms (especially when it comes to developer audiences) and I think appealing to the negative is never the right long term strategy; it does work to get short term eyes though.

What Elon just did in Beijing has a 2,000-year-old Chinese name. The Western feed isn't going to use it. 世家 (shijia). Sima Qian used the term in the Records of the Grand Historian for hereditary noble houses, the families understood to operate across generations rather than individual careers. Walking into a state-level meeting with your heir is the visible signal of shijia status. Arriving alone is a single-generation transaction. Chinese business culture rewards this thinking more aggressively than almost any other major economy. Lee Kum Kee is in its fifth generation. CK Hutchison is in its third. The Cheng family at New World is in its third. The pattern repeats across every long-horizon culture. Murdoch had Lachlan running a News Corp business by 24. Bernard Arnault placed each of his five children in LVMH operating roles before 30. Mukesh Ambani named Anant to the Reliance board at 28. Western feeds see a doting father, which is real. The room sees a foreign founder signaling the relationship outlives any single administration, which is also real. A five-year-old in fresh sneakers. The Chinese side is doing math on the year 2050.

Engineers don't write code. PMs are shipping to production. The design process is dead (there's no time). Marketing can ship their own campaigns. SDRs are being replaced by AI. Everyone's a data scientist now. What a time to be alive.

I find myself doing a lot better work, being more satisfied, and also learn a lot more+faster when I do *the hard work* and don’t outsource it to AI. As in, I’ll use AI as a *tool* with substasks, additional research: but I don’t turn off my brain or kick back, assuming it can do the work for me. Every time I “hand over the” hard work part to AI and mentally turn off, I either regret it or find myself eventually needing to go back and spend more time on it. I also see slop work coming out from people who assume the AI does better work than they would.

Elon completely stole the banquet 😂 He was already posing for someone else when Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun walked up to his idol asking for a selfie Elon instantly poses with the funniest face does the same funny expression with Apple CEO Tim Cook too Now Elon became the MAIN attraction across Chinese media and the entire world 🤣

@lennysan Hmm it has always been

Distribution is the new moat

AI slop is good, actually. Slop is what enables fast parallel experimentation. The etiquette and skill is understanding the boundaries of where slop exists and the extent to which it should be cleaned up and how. A few examples: I’m working on the internals of some system right now. The API and GUI of this thing is fully zero shame slop. It’s horrible. But it lets me focus on the core quality while shipping a usable piece of alpha quality software to testers (transparent about the slop frontend). Similarly, this system has plugins. We sent agents in Ralph loops overnight to generate dozens of plugins. The plugins are slop. The quality is bad. The plugin API/SDK is absolutely not done. But we can test a full GUI with a full plugin ecosystem. When we change the API, we can regenerate them all. The cost of change is just tokens, the velocity is incomparable to before. I built Terraform. We tested and shipped TF 0.1 with about 3 very weak providers. Because we ran out of time. Building was slow. And when we changed our SDK the cost was immense. Totally different today, 10 years later. Today, I would’ve slop generated 100 providers (again, with transparency and cleanup later, but just to prove it out). As an anti example, I would not PR this (without prior warning) to another project. I would not throw this onto customers without full review or transparency (as I’m already doing). I would not accept first pass slop. It’s almost never right. Slop is a tool. And like anything else it’s not blanket bad or good. The context is everything.

@GergelyOrosz @jessijingyicao Pretty sure Elon has direct line with a lot of VIP and more alignment as well

@jessijingyicao So we are saying Grok must have far less demand than projected, right? As sounds like they have spare capacity, a LOT of it While other competitors don't seem to have enough thanks to demand

So let me get this right: 1. Anthropic bans xAI from using Claude (to stop them from perhaps distilling Claude for their own model) (...) 2. xAI gives up ~a quarter of its DC capacity for Anthropic to rent and run Claude A win for Anthropic no doubt. What's in it for xAI tho?

One thing I am certain will happen (probably is happening): A massive industry emerging selling snake oil. Aka people with 0 real experience posing as “AI-native consultants.” Happens in every gold rush. Pay attention to ppl who actually do the job like @clairevo instead tho

@NoahKingJr I can tell you on Father’s Day

TELL ME SOMETHING YOU CAN DO THAT CLAUDE CANNOT

This is a worthwhile read from Meta engineer @championswimmer (who I met last time I was in London - great guy) His point is that a lot of these “AI layoffs” could well be backwards: they are prob happening because more AI spend doesn’t correlate with better business results…

Every company is going to need this role.

Stripe just created a role that didn't exist 12 months ago (and they're paying multiple six figures for it) It's called the Forward Deployed AI Accelerator. They are hiring AI-native individuals to work directly with their marketing teams to fundamentally change how they work. Each person will be assigned to a cohort of 20 marketers. Their job is to build custom AI tools and agents and coach each marketer until they are self-sufficient. Basically, work with marketers until they automate their jobs. Stripe's marketing org is betting that AI should not be an occasional tool but the default mode for all work. But they also understand that most employees won't upskill themselves. They'll need someone who is embedded within their teams to build alongside them. If you are AI-pilled, this is probably the role for you. And this also gives a clear picture of where every organization within a company is heading.

@chddaniel That’s something RL has been solving for the last 15 years. Why it’s terrifying?

this is terrifying.

As I previously said: Anthropic is on a speedrun to burn developer trust. Nothing wrong with wanting to remove Claude Code from the Pro subs: but everything wrong by running shady growth tests without upfront comms, instead of being clear about it.