@mil000 just tell me u don’t generate alpha through agentic workflows 🤦🏻♂️
English
james-javier
50 posts
If Alex Wang was 16, would he be attending this event or would he be at home working his ass off? These events are such a waste
autumnkyoko@akcushman
we're in a bubble if there are enough AI founders in SF for YC to fill up the f*cking chase center. what on earth
English
“Let this happy day give birth to an American Republic. Let her arise, not to devastate and to conquer, but to re-establish the reign of peace and of law”
Richard Henry Lee , June 1776 speaking to second continental congress
English
@ChivalryGuild Something about calling a meal a “product” just doesn’t sit right with me
English
Managerialism, perfectly captured. Banal, fake, lifeless—both the leaders of mass organizations and the "product" they peddle.
Getting out of our civilizational disaster requires us to understand how we got into it in the first place. Though he's not personally impressive, this type of guy claims to have a very important skill: managing colossal organizations. He's good at paperwork, corporate lingo, cya, credentialing, "best practices," focus group morality, and so on. As almost all American institutions got massive, these competencies were in higher demand; so this guy and others like him came to rule American society.
Sam Francis offers a good summary in Beautiful Losers:
“In the early twentieth century, the increasing massiveness of American society appeared to demand new organizational forms of control. The imperatives of mass scale in the economy, in government and politics, and in social and cultural life gave rise to a new elite that found its principle power base in bureaucracy. In both the public and private sectors, the bureaucratic, organization of power and control appeared to be the only means of ruling modern mass units. In the private sector the evolution of bureaucratic dominance followed the ‘separation of ownership and control’ in the large corporations and took the form of managerial direction of large corporate firms … But there was no fundamental difference between the interests of the bureaucrats of the public sector and those of the private sector. Both bureaucratic realms shared a common mentality: a rationalistic faith in administrative and manipulative techniques as a means of holding and exercising power.”
It's a function of scale. Brilliant and talented people typically don't do well with this bureaucratic stuff. They are aristocrats of the spirit, and they flourish on a humane scale. But managers are in their element when it comes to colossalism.
The managers' awfulness sets the tone. They have remade everything in their own image and likeness, including turning McDonald's all-American cuisine into poisonous "product." This has happened on basically every level of American society.
English
@JasperMSMKT @nic_detommaso From a student fascinated by VC, are there any ways someone could provide value from the get-go before asking for something?
Sending the VC an interesting startup that fits their thesis perhaps?
English
5 mistakes aspiring VCs keep making (and nobody tells them):
1. Leading with resume instead of edge
2. Thinking all VC firms are the same
3. Networking to find a job instead of to add value
4. Not translating operator experience into investment language
5. Trying to move too fast
Read a deeper dive in comments
English
The Bloomberg terminal is finished! I used ChatGPT to recreate it FOR FREE!
English
Thinking about AI in agriculture and other commodity (read: low margin + high complexity) businesses is extremely interesting. Margins get hammered by tiny, repeated slips in a multi-variable interconnected system.
Over the medium term, I suspect we will see, at minimum, a bifurcation of AI nomenclature / taxonomy as follows:
Consumer-style AI chatbots that we all know and (most of us) love, are great for white collar businesses: enterprise search, document creation, etc, but they don’t solve the multi-variable, physical-world planning challenges operators face.
Companies like @SWARMeng - think of SWARM like a decision support system or an extremely good optimization expert. It actually augments an operators judgment on complicated multivariable items - across constraints like freight, allocation timing, labor volatility, and basis movement. It brings discipline and clarity to complex trade-offs without functioning as a “black box”.
SWARM Engineering@SWARMeng
#GEAPS2026 wasn’t about AI hype. It was about margin discipline in a volatile grain system. Grading precision. Infrastructure limits. Decision velocity. In grain, small inconsistencies compound fast. At SWARM, we scale operator judgment so better decisions happen under pressure. linkedin.com/posts/swarm-en… #GrainIndustry #DecisionIntelligence
English
@tokifyi I think he’s capping and it’s acc just cutting bloat ngl
English
just build something. nothing is safe anymore.
ai is changing everything.
jack dorsey just layed off 40% of his team.
jack@jack
we're making @blocks smaller today. here's my note to the company. #### today we're making one of the hardest decisions in the history of our company: we're reducing our organization by nearly half, from over 10,000 people to just under 6,000. that means over 4,000 of you are being asked to leave or entering into consultation. i'll be straight about what's happening, why, and what it means for everyone. first off, if you're one of the people affected, you'll receive your salary for 20 weeks + 1 week per year of tenure, equity vested through the end of may, 6 months of health care, your corporate devices, and $5,000 to put toward whatever you need to help you in this transition (if you’re outside the U.S. you’ll receive similar support but exact details are going to vary based on local requirements). i want you to know that before anything else. everyone will be notified today, whether you're being asked to leave, entering consultation, or asked to stay. we're not making this decision because we're in trouble. our business is strong. gross profit continues to grow, we continue to serve more and more customers, and profitability is improving. but something has changed. we're already seeing that the intelligence tools we’re creating and using, paired with smaller and flatter teams, are enabling a new way of working which fundamentally changes what it means to build and run a company. and that's accelerating rapidly. i had two options: cut gradually over months or years as this shift plays out, or be honest about where we are and act on it now. i chose the latter. repeated rounds of cuts are destructive to morale, to focus, and to the trust that customers and shareholders place in our ability to lead. i'd rather take a hard, clear action now and build from a position we believe in than manage a slow reduction of people toward the same outcome. a smaller company also gives us the space to grow our business the right way, on our own terms, instead of constantly reacting to market pressures. a decision at this scale carries risk. but so does standing still. we've done a full review to determine the roles and people we require to reliably grow the business from here, and we've pressure-tested those decisions from multiple angles. i accept that we may have gotten some of them wrong, and we've built in flexibility to account for that, and do the right thing for our customers. we're not going to just disappear people from slack and email and pretend they were never here. communication channels will stay open through thursday evening (pacific) so everyone can say goodbye properly, and share whatever you wish. i'll also be hosting a live video session to thank everyone at 3:35pm pacific. i know doing it this way might feel awkward. i'd rather it feel awkward and human than efficient and cold. to those of you leaving…i’m grateful for you, and i’m sorry to put you through this. you built what this company is today. that's a fact that i'll honor forever. this decision is not a reflection of what you contributed. you will be a great contributor to any organization going forward. to those staying…i made this decision, and i'll own it. what i'm asking of you is to build with me. we're going to build this company with intelligence at the core of everything we do. how we work, how we create, how we serve our customers. our customers will feel this shift too, and we're going to help them navigate it: towards a future where they can build their own features directly, composed of our capabilities and served through our interfaces. that's what i'm focused on now. expect a note from me tomorrow. jack
English
@RealNick05 Yes definitely , and we shall see what happens… personally the startup I’m working at, we use cowork and plugins but not for any sensitive data… I think people are too quick to get caught in the hype cycle without taking a step back…
English
@jamesjmrota Profit, yes, and which in turn supports their valuation claims, for now.
English
48 hours ago @claudeai released the Wealth Management plugin and of course I had to dig in and check it out. I've created a thread on how to use it and what are the inputs and outputs. I'm sharing all the PDFs involved.
[1/12]
English
@RealNick05 I don’t think “to keep hype up until IPO” is the reason they’re launching all this… IMO it’s moreso to take the enterprise market share n turn profit within next few years… curious your thoughts?
English
Sooner or later people would realize that Anthropic is just vibe coding stuff on steroids, in order to keep the hype romping until their IPO.
Scrutiny happens after that.
And wait till you realize all those plugins pulling data, which is soon going to be monitored, metered & monetized.
And then all the funny plugins would dissappear when data ownership/usage lawsuits follow.
English
@sadvalueinvestr @staysaasy Genuinely curious what a more accurate depiction would be?
English
@staysaasy This is super not close to what’s going on but I do appreciate the effort.
Roughly equivalent to how finance people think of tech people.
English
My punch line on how hedge fund / asset management bros think about tech is below.
To sum it up, I think that some people in tech think that finance people are dumb and *bad* at analysis, when they're actually very self-aware and *not even really attempting* to do certain types of analysis.
Most finance bros have built exactly enough software to be maximally dangerous. They've probably built really complex Excel spreadsheets, maybe with a bunch of janky macros, and probably taken an intro to programming class. They have built several programs and 0 products.
This gives them enough familiarity with coding principles to have moderate-strength *emotional reactions* to different technologies. E.g. "Claude Code is magical," or "that business seems like it's just a SQL table."
They also generally know that they're not experts. Your average finance bro almost always had a fraternity brother who was studying computer science and visibly spent a lot more time studying. They know intellectually that the rabbit hole of technology goes deep.
Your average finance bro in 2026 is also no longer a total meathead. They're generally pretty smart people. Maybe not 150 IQ savants, but not dumb. You can throw a complicated logical argument at them and they'll follow the whole thing. They aren't idiots and it's their job to know what they don't know. But those emotional reactions persist.
Finally – you've gotta remember that these are not the most risk-seeking people on the planet. The crazy risk-takers are the traders at Jane Street, etc. who are throwing down big positions based on mental math; you don't usually get to YOLO millions of dollars of other people's money. Some dude making a decision to buy or sell a stock probably ended up in that profession because he didn't want to work as hard as a doctor or engineer, was more interested in business than a lawyer, went to a fancy college, and wanted to make a lot of money. It's a pretty risk averse personality type at a macro scale.
Also, for many types of funds, you can just... not trade. You can just sit there for a while, and when interests rates are up a bit (like today), you'll still make some $. It certainly beats losing it.
So what happens when there's a big technology shift from AI? Brad and Chad look at it and think:
* These AI products look really cool, and I am genuinely impressed
* Software is kinda hard to build, so this feels like a Big Change (tm)
* I don't think I fully understand what the long-term impact is going to be, and I know that other people probably do, and information asymmetry in a zero sum game is scary to me
* I really don't want to lose my job. I want to keep getting paid, and I want to party in the West Village, and I want to rent a house in the Hamptons this summer, and blowing up my portfolio will jeopardize that
* So I think I'm just not gonna own or trade anything that looks like it might be in the blast radius of this AI thing, until I figure out what's really going on. I'd rather miss a 20% gain than risk a 98% loss
Main thing to notice – at no point did the decision calculus go into some deep analysis of the structural defensibility of ServiceNow in the face of rapidly increasing model power and agentic coding harnesses. Your median finance bro doesn't need to go that deep in order to do their job at a level that serves their interests. They just need to see "Woah, new and very different, seems scary, sell" and suddenly everyone is dumping Atlassian stock.
staysaasy@staysaasy
@thenanyu Everyone in tech should spent *at least* a summer in Manhattan in their 20s so that they can interact with finance people and truly internalize what they do and don't know about technology
English
@BrianSozzi + the the 2 million people driving uber, Lyft, taxi etc
obvi not saying govt must artificially “protect”these jobs
interesting tho
English
JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon at an investor cocktail event last night on AI (part 2):
"What if, I think there are 2 million commercial truckers in the United States, and there are lots of other examples you can give. There's a thought exercise, and you could push a button, eliminate all of them, and they make $120,000 on average. Save fuel, save lives, save time, a more efficient system, less disrupted highways, all that beautiful stuff. Would you do it if you put 2 million people on the street where even if there are jobs available, that next job is $25,000 a year, stocking shelves. I was saying, "That's kind of really bad, kind of civilly, should we as society agree to that?" I don't think so. I was talking about the business and government, and they should start thinking today, not when it happens, what would we do to deal with the [AI] issue? It's got to be business and government."
English
There needs to be an IQ test before people are allowed to post on LinkedIn
English
@Chillestdotcom Is this just going to result in reallocation of IT budgets or actually reduce cost? Vectorization, hosting, and compute will still be quite expensive I’d imagine? I guess regardless it’s still better than paying a saas subscription
English
Software is not dead because you can vibe code it.
Software is going to die because of agent orchestration.
English
There's literally zero media coverage for bootstrapping founders in Canada.
English
bro forgot to ship
he also forgot the 50% discount code for 3 months for premier users
(link below)
Theo - t3.gg@theo
I was frustrated by the image generation experiences in existing apps. Including ours. That's why I spent almost a year playing with alternative UX. Today, we finally have something to show for it. Introducing T3 Canvas, the world's best image generation experience.
English