Lew Yan Liang

@ElvinYong7 @graciehartie SG property will drop only if PAP lose elections and people like Amos Yee comes into Parliament and does a "Singaporeans First" stun. You keep Chinese coming in, the problem is we cannot afford homes, not the other way round

@graciehartie Nah. Property can't drop. It's underpinned by bank loans and CPF

Oh?!?

@graciehartie This is normal for CC condos. The OCR and RCRs are at peak. There is no demand for CC condos, no HDB upgraders, no schools usually. Tampines, Jurong - blind can earn 10% in 5 years, leveraged by bank loans

It’s below 10 only because the user is targeting hawkers and coffee shops. That’s the maximum any user can afford for this range. Which is fine. But the lifestyle is vastly different in Japan, London. Where food may not be so cheap but for $15-$20, it’s so much more afford now elsewhere

This. I’ve always been a huge advocate for the “Singapore has very fair prices” notion Funnily enough, people that comment about Singapore being expensive to live in are usually expats and foreigners that made their deduction from watching “Crazy Rich Asians” Of course, if we were to take into consideration cars and housing, then yes, Singapore IS expensive But I think a more accurate index to evaluate “living” would be what we need - which is food Now, assuming an average meal cost of $10 (which is a heavy overestimate), the average monthly meal cost would be ~SGD$1000 Or a weekly cost of ~USD$200 That’s lesser than almost most tier-1 US cities With way more safety Food for thought (pun unintended)

Finally got GPT-5.5 on Codex to think way harder than it normally does. As one would expect it to be 'think very hard', 'ultrathink', 'deep dive' etc - does not work. A simple 'use at least 100 (onehundred) tool calls before coming up with an answer' works really well

@AdamNMayer Soon, dude. Soon

The only FAANG company where the employees actually seem genuinely happy is Apple.

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.

@tony_tweets1 @bluemxgbs @AIandDesign @Meta But fiscal policy isn’t a buzz word. It’s quite exhaustive. Economics 101, fiscal and monetary policy. Left and right arm of finance ministries globally.

@premiumcapture @bluemxgbs @AIandDesign @Meta Which also means nothing. You’re just throwing around meaningless buzzwords and corporate crapspeak without addressing the core of your argument: where will government revenues come from to feed people as you’ve insisted in this utopian AI future?

I'm not gonna lie, the @Meta layoffs are some of the most dystopian I've ever seen. They got told to work from home, they were sent the emails at 4AM in the morning. Those who weren't impacted have software on their computer that tracks their every move, preparing AI to take their job as well. They're literally training the AI that will eliminate their position as well. Meanwhile, Meta is raking in RECORD PROFITS. I am a massive, unapologetic AI enthusiast. Yet, this is NOT the future I had in mind. I wish for Meta to crash and burn. This is not the way. Literally nobody benefits from this.

@Beaton9903 @AIandDesign @Meta By then, definitely more socialist than meritocratic

@premiumcapture @AIandDesign @Meta Communism by default?

@tony_tweets1 @bluemxgbs @AIandDesign @Meta I mentioned in my last reply “fiscal adjustments”.

@premiumcapture @bluemxgbs @AIandDesign @Meta You have no idea at all what you’re talking about, none. Government can’t feed people — the thing you’re suggesting — without revenue, and you have no path to new revenues in your fantasy. Shouting “productivity will increase” doesn’t balance the books, it means nothing.

@tony_tweets1 @bluemxgbs @AIandDesign @Meta This has nothing to do with corporate tax. Overall, across the entire economy, productivity will increase without humans. Fiscal policies will change. Governments will realise they cannot fight AI, but can create a beautiful, freer world without compulsory labor

@premiumcapture @bluemxgbs @AIandDesign @Meta Where is government getting this revenue when their tax rolls are dried up?

@fymkev @icanvardar The problem is codex’s ability that came swift and furious.

@icanvardar still baffles me TO THIS DAY how folks replace their ENTIRE thinking capacity with ai. like bro it’s a tooooollllllll not your medulla!!!

if your entire career can be replaced by a teenager with chatgpt and wifi maybe the problem was never ai

@profHenryPie @AIandDesign @Meta Yes I am a dreamer. Because if what I say don’t happen, we are screwed. All of us have no jobs, government don’t distribute supplies as per normal economics theory. There will be an entire collapse of convenient, authority lies in the hands of token owners

@premiumcapture @AIandDesign @Meta And will governments finance this ? By taxing away AI productivity gains from the shareholders ? Dreamer

@bluemxgbs @AIandDesign @Meta Because of 1 man 1 vote. If you don’t provide free food, civil revolts. And you can, as government by then.

@premiumcapture @AIandDesign @Meta At that moment, what’s the value of the normal human being, the very large population you’re talking about? Why the same ruling class who wants to get rid of any burden from human cost to pay freely to those large population?

@James_Willock @AIandDesign @Meta It will be the way when suppler out strips demand.

@premiumcapture @AIandDesign @Meta Except they won't do that.

@_cat_turner @AIandDesign @Meta I want to be very clear. The principle is AI will make supply abundant. Labor is cheap to the extent unimportant. Government will then distribute supplies. That’s assuming it’s a socialise government.

@premiumcapture @AIandDesign @Meta The corporations (like Amazon) pay very little taxes compared to businesses in the past. There will be no funds to do such a thing.

@rxhit05 half the ai wrappers rn are just betterrr ui + better marketinggg

I feel most “AI startups” today are basically: take user input send it to OpenAI API return response charge $19/month

@rxhit05 Not sure if it’s half or all.

@Dalton254_ke Cos salary isn’t reducing. You are expected to produce 10X more with AI.

With all these AI Agents around why isn't work reducing?