Meanwhile, we used to sit around the office while waiting on compilers, after which we could see if recent changes actually worked.
Now?
"5 minutes of a spinning cursor for my design specification to result in usable software?! Ridiculous!"
151–160 of 261 posts
Meanwhile, we used to sit around the office while waiting on compilers, after which we could see if recent changes actually worked.
Now?
"5 minutes of a spinning cursor for my design specification to result in usable software?! Ridiculous!"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, if a chatbot could do all those things then I'd honestly rather use that chatbot than talk to a human, unless I had some very specific concern. But it seems that GPT models can understand other humans just fine.
What do you mean by "other" humans?
So when you've taken 6-12 months to ship and everybody already iterated twice by directly using a hosted model and is building a real customer base you are only at v0.1 with your first customers who are telling you they actually wanted something else and now you have go and not just massage some prompts but recode your compiler and tool chain and everything else up and down the stack.
Perhaps if you already know your customers and requirements really really well it can make a lot of sense but I'd be very sceptical about "given how easy it is to do, why are you not validating your concept early with a fully general / expensive / hosted model". Premature optimisation being root of evil type stuff.
This is a nice post, and I think it will resonate with most new AI startups. My advice would be don't build an AI product at all. To my mind an "x product" is rarely the framing that will lead to value being added for customers. E.g. a web3 product, an observability product, a machine vision product, an AI product. Like all decent startup ideas the obviously crucial thing is to start with a real user need rather than…
That's basically Steve Jobs' advice: "One of the things I've always found is that you've got to start with the customer experience and work backwards to the technology. You can't start with the technology and try to figure out where you're going to try to sell it."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think most people I know offline hate interacting with chat bots as products It's hilarious to me when people are bringing back chat bots as a concept. We had chat bots a few years ago and it was something that almost all larger companies had built strategies around. The idea being that they could significantly reduce call centre staff and improve customer experience. And it wasn't just that the quality of the co…
I work in a small team with increadibly good programmers. ChatGPT as of right now is not good enough to replace asking one of them for help when I am stuck. But it is good enough to replace stack overflow. Look forward. A year ago I would have so agreed with what you say. But look where we are already. And think about what will come. My god. We're in for a ride here. Saying that chatbots sucked last time we tried tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. Avoid the “If have hammer, everything looks like a nail” strategy. Find a customer pain point and use the right blend of tools. You can also make a new tool where tools dont exist
Being a "AI startup" makes about as much sense as being a "Python startup." What does your company do? We do Python! OK, but what problem are you solving? Lots of them, but what's important is we solve it using Python code!
At least "AI startups" might turn out to be more beneficial than "crypto startups" were.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you mean by "other" humans?
As in LLMs have human-like understanding in a way that previous chatbots did not, they can both understand and emit human text.
Yikes! We are headed towards customer service hell. At least I'd like there to be some human feelings while I'm getting fucked.
This is a nice post, and I think it will resonate with most new AI startups. My advice would be don't build an AI product at all. To my mind an "x product" is rarely the framing that will lead to value being added for customers. E.g. a web3 product, an observability product, a machine vision product, an AI product. Like all decent startup ideas the obviously crucial thing is to start with a real user need rather than…
>> This is regardless of quality, bots are rarely as good as speaking with a real human being I avoid calling organizations as I know I will be on hold forever, when I finally do get through to someone usually they provide another number to call and the process repeats. I just want the thing done, as fast as possible - I don't care if I talk to a real person or not. The reason chatbots haven't helped the process so f…
E.G. it's one thing to allow an authenticated User to use a bot to manage their own files/workflow inside an app (we do that), but can you imagine putting in production a support bot with actual empowered features (eg negotiating a rate, issuing a refund) AND the risk of prompt injection?
So what will happen is those customer service bots will be even less empowered than the outsourced CS agents.
This is a nice post, and I think it will resonate with most new AI startups. My advice would be don't build an AI product at all. To my mind an "x product" is rarely the framing that will lead to value being added for customers. E.g. a web3 product, an observability product, a machine vision product, an AI product. Like all decent startup ideas the obviously crucial thing is to start with a real user need rather than…
So slapping the term all over your product provides value to your customers.