Have I ran out of 100,000 requests?
Does your significant other know about your car collection? You may have a car hoarding problem.
Readit NewsWalterSear commented on Have I been Flocked? – Check if your license plate is being watched haveibeenflocked.com/... · Posted by u/pkaeding
WalterSear commented on I'm Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA · Posted by u/proberts
Yes, it did occur to me that there would be no way to verify it. But it felt like it was in my best interest to at least provide something.
You would have to make sure your search footprint supported that. IE - fully private, non-publicly-visible profiles everywhere.
WalterSear commented on Google, Nvidia, and OpenAI stratechery.com/2025/goog... · Posted by u/tambourine_man
How is the number of users a moat when you are losing money on every user?
Inference is cash positive: it's research that takes up all the money. So, if you can get ahold of enough users, the volume eventually works in your favour.
WalterSear commented on Google, Nvidia, and OpenAI stratechery.com/2025/goog... · Posted by u/tambourine_man
you have to show this 'future-illegal' action is harmful first by demonstrating harm.
That's why i used the sugar example - it's starting to be demonstrably harmful in large quantities that are being used.
I am against preventative "harmful" laws, when harm hasn't been demonstrated, as it restricts freedom, adds red tape to innovation, and stifles startups from exploring the space of possibilities.
> starting to be demonstrably harmful
Starting?
I personally see this as a positive trend. VC in its earliest form was concerned with experiments that had high technology risk. I am thinking of companies like Genentech and scientists like biochemist Herbert Boyer, who had pioneered recombinant DNA technology.
After that, VC had become more like PE, investing in stuff that was working already but needed money to scale.
This isn't that.
This is VCs FOMOing as global-economy-threatening levels of leverage are being bet on an AI transformation that, by even the most optimistic estimates, cannot achieve a tiny portion of the required ROI in the required time.
If a science experiment works and is transformational can be worth a trillion dollars, how much is it worth if it has a 5% chance of being transformational?
What it's transformational but takes a decade or so, instead of a year or so?
It's not like this isn't following exactly the same hype cycle as every other technological transformation.
I think that's a good thing and VC getting back to it's roots. I'm glad that scientists doing AI are getting big money and don't know exactly what the product will be rather than some business person with a slick deck and hockey stick charts.
VC isn't "getting back to it's roots", though it is certainly displaying one of it's fundamental drives: FOMO.
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
It's certainly an open question whether the providers can recoup the investments being made with growth alone, but it's not out of the question.