Readit NewsTheir "copilot" brand is so weird and... muddled.
There's the AI code assistant thing that github actually started, there's the horrible chatbot maker GUI demoware, there's AI stuff you might be able to do with your sharepoint (if only you could get hold of the right ms sales rep to take your money), there's an app that does genai things on your personal MS account... And now there's a Surface rebrand?
That org chart meme about Microsoft being little fiefdoms pointing guns at eachother never stops being relevant.
[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot/microsoft-...
[2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/blog/2023/05/0...
[3] https://copilot.microsoft.com/
And [4] the meme itself, as you really can't convince me the above is the result of a coherent company-wide strategy https://i.insider.com/51dfec8469bedd5e19000017
Yes, and additionally the Copilot 360 user interface is a mess, processing time is slow, and the quality of results is poor. Using the Chat GPT or Claude interface produces much quicker/better results.
Looks like he was Director and then CTO at these companies. In other words his reports were very senior and had a wide array of organizational information sources. Similar to the Nvidia CEO who doesn't do 1-on-1s with his very senior VP level reports.
Which says very little for the 99% of managers who aren't at that level.
He also seems to focus a lot on 1-on-1s being for career advice or feedback to the report versus being a way to build rapport/trust, share information, get a pulse on the organization and get feedback yourself. Again, these things matter less when you're a manager of managers but matters more when you're managing ICs who view things from a non-manager lens.
In my org, I customize meetings based on the specific report, their function, and their needs. With some reports, I meet with weekly, others biweekly, some monthly, some as needed. We adjust as needed based on turbulence, new projects, approaching deadlines, etc. It’s a very effective model.
edgefield commented on Predicted 25% Drop in Search Volume Remains Unclear datos.live/predicted-25-d... · Posted by u/taubek
I use LLMs to answer certain questions, but those are often questions that I wouldn't have bothered using a search engine for in the past, rather I would have asked a colleague or just thought through the question on my own. And when I try to ask an LLM questions that search engines are good at, I'm most often disappointed.
In other words, it's not clear to me LLMs are going to eat into the market share of search engines, rather than just providing a tool with largely orthogonal use cases. But we'll see how the tech develops from here.
I strongly disagree. As a simple example, just this week I was looking for ice breaker questions for a work team event. I started with Google and was wading through a myriad of pages stuffed with ads and noise. I happened to have Claude open for an unrelated work experiment and thought to ask Claude for ice breaker questions. It provided 10 good questions and I selected the first two. It’s just a matter of time until we retrain our brains to first use LLMs before Google and then Google’s usage is going to drop like a rock. LLMs for many use cases is simply better, providing better results with far less noise.
While I absolutely agree with PG here on identifying a missing link and solving it with technology as your own project is a good way to own a startup, I also feel most of his examples are reminiscent of survivorship bias.
For every one of these giant trillion dollar companies, there are also thousands of companies that couldn't make it. Also, just by the distribution of it all, not every company can be a Google. Not trying to be pessimistic here; everyone should be able to try solving some problem as a project and have fun meanwhile. However, expecting a Google out of it could be a bit too demanding.
Yes, and doing a startup involves risk. If you fail, you’ll lose time and likely money. I’m now 10+ years behind on my retirement savings. I’ll likely need to work until 70-75.
Can anyone provide a single case of where a private equity majority owned business thrived, expanded, or at least maintained market share for at least three years? It seems private equity focuses on extracting every bit of value from a business, as quickly as possible, and then walking away via asset divestiture and bankruptcy.
Most notably and most recently, the decision to drop access from 3rd party apps to its lists is an incredibly short-sighted idea. No one wants to use Amazon's software. Make Alexa effortless to use with 3rd party software. https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/31/24168681/amazon-alexa-thi...