Readit News logoReadit News
shalmanese commented on Why LLMs can't really build software   zed.dev/blog/why-llms-can... · Posted by u/srid
livid-neuro · 11 days ago
The first cars broke down all the time. They had a limited range. There wasn't a vast supply of parts for them. There wasn't a vast industry of experts who could work on them. There wasn't a vast network of fuel stations to provide energy for them. The horse was a proven method.

What an LLM cannot do today is almost irrelevant in the tide of change upon the industry. The fact is, with improvements, it doesn't mean an LLM cannot do it tomorrow.

shalmanese · 10 days ago
The analogy is very apt because the first cars:

* are many times the size of the occupants, greatly constricting throughput.

* are many times heavier than humans, requiring vastly more energy to move.

* travel at speeds and weights that are danger to humans, thus requiring strictly segregated spaces.

* are only used less than 5% of the day, requiring places to store them when unused.

* require extremely wide turning radiuses when traveling at speed (there’s a viral photo showing the entire historical city of Florence fit inside a single US cloverleaf interchange)

Not only have none of these flaws been fixed, many of them have gotten worse with advancing technology because they’re baked into the nature of cars.

Anyone at the invention of automobiles with sufficient foresight could have seen the intersecting incentives that cars would wreak, same as how many of the future impacts of LLMs are foreseeable today, independent of technical progress.

shalmanese commented on How to sell if your user is not the buyer   writings.founderlabs.io/p... · Posted by u/mooreds
shalmanese · 18 days ago
Employees, by and large, all share three common desires:

* How do I get promoted?

* How do I get a raise?

* How do I not get fired?

Beyond those common desires are a constellation of more personalized that is specific for each salesperson and the cohort they target (I'm somewhat of an idealist in that I believe people are quite often strongly driven by meaningful non-capitalist, non-realist desires).

In any case, when you're working in enterprise sales, what you have to realize is that, regardless of what the desire is, what your corporate champion is "buying" is a way for them to achieve their goals and only incidentally what is good for the company, where your product is merely a proxy to accomplishing this.

Of course, companies also know this and anyone who has owned a P&L immediately recognizes that the sum of all things everyone wants far exceeds the resources of the balance sheet, thus, some selection process needs to be put in place to allocate scarce resources.

Your corporate champion is ideally far more aligned with you against the company than they are with the company against you and your job is to figure out how to win this selection battle together.

The core insight though, is that people are actually astonishingly bad at performing on this and it's actually quite easy for an outside sales person to become a subject matter expert for 3 core reasons:

1. Any employee usually only ever has a sample size of 1 whereas you have a broader peek into how this has happened across a range of companies industry wide.

2. Any employee, only a minor part of their job involves interfacing with outside parts of the firm responsible for allocating resources whereas you treat this as a core competency.

3. For any person, it's always easier to advise a 3rd party on what to do than to practice the same actions yourself.

What this means though, is that, as an enterprise salesperson, you should understand that your core value comes from developing subject matter expertise in how to help people in your industry get promotions, get raises and avoid getting fired and the product you're representing at the moment is merely the avenue through which you enable that to happen.

The best salespeople I've ever met always share a common core value that they deeply care about making sure everyone around them is getting rich with the faith that some of that money eventually reflects onto them but that's not what drives them. That's why so many immigrants and children of immigrants make such great salespeople, they've seen the material difference wealth has made on their circumstances and they want to spread that opportunity to others.

This is what I advise Founders who start Enterprise focused businesses. Fundamentally, you should be thinking about how do I get someone to VP/Director/Line Manager/Tech Lead 2/3/5 years earlier than if my product doesn't exist and how do you breathe this passion day in day out.

shalmanese commented on Why do some AI chatbot subscriptions cost more than $200?   wired.com/story/seriously... · Posted by u/isaacfrond
hermitcrab · a month ago
I was talking about software (the OP example), where there is a big fixed cost and (generally) a very low per unit cost. But I probably should have made that clearer. Things do indeed change when you have a significant per unit cost (e.g. manufactured goods).
shalmanese · 25 days ago
Except that AI companies have different unit economics from SaaS businesses, requiring a rethinking of fundamentals, as laid out in this a16z post: https://a16z.com/the-new-business-of-ai-and-how-its-differen...
shalmanese commented on Why do some AI chatbot subscriptions cost more than $200?   wired.com/story/seriously... · Posted by u/isaacfrond
hermitcrab · a month ago
The optimal price is the optimal price, regardless of what the service costs to run.

But, yes, if the cost to run the service is X and the optimal price is <X, you have a problem.

shalmanese · a month ago
No it’s not. Assume there is demand for 5000 units at $1 and 2000 units at $2. If it cost $0 to produce, then the profit is $5000/$4000 so you should price at $1. If it cost 90c to produce, then the profit is $500/$2200 so you should price at $2.
shalmanese commented on A new pyramid-like shape always lands the same side up   quantamagazine.org/a-new-... · Posted by u/robinhouston
cubefox · 2 months ago
A sphere is bad, it rolls away. The shape from the article would be better, but it is too hard to manufacture. And weighting is cheating anyway. The best option for a D1 is probably the gömböc, which is mentioned in the article.
shalmanese · 2 months ago
Technically, a gomboc is a D1.00…001.
shalmanese commented on Ask HN: How to Deal with a Bad Manager?    · Posted by u/finik_throwaway
shalmanese · 2 months ago
Learning how to form a relationship with your skip is a valuable but undertaught skill.

You have to understand that

a) There is no "objective" standard by which a manager can be evaluated as good or bad

b) You are not in a position to determine whether your manager is "good" or "bad", only whether they are a good or bad fit for you. The person who determines whether your manager is good or bad is your skip.

Good managers are the ones that get retained and considered for promotion, bad managers are the ones who are slated for demotion or firing. It doesn't matter if a manager does things counter to every management best practice, if they consistently get promoted, they're a "good" manager. If you don't like that, you should consider working for a company where this doesn't typically happen.

How you deal with a manager that is not a good fit for you is to determine how much political capital they have within the organization. If they're there to do the job the company wants them to do but you simply don't fit into the larger objectives, then you need to accept that for what it is and understand that the purpose of a system is what it does.

However, if you understand that they don't have as much political power as they would seem to let on, then you have a lot more room to maneuver. It's possible to work with the skip to transfer you to a different team because the skip values retaining you more than they value keeping that manager happy. It's also possible though risky to help build the case for the skip that this manager was not the right fit and should be helped to find a different position, possibly at another firm which would be more suited to their skills. Skips don't have visibility into the day to day workings of a manager so understanding what a skip needs to build their case and how you can be an ally in the documentation can be a valuable function you can serve.

But ultimately, these are both lower probability scenarios and you should be preparing as a likely contingency for your exit from the company and finding a manager more suited to you.

shalmanese commented on Finding Shawn Mendes (2019)   ericneyman.wordpress.com/... · Posted by u/jzwinck
mmillin · 3 months ago
Reading this felt very similar to watching “Pitch Perfect 237” (Anna Kendrick 9/11 conspiracy) https://youtube.com/watch?v=MiC9X_MoE1M
shalmanese · 3 months ago
A significant amount of context is missing if you're not aware of Room 237: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_237

A documentary about the various conspiracy theories developed around The Shining. The music in the YT video is from the documentary.

shalmanese commented on My AI skeptic friends are all nuts   fly.io/blog/youre-all-nut... · Posted by u/tabletcorry
shalmanese · 3 months ago
I mean, the root cause of this is quite mundane.

People like to think that intelligence is some intrinsic force but it's far better thought of as situational. We are contextually smarter or dumber based on the emotions we're trying to process from a situation and how our motivation reasoning allows us to avoid certain negative emotions.

The subset of people the OP is trying to argue against are people who are otherwise normally intelligent but have an emotional need for AI to be unimportant that they're unable to process so they build a social community of terrible arguments.

The nature of the internet is that visibility is terribly correlated (and often anti-correlated) with popularity so OP thinks this is some large contingent of people when it's instead algorithmically served conflict generators.

Writing against that is also an algorithmic conflict generator, as evidenced by the number of upvotes here. The correct response is to realize that people putting up terrible arguments about AI don't actually care about AI, they're using this issue to process unresolved trauma from other, unrelated areas of their life and taking their ideas literally instead of seriously is a waste and diversion. There are plenty of smart people with far more nuanced views that still disagree with you where they're interested in the content of the argument.

shalmanese commented on Ask HN: Do people actually pay for small web tools?    · Posted by u/scratchyone
shalmanese · 3 months ago
You’re going to get very biased answers to these questions because the people paying for tools don’t post on webforums. They’re generally paying because they care so little about the problem they’re willing to throw money at it to make it go away.

That being said, also $5 is a terrible price. People who pay too much attention to people who post on web forums get gun shy and are afraid to discover what people are actually willing to pay for things.

Everyone who has ever raised their prices has said consistently that a) the number of people who left was below their expectations and b) the people who left were overwhelmingly their most complaining customers who caused the most support burden.

shalmanese commented on AI in my plasma physics research didn’t go the way I expected   understandingai.org/p/i-g... · Posted by u/qianli_cs
shalmanese · 3 months ago
This is less an article about AI and more about, one of the less talked about functions of a PhD program is becoming literate at “reading” academic claims beyond their face value.

None of the claims made in the article are surprising because they’re the natural outgrowth of the hodgepodge of incentives we’ve accreted as what we call “science” over time and you just need to practice over time to be able to place the output of science in the proper context and understand that a “paper” is an artifact of a sociotechnical system with all the entailing complexity that demands.

u/shalmanese

KarmaCake day12592October 8, 2008
About
shalmanese@gmail.com

I've done so much startup stuff I'm equally bad at all of it.

I currently work coaching Founders globally from a base in Singapore: https://coaching.figuringshitout.com/

I formerly was a 3x Founder and have worked in Engineering, Design, Product & Growth.

I also have a background in Computer Vision (designed a single camera 3D tracking algorithm), Augmented Reality (Designed a AR prototype for FEMA to manage disaster response workers), Tabletop/Touch Computing (Studied how people's collaborative behaviors change when put under time pressure), HCI (Studied it for 4 years), Interaction Design (ditto) and am well read in Psychology (esp. Social Psych), Economics, & other random trivia.

I also cook... a lot.

View Original