MatekCopatek

18-20 million foldable phones were sold in 2025. About 10 million PS5 consoles were sold in that same period. So there's definitely a bit of interest.

Why does it have to be an all-or-nothing fight for the final smartphone form? Can't it just be a semi-niche product that some people buy?

That's perhaps broadly true in a very general sense, but there are many technical solutions that should be applied when you're designing a platform intended for sensitive anonymous crime reports.

It's reasonable to be upset if those solutions were not responsibly implemented.

It's a little more nuanced than that. Not voting can be just as democratic as voting if you're informed about your options and decide none of them represent your position.

But even in situations where someone would potentially want to vote and a tweet misleads them to believe it's not worth it, why is that worse then a tweet misleading them to believe that a certain political option will work in their favor?

I mean... You can buy a stick of RAM with Samsung chips on it and use it in your own machine to run a local model vs. paying for an Anthropic subscription. I assume that's what they're referring to, not owning Samsung stock.

I've commented about this before, I think many LLM based apps nowadays are at risk of being replaced by a product straight from the labs once they prove to be successful.

We've seen this pattern with Apple making their own version of an app that was previously popular on the app store.

The labs are in a perfect position to do this - they have a bunch of data on what's being used and they have direct access to their own models/compute. If an external service is popular, it's relatively trivial for them to estimate how much additional profit they're leaving on the table.

If the usecase isn't far from their core business (and things like this absolutely aren't), with their size, why wouldn't they eat other people's lunches?

Anyone else worried about the premise of Anthropic selling specific agentic tools that also use their models underneath? My first thought is apps on the iPhone that got banned after Apple introduced an official option with the same functionality in a new iOS.

I'm not sure I would risk building an agentic app that competes with this on Anthropic models out of fear of that scenario.

Is this some kind of trick question or am I just misunderstanding your reply?

As far as I know they sell the patterns, not the finished knitted artifact. Aspiring knitters buy them to enjoy knitting. The physical representation of the pattern isn't worth anything (just a piece of paper), what you're buying is a license to use their intellectual property, so I'd say they're making money from copyright.

You don't have to extrapolate much to conclude that's a general critique of capitalism.

Corporations aim to make the cheapest possible product that still sells because that creates the biggest profit margin.

If we're collectively unhappy with the outcome, that's the core value we need to change.

Absolutely nothing, if it fits your usecase, but how do you handle e.g. reusing the same skill in multiple repos?

Are you manually keeping all copies in sync?

This might be a cynical take, but I doubt Ticketmaster (and most of these other examples) are motivated by doing the most good. Their underlying principle is extracting the most value for shareholders at any cost.

Some people argue even that behavior ends up producing the most good, but I cannot accept that level of mental gymnastics.

While I agree with the general sentiment, the problem here isn't developers not being familiar with statistics, it's the simple fact all of this is profit driven most of the time.

I tried to purchase tickets for an event last week. I had to go through Ticketmaster as it was the only official way. They forced me to verify my account using a phone number, but whoever they were using for messages wasn't able to deliver a code to my number. I tried a few numbers from our household and they all failed.

Searching for this issue yielded a bunch of results, so it was definitely a known issue, but there wasn't anything I could do, really. To them, it's simple math. Another SMS provider that covers my (tiny EU) country might be more expensive. They might be avoiding scammers that used my mobile operator in the past. Whatever it is, it would probably cost them more than they lose in ticket sales.

Without some government entity to force them, they don't give a shit about me being able to see an event.

Hey HN, we're building a tool aimed at organizations who use a lot of different AI assets (skills, tools, rules, agent definitions etc.) and find it hard to manage them consistently.

If anyone is willing to give us a bit of feedback, I guess we'd mostly like to hear if the issues this blog post opens with are even a problem for you and if yes, how are you currently solving it.