bamazizi

Lots of points on AI is just a "tool" and that's where I think misconception and misunderstanding will be most devastating for some.

- Yes, engines did replace horses, it was utility revolution

- Yes, computers replacing pen, paper and calculators

- Yes, internet has revolutionized access, borderless business, communication and digital transformation

All the inventions have been about tool replacing another tool, but AI trajectory does not really fit those models.

Maybe AI utilization today is giving the impression of tool and productivity revolution but it's the only entity challenging the actual human organ. It's brain replacing brain and that's the unprecedented and unfamiliar territory.

Eventually this new brain will get its own limbs too!

This article resonated with me, especially since I've noticed the fund raising hoopla's in my circle has dramatically dropped. Either investors are tightening the belt so founder-investor fit has crossed into the realm of disillusionment

better, more, screenshots or video walkthrough would help why something like this is interesting/needed.

The flood of new tools is truly overwhelming there isn't enough time to setup all of them to validate the marketing claims against actual functionality and benefit

When something is "free", YOU are the product!

I had a SaaS project last year with massive HTMX code base. Code was big and pain was even bigger. A few months back I attempted to convert parts of it to DataStar but the introduction of premature "DataStar Pro" and putting pretty basic but essential utilities behind the paywall killed the vibe. I scrapped the idea and wouldn't go near it.

Having just watched the Vite documentary both HTMX and DataStar have a higher order mission to challenge dominant incumbent JS frameworks like React/NextJS. HTMX is struggling and in my opinion Datastar is DOA!

Win the adoption, win the narrative then figure out cashing in. People behind Vite won the JS bundling race, they now have a new company Void(0) and raised venture money. NextJS solved major React pain points, gave it away for free and built a multi-billion$ infrastructure to host it.

I wonder how the just announced "GPT-4o" with real-time voice impacts projects like this?

The demo on real-time multi language translation conversation blew me away!

Quick scan of your resume as someone who interviews 20-40 people/year (although not so much lately) ... I couldn't figure what you're actually great at. Strengths, passion and project type gravitation?

FYI, your resume is shallow but still better than a lot I see each year. For someone like me to decide who to interview and spend that 1 hour on, comes down to info presented on resume intended towards the people reading the resume and fit feel to the job description.

Tips:

- Post resume in "doc" format and not "pdf" this is because most recruiters and HR feed resumes to parsing engines that match content of resume to job description for keyword matching.

- Recruiters have a DB of thousands and thousands of resumes, for each job posting, they can only refer top 3. They only get paid if the candidate is hired and bonus if they stay more than a year! So know who your target audience is.

- Interviewers hate doing interviews too! Resume is easiest way to get a feel and reject allocating the interview slot time.

Github open source projects are not at all an indicator of "popularity". There are vast amount RN apps on the appstores and closed source.

As someone who has tried most of the options for streaming realtime mobile app, I landed on RN/EXPO for the sole reason of community size and ease of use. Basically everything is possible!

Typical recommendation has been to build MVPs in RN and then switch to native after your raise funds, but strongly advise against it unless the nature of your app demands native implementation. You can stick with RN all the way to FB/Instagram scale!

Part of it has to do with licensing costs but also "brand-able" ownership.

Say if you use Arial or Helvetica for your logo, then it's a generic typeface easily reproduced by whoever else that has them installed on their computer. So often, many brands for their logo take a generic font and customize it to make it their own. However, when you customize a font for a logo the font file itself is not customized, just the vector version of it for the character of the brand name. So if you want to extend the usage of the font style to say headline text or advertising text, then you need a whole custom built font. Custom fonts cost money, but picking a pre-existing "designed" typeface from other type foundries cost a lot more than getting a custom font. So two birds with one stone, you get a unique font for your brand and don't pay additional licensing since you own it.