dmacedo

You are aware that's a very bad flex.

It'd be one thing to highlight bad teams you've been thrown in to; its a very different one to state that about the teams you've hired.

What was it exactly that prevented you from building good teams, with good process supporting them; that limited you to 20% good hires??

Oh thanks for the note about ergo.chat, need to have a play with this!

I've been building my own (native) mIRC clone for MacOS as a side project, exactly on the scratch my own itch kind of thinking! :)

Didn't really look into iOS though, I'll have a think...

So far:

- Swift 6/AppKit built with SwiftPM only, no Xcode project. As a stack of modules.

- The default behaviour is native window(s), but have a classic MDI frame (with child windows inside one main window) that I really enjoy playing with and debugging.

- Behaves "the mac way" (menu bar, text editing, scrolling, full-screen, dark mode, VoiceOver), and anything that belongs to mIRC behaves the mIRC way. Still lots of rough edges though.

- Conversations are tabs in one shared window, the tab bar acts as mIRC's switchbar, the treebar becomes a sidebar. DCC transfers get their own standalone windows as I felt that makes it better as p2p.

- The options, defaults, and menus are an exact copy of mIRC 7.85 - I'll evolve it after "finishing"

- Only the top UI layer touches AppKit, so the parts that have to match mIRC exactly can be tested headless in CI.

- The IRC protocol, session state, mIRC formatting, a mirc.ini-compatible config, a scripting interpreter that copies mIRC's evaluation model (PCRE2 tuned to behave like mIRC's PCRE 8.45), DCC, and the display format strings are all pure Swift.

- Some decisions go beyond mIRC to fit MacOS: an untrusted server certificate is asked the user and pinned, never just trusted. Router port mapping uses MacOS's own port mapper. And also created a few new pixel icon sets I haven't fully decided on.

I would say its even more proactive than support other projects. It is becoming clearer that every single technically competent member of the friends or family is now required to educate and proactively change devices.

Remember this upcoming Christmas that the ye oldie tradition of fixing PCs clearing awful exploiting phone apps (and cancelling subscriptions) should also include the "fix my browser" again, instead of Internet Explorer being replaced by Chrome, our collective duties is to replace Chrome with Firefox, plus its useful extensions to block ads and improve the web experience removing trackers etc.

Your call to arms today is to ensure all your tech colleagues join the movement, and then we can see Google's management views on "market growth"; they forget they made Chrome, we sold it - its our fault we forgot the "infinite growth of shareholder value"...

While I absolutely agree with your points, and do feel the same towards books I've read and later revisited similar to the ones alluded to. I would echo the transparency of giving readers the choice rather than the thought process that it'll still be enjoyable, therefore the deception is fine.

Especially as I feel that more and more this degree of transparency will be crucial for people to make more informed decisions in what they wish to read - and by the author's point, where do they want to spend their money.

What if an individual not knowing any better could absolutely enjoy AI written stories from cradle to grave, but would rather live in the blissful innocence of contributing to a lone writers' income rather than content farms? Isn't that enough reason to want transparency here?

My point being, if there's really "no harm" in the deception of either human-powered or AI-powered content farms. Then let's opt for imposing the transparency for readers to truly have the choice.

Well I want to launch Straightening Forks: the B-Corp that hires experienced developers, designers, and other digital folks and instead of buying dying digital estate to extract the remaining bone hurting juice from its user-base, it would instead: re-implement (fork, LOL) open alternatives seeking viable business models or just FOSS a working path, with minimal product features serving those core users and their needs, centralising the core cross-product services and cost optimising the backend plus realising what's the actual features users "need" vs. "want", and try to create sustainable products which instead of just extracting value try to provide value in this world.

Surely this isn't difficult???...

There are two important points to consider though:

On the bubble pop it's the feedback loop of investments to ROI materialising or not which will dictate if this stabilises in the current trajectory or if the bubble pops and massive investments will get written off (whoever is holding the bag can cry a river and won't be made whole).

But on that point for a team delivering value and demonstrating ROI I'm curious to see how many businesses fly through their roadmaps at whatever velocity and quality LLMs can deliver - and how does that translate to business growth. Are you achieving more in features and accelerating growth to the same 2 months instead of 12+? Or has the LLM spend just made 12+ months of "cost to build roadmap" into 2 months of staff + LLM costs anyway without profit to match??

Unless "other lines" go up as well, just compressing that increased cost without the benefits in revenue and growth, it'll still fail the ROI to keep paying the LLMs tax for these frontier labs to recoup their investment and then some...

I initially submitted without comment, but just want to also say:

This is a looong conversation between Kelsey and Gergely, but I feel it's worth watching (whatever that means coming from someone you don't know).

There's plenty of really valuable insights into both Kelsey's mindset and attitude, which I really appreciated and connected with, from the path taken, to things probably all learn in our careers.

And absolutely loved the arch of the conversation, the value for us later in our careers is likely towards the last half of the video, but it does make me really appreciate the storytelling I feel we should all share with our peers and our younger colleagues.

Hope you are fortunate enough to have or can find the time to enjoy this, I really enjoy the "exit plan".

Perhaps you should wait to make that case, we're starting to see ramifications from USAID cuts as the worse one, but there's also health and nutrition effects from Medicaid/SNAP reductions, and whatever in the world is happening on immigration and detention with insane ICE behaviour, plus second order effects from abortion and public health changes.

Trying to solve my own problem of drowning in meetings and scattered tools, turning things into actionable items.

It sits on top of what I already use and gives me a unified "What do I need to do (now/today)?" view.

Trying to auto-capture action items from meeting transcriptions and other inbound, and routing quick thoughts to the right tool with a couple of keystrokes, helping me prioritise my day so I'm not spending energy on too much organising (or through lack of organising getting distracted).

I wanted something that watched my inputs and keep my GTD loop running, especially when back-to-back meetings and context-switching make it really hard (or impossible) to stay on top of things I need to do!

Might also augment it with LLM for some support of task breakdown, but only as human-in-loop assistance.

Not thinking this could ever turn into a product since it's so custom.

It was, and and the same with ReTweets (RT) and #hashtags, some of us were even there since the SMS days and witnessed that formal adoption