techtuate

I don't know how such start-ups get funded and come up with such harebrained ideas. Unless its a marketing gimmick, I don't understand what this company is looking to learn. A tiny RAG learning with a small sample + maybe getting some professional cleaners and data from any Chinese robo cleaning companies on potential floor configurations would compress this cycle and save them a lot of money. Good luck to the investors - but if they signed up for this plan, they deserve a their money being cleaned up better than users' homes

Good that they will, but will it really make any difference to viewing behavior? They could consider paying AI creators less if they want to encourage human creativity - else this is just another label which gets ignored.

Looking at the comments in this group, I'm not the only "stupid" one who hasn't noticed any discernable improvement in quality across the newer models. In fact my Claude code on re-login switched to Sonnet 4.6 and the vibe coding quality (with Opus 4.7 assisted prompts) has been good enough for me to lazily persevere with Sonnet for coding. Having said that I'm now on Opus 4.8 and will gladly come back here and eat humble pie should my opinion change. PS: Since my goal is embedding the best AI in B2B SAAS products, the key differentiator is not to use the shiniest Claude version (too expensive anyway) but to build a client aware RAG to enable bespoke learning and to use the right AI for my product - a combination of Gemini 3.0 Flash (image and not bad at reasoning), Grok (reasoning) work for me. Would love to hear more ideas (especially on open source as I'll look to cost optimize when I hit scale)

A very interesting take indeed. I don't know how comments here have morphed into AI Bashing but my honest take: What google has done is self-preservation not declaring a war on creativity. They were ahead of everyone else on AI but they didn't reinvent "google" because it was unprofitable. Selling prime search slots which get clicked is far more money making than having most searches die at the AI summary (most of mine do). This is a hat tip to ChatGPT and Google's way of saying your UX is better than ours was. Let's offer a mix and see what we can salvage - both in revenue and users. In the long-term the corporate will have to look at alternate revenue streams and their forays into chip etc. are clear indicators of the same. I know it hurts us (read creators - I'm happy cowriting with AI) but Google is being true its shareholders and to its goal of making money and we can't blame them for it.

I was wrong - not investing in FB and Amazon many years ago - thought those businesses will shrivel and die. I believe OpenAI is a bit of a coin flip as the AI space evolves. In fact I feel all AI will be marginal return generators at best. There are a lot of incumbents and a lot more coming as barriers to entry get increasingly lower. Unless a company can build a near monopoly it'll be hard to justify a 100X revenue valuation despite heavy losses. I feel it's safer to take a punt on alternate compute companies (Musk leads but others exist) than take a bet on one of many AI companies to build a monopoly.

Interesting article and an accelerating trend that will continue for some time in the tech industry. The challenge and the opportunity will be for legacy companies to ensure their legacy stack is well mapped to the newfound AI capabilities. My biggest fear is human laziness - AI coding is good for the most part and will get many times better over the next few months - BUT IT'LL NOT BE PERFECT. Overloaded employees are likely to get lazy and ship features cheaper and faster without checking - this will lead to small businesses being hit for no fault of their own. Anyway - short term share price gains beckon.