Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Building design tools in Lovable Introducing our new in-house Connectors tool. Built entirely by one person. Arthur Hilhorst from our team has been working on the new Connectors experience inside Lovable. His latest project is an internal tool that manages all connector icons and logos across the product. Sounds...

25,164 views • 3 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

We use OpenClaws to do all of our work at Every 📧. We have 25 full-time employees, so we’re one of the few companies in the world that has seen how work changes when everyone has their own personal agent in the company Slack. I chatted with Every 📧 COO Brandon (Brandon Gell) and Every 📧 head of platform Willie (Willie) to share what we’ve learned. We get into: - Why agents become mirrors of their owners, and how that influences how other people on the team interact with them - How a parallel AI org chart forms on its own. People have stopped tagging me on Slack with questions about Proof, the document editor I vibe coded, because they knew my agent R2-C2 can step in - The etiquette for human-agent collaboration is being invented in real time. Brandon's rule is that if there's an established process or documented answer, always ask the agent, not their human - Why everyone is a manager now, and why even experienced managers carry limiting beliefs about what their agents can do - This is a must-watch for anyone trying to understand how AI workers change daily operations, not just in theory, but inside a company that’s half-agent Watch below! Timestamps Introduction: How Brandon built Zosia, an AI agent to run his household: Brandon’s “aha” moment: What happened when everyone on the team got their own agent: How agents take on their owners' personalities, and why that matters inside an org: Why it’s important for agents to work in public: What we’re still figuring out when it comes to agent behavior, including memory gaps, group chat etiquette, and the "ant death spiral" problem: How we built Plus One, our hosted OpenClaw product: The cultural shift required to make agents work at scale:

Dan Shipper 📧

67,958 views • 5 months ago

Perplexity CEO Aravind Srinivas on the brutal truth about who actually makes money in AI (and why it's not who you think): Aravind argues that the real value in AI comes from orchestration. He points to products like Codex, Claude Code, and Perplexity Computer: "What is that? It's an orchestration system. It takes a model, pairs it with an agent harness." And what is an agent harness? "The simplest way of describing it is like rules for how the agent loop should run. What are all the skills and sub-agents and connectors and tools it accesses? Without the harness, you don't necessarily capture and convert the intrinsic intelligence in the model into valuable output tokens." This leads to a blunt conclusion about who has a real business in AI, and who doesn't: "If you're literally just a reseller of model tokens, you have no business, because the model will get commoditized. So even if you're a model builder, you don't have a business. As an infra layer, you have some business on serving those output tokens. But as an application layer or model builder, you don't really have a business if you're just a reseller of tokens that come directly out of the model." So where does the value accrue? "You have a business if you know how to take the model, ground it in valuable context, orchestrate it with a really good agent harness, connected to the right set of tools and connectors (whether it's personal connectors or business connectors) and provide the experience to people in one single unified system." Aravind Srinivas then explains Perplexity's specific edge: Beyond orchestrating across tools, files, and connectors, they also orchestrate across models. "That is the differentiation that Anthropic and OpenAI cannot claim, because you wouldn't find GPT-5 inside the Claude Code harness. You wouldn't find Claude Opus inside the Codex harness. These are competing with each other. Whereas you would find both these models inside Perplexity Computer." Why does this matter? Because it all comes down to power. In Aravind's framing, the fundamental cost driver in AI is watts (the one input nobody can subsidize except the government). "Whoever provides the most valuable output tokens with the least amount of power expended to produce them generates the greatest value to the end user, has the most pricing power, has the most value. That is the orchestration problem to solve." His conclusion: "The one single most important metric in AI is token value per watt per user."

Big Brain AI

42,319 views • 1 month ago

Nat Eliason’s (Nat Eliason) career arc is borderline absurd—but it works. He’ll spot a new tool or trend, master it, build a business around it, and move on. Nat’s pulled it off with the note-taking wave ($600k in sales from a Roam Research course), real estate (6x return flipping property in Austin), and crypto (published his insider story with Random House). Now it’s AI: he’s running a viral course on building apps with AI—$200k in pre-sales in just a week, 800 students and counting. I’ve known Nat for a long time and I think he has a great sense for where the puck is headed. He was one of the first guests I had on the podcast and I was delighted to have him on again. Here are a few takeaways from our conversation: - Coding with AI has become orders of magnitude easier for non-technical people over the last 2 years—Nat rarely has to help students fix bugs; they troubleshoot in Cursor on their own. - AI coding assistants are creating new behaviours in programming, like using a speech-to-text model to talk to an agent and having it write code for you. - The traditional learning curve of coding is flattening because AI tools let beginners build and iterate in faster feedback loops. - AI has given Nat leverage in spades—it increases his ability to be a creator while also building a robust business with as few people to manage as possible. He demos an AI book editor he coded for his sci-fi novel. - In the age of AI, software is becoming content and the barriers to create are lower than ever—but custom software for everything isn’t the answer. Nat’s model is that personalized tools make sense for that one thing you care the most about. - Nat believes that the future of writing with AI is a Cursor-style interface with a model that’s trained on your style and voice. This episode is a must-watch for writers, creators, and anyone interested in the future of product building. Watch below! Timestamps: Introduction: 00:01:45 The origins of Nat’s viral course on building apps with AI: 00:11:45 How coding with AI has evolved over the last two years: 00:18:46 Nat creates an app using Composer, Cursor’s AI assistant: 00:22:22 Tactical tips for coding with Cursor: 00:26:06 How coding with AI is creating new behaviours in programming: 00:29:06 What excites Nat the most about the future of AI: 00:32:41 A demo of Hubbard, the AI editor Nat built for his science fiction writing: 00:38:58 When does it makes sense to build custom software: 00:44:52 Nat’s take on the future of writing with AI: 00:49:18

Dan Shipper 📧

27,207 views • 1 year ago