Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

MICROSOFT REJECTED THIS GUY SO HE VIBE CODED HIS OWN EXCEL applied to microsoft, got rejected, decided to build a terminal-based spreadsheet viewer from scratch here's what it actually does: > opens and renders .xlsx and .csv files directly in your terminal > keyboard-driven navigation so you never touch... a mouse > handles large datasets without the lag that modern excel has > cell formatting, formulas, and sorting all working in the CLI > lightweight enough to run on any machine instantly no ribbon UI, no bloat, no web version that takes 10 seconds to load just a fast spreadsheet tool that looks like something from the 80s but performs better than most modern alternatives the first user, who was a data analyst, said he's been complaining for years that the move to ribbon was a punch to the face for hardcore users another user said it reminds them of lotus 1-2-3 from the DOS days but way slicker modern excel is 90% features nobody uses and 10% of what power users actually need this guy stripped it down to the 10% and made it fastshow more

Om Patel

26,874 subscribers

86,946 views • 3 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Comedy Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

$Gmail creator Paul Buchheit on how to build something 100 people love In the clip below, Paul talks about how he built the first version of Gmail. The first version was built in one day, and from there, he iterated his way to 100 people who loved the product: “The whole thing was just iterating, step by step trying to build something that made people happy.” The team decided that they needed to have 100 happy users before launching gmail to the world. To achieve this, Paul embedded a quick questionnaire in the interface that asked users: “Are you happy? Yes or No” Paul would then seek out all of the “No” responders and ask them directly: “What will it take to make you a happy user?” He ignored feedback from the people who said things like “it basically needs to be a clone of Outlook” because it was unlikely he would be able to convert them. But other people just needed a minor feature or a bug fix. So Paul worked on those requests one-by-one until he hit 100 happy users. Email was 30 years old when Paul started building gmail, and it’s pretty much impossible to enter a space like that and build something that appeals to everyone. If you try, what you will end up building is a mediocre product that nobody really loves. What Paul recommends doing instead—and what he did with gmail—is: “Build a thing that has really deep appeal. Even if it’s to just a tiny fraction of people—if you can make that small fraction of people obsessively love what you’re building, it’s easier to just grow that group. There’s always people at the margin where if you make the thing slightly better, they’re going to join into that group. It’s easier to start with deep, narrow appeal and broaden it over time than it is to start with broad ‘meh’ and convert ‘meh’ to loving your thing en masse.”$

Gmail creator Paul Buchheit on how to build something 100 people love In the clip below, Paul talks about how he built the first version of Gmail. The first version was built in one day, and from there, he iterated his way to 100 people who loved the product: “The whole thing was just iterating, step by step trying to build something that made people happy.” The team decided that they needed to have 100 happy users before launching gmail to the world. To achieve this, Paul embedded a quick questionnaire in the interface that asked users: “Are you happy? Yes or No” Paul would then seek out all of the “No” responders and ask them directly: “What will it take to make you a happy user?” He ignored feedback from the people who said things like “it basically needs to be a clone of Outlook” because it was unlikely he would be able to convert them. But other people just needed a minor feature or a bug fix. So Paul worked on those requests one-by-one until he hit 100 happy users. Email was 30 years old when Paul started building gmail, and it’s pretty much impossible to enter a space like that and build something that appeals to everyone. If you try, what you will end up building is a mediocre product that nobody really loves. What Paul recommends doing instead—and what he did with gmail—is: “Build a thing that has really deep appeal. Even if it’s to just a tiny fraction of people—if you can make that small fraction of people obsessively love what you’re building, it’s easier to just grow that group. There’s always people at the margin where if you make the thing slightly better, they’re going to join into that group. It’s easier to start with deep, narrow appeal and broaden it over time than it is to start with broad ‘meh’ and convert ‘meh’ to loving your thing en masse.”

Startup Archive

44,476 views • 2 years ago

Bro, as someone who was gaming in the 90's, I had no idea that Crash Bandicoot was nearly impossible to run on the PS1. The developers found a way to get around the PS1 limitations, and the way they did it was sick! This is what optimization looks like, and somehow, most modern game developers can't seem to pull it off.

Bro, as someone who was gaming in the 90's, I had no idea that Crash Bandicoot was nearly impossible to run on the PS1. The developers found a way to get around the PS1 limitations, and the way they did it was sick! This is what optimization looks like, and somehow, most modern game developers can't seem to pull it off.

MugenLord

173,951 views • 5 months ago

NO BUT HIS IDEA SO BRILLIANT? 👑: i already talked about it and gave hints to yeodoongies, right? so, it was almost at the final completion stage, but then the price came out. and it ended up being a bit higher than i expected. since i really wanted this item to be practical and actually useful for yeodoongies, i designed it with that in mind—and because of those extra details, the unit cost ended up a bit higher than i first thought 👑: so i thought, “wouldn’t this be a bit too much of a burden for yeodoongies?” that’s why i just decided to scrap it and changed to something else instead 💬: then just give me the one you scrapped 👑: ㅎㅎㅎ ah, that one was actually—well, i guess i can just say it now anyway. actually, i was thinking of a keyboard. the idea for that keyboard was something like i wanted to put hehetmon face on the keyboard—what should i call it? on the keycaps, like emojis. and then, you know those keyboards that don't make that loud clicking sound? not like mechanical keyboards, but ones that sound like asmr... ah, silent! but even though it's silent, it has that, you know—that “sagak-sagak” sound when you press the keys. yeah, you’re right! like “tuduk-tuduk” sound! i had that kind of keyboard in mind and tried to make it happen. but the unit cost ended up being higher than i expected. and i thought, this is a bit too much— i know our yeodoongies would want to have it no matter what, but if the price is this high, it’ll be such a burden on yeodoongies. so, i just made the call to scrap it and switched to something else

NO BUT HIS IDEA SO BRILLIANT? 👑: i already talked about it and gave hints to yeodoongies, right? so, it was almost at the final completion stage, but then the price came out. and it ended up being a bit higher than i expected. since i really wanted this item to be practical and actually useful for yeodoongies, i designed it with that in mind—and because of those extra details, the unit cost ended up a bit higher than i first thought 👑: so i thought, “wouldn’t this be a bit too much of a burden for yeodoongies?” that’s why i just decided to scrap it and changed to something else instead 💬: then just give me the one you scrapped 👑: ㅎㅎㅎ ah, that one was actually—well, i guess i can just say it now anyway. actually, i was thinking of a keyboard. the idea for that keyboard was something like i wanted to put hehetmon face on the keyboard—what should i call it? on the keycaps, like emojis. and then, you know those keyboards that don't make that loud clicking sound? not like mechanical keyboards, but ones that sound like asmr... ah, silent! but even though it's silent, it has that, you know—that “sagak-sagak” sound when you press the keys. yeah, you’re right! like “tuduk-tuduk” sound! i had that kind of keyboard in mind and tried to make it happen. but the unit cost ended up being higher than i expected. and i thought, this is a bit too much— i know our yeodoongies would want to have it no matter what, but if the price is this high, it’ll be such a burden on yeodoongies. so, i just made the call to scrap it and switched to something else

yeopamine

37,777 views • 4 months ago

Seen a lot of stick on here for Paddy Brennan for his ride on Northern Air and I wanted to watch it just to say to the idiots that it’s what you deserve betting on a maiden hurdle hurdle for a horse first run over hurdles. They are almost schooling them and giving them experience on first run over hurdles or trying to get a mark so you’re just thick for betting a horse first time up over hurdles. I watched it anyway and wtf IT IS ACTUALLY SHOCKING Takes a pull on it most of the race and even a pull 2 out and never ever tried to win the race and finished off the race so well you’d have to think what the fuck was Paddy Brennan doing. He made 0 effort to win the race and it was actually obvious from the off what he was doing because he had him held up 10 lengths off the pace with the outsiders. Paddy never intended to win the race from the off

Seen a lot of stick on here for Paddy Brennan for his ride on Northern Air and I wanted to watch it just to say to the idiots that it’s what you deserve betting on a maiden hurdle hurdle for a horse first run over hurdles. They are almost schooling them and giving them experience on first run over hurdles or trying to get a mark so you’re just thick for betting a horse first time up over hurdles. I watched it anyway and wtf IT IS ACTUALLY SHOCKING Takes a pull on it most of the race and even a pull 2 out and never ever tried to win the race and finished off the race so well you’d have to think what the fuck was Paddy Brennan doing. He made 0 effort to win the race and it was actually obvious from the off what he was doing because he had him held up 10 lengths off the pace with the outsiders. Paddy never intended to win the race from the off

Bookies Dream

452,925 views • 2 years ago

TikTok just got caught running a secret experiment on 15 million Americans to find out how much money their dangerous version could make them. In 2021 the company rewrote part of its recommendation algorithm so users would stop getting buried under harmful content over and over. Then it held back 10% of its American users and left them on the OLD version. At the time that was roughly 15 million people. None of them were told. They opened the same app, saw the same logo, and scrolled a feed the company had already replaced for everyone else. Internally the practice has a clean name. It is called a backtest, and it is the same A/B test any company runs when it wants to prove a change actually worked. Companies normally run those on button colors and checkout flows. TikTok ran one on what happens to people when the app stops protecting them. Why would a business do that? Because a safer feed is a less sticky feed, and stickiness is the product. One of the 15 million was a 16 year old named Chase Nasca. He had no history of mental health issues. He committed sicide in February 2022. In March 2023, a Bloomberg Businessweek reporter emailed the company asking about Chase for a story on teenagers and the algorithm. Only then did TikTok's algorithm and safety teams go back and reconstruct his account. They found he had been assigned to the control group. The same report notes that most of what he actually searched for on the app was sports and comedy - but he was regularly shown sicide and other harmful content. Their findings became a 14 page internal report on youth safety and filter bubbles. Its key contacts list shows it went to 10 teams inside the company, including communications, legal response, policy, security and search. So the lawyers knew about it. The communications team knew. Policy, security and search all got a copy. Then came the recommendations, and this is where it gets genuinely ugly... The report proposed two fixes: The first was to shrink the control group from 10% of American users to under 1%. The second was to cut how long the same users sit inside it, from as long as a full year down to seven days. Nobody proposed stopping. And the report ran the numbers on its own suggestion. Even at 1%, it said, at least 1.8 million users would still be excluded from the safety change, and it warned those people would be left "at risk for falling into bubbles." Someone typed that sentence, sent it to 10 teams, and the practice continued. A former TikTok trust and safety team leader who worked there while the experiment was live said he had never heard of it. After seeing the details he said the control group was far too big, and that the test should have excluded minors and suicide content entirely. The staff paid to protect users did not know the experiment on users existed. TikTok's answer this week is that the 2022 test was routine, and that its purpose was to check whether safety changes were working as intended. The internal report describes its own recommendations as a way to prevent future incidents. Chase's parents sued for wrongful death. A judge dismissed the case last year after TikTok argued that Section 230 protects it from liability for what its algorithm recommends. The appeal is still pending. So the company's legal position is that it is not responsible for the videos its algorithm served a teenager, while its OWN document confirms it chose which version of that algorithm he received. Every large platform runs tests like this one. But not one of them publishes how many users are sitting in the old version at any given moment. TikTok's number was never supposed to become public.

Ricardo

31,047 views • 1 month ago

A guy was sitting in a trader chat complaining for the 3rd month straight about his results being basically zero Someone dropped him a link to a wallet 1 bot, $47K in a month, 860 trades per week. He asked: is this even legal? They replied: this is public data, you could have found it yourself Here is what is actually happening 93% of Polymarket users trade by hand. The other 7% automated the process, and they are the ones pulling $11K to $120K per month. And 5% of those 7 never wrote a single line of code. They just copy trades from top wallets through on-chain data The blockchain shows every trade from every account The bot does not sleep, does not tilt, and processes data faster than any human: This is not a question of talent. It is a question of tools. And the tools already exist. No need to build anything from scratch That guy from the chat is now in that 7%. All he did was stop clicking by hand

A guy was sitting in a trader chat complaining for the 3rd month straight about his results being basically zero Someone dropped him a link to a wallet 1 bot, $47K in a month, 860 trades per week. He asked: is this even legal? They replied: this is public data, you could have found it yourself Here is what is actually happening 93% of Polymarket users trade by hand. The other 7% automated the process, and they are the ones pulling $11K to $120K per month. And 5% of those 7 never wrote a single line of code. They just copy trades from top wallets through on-chain data The blockchain shows every trade from every account The bot does not sleep, does not tilt, and processes data faster than any human: This is not a question of talent. It is a question of tools. And the tools already exist. No need to build anything from scratch That guy from the chat is now in that 7%. All he did was stop clicking by hand

Blaze

36,941 views • 6 months ago

the CEO of NVIDIA just said the PC you use today will be gone, replaced by an AI supercomputer that lives in your house Jensen Huang stood on stage holding the machine and said it becomes less like a computer and more like R2-D2, a thing in your home that just does work for you all day he put it bluntly, this is as big as the day the phone became the smartphone and the wild part is the hardware to do it already exists and ships this year here is what he actually unveiled: > a desktop that runs a one trillion parameter AI model locally, 768GB of memory, sitting by your desk > agents that run 24/7 with no meter, no cloud bill, no rental, doing work while you sleep > NVIDIA and Microsoft rebuilding the PC from the ground up for the first time in 40 years > a full lineup, from a $249 chip to enterprise monsters, and almost nobody knows which one they actually need the hype is going to push everyone toward the biggest most expensive machine i wrote the honest breakdown, every NVIDIA AI box, what each really does, the real math, and which one is actually yours the full guide is in the article below

the CEO of NVIDIA just said the PC you use today will be gone, replaced by an AI supercomputer that lives in your house Jensen Huang stood on stage holding the machine and said it becomes less like a computer and more like R2-D2, a thing in your home that just does work for you all day he put it bluntly, this is as big as the day the phone became the smartphone and the wild part is the hardware to do it already exists and ships this year here is what he actually unveiled: > a desktop that runs a one trillion parameter AI model locally, 768GB of memory, sitting by your desk > agents that run 24/7 with no meter, no cloud bill, no rental, doing work while you sleep > NVIDIA and Microsoft rebuilding the PC from the ground up for the first time in 40 years > a full lineup, from a $249 chip to enterprise monsters, and almost nobody knows which one they actually need the hype is going to push everyone toward the biggest most expensive machine i wrote the honest breakdown, every NVIDIA AI box, what each really does, the real math, and which one is actually yours the full guide is in the article below

John Doe

194,375 views • 3 months ago

Susie's beautiful words about Lewis 🥹🙏 "Lewis [Hamilton] is always someone that has been willing to use his voice for good and has always been someone that's seen the wider picture of how his influence can have a positive impact. Sometimes it's easy to take the trodden path that everyone else does, but he has absolutely forged his own path and he's had such a big impact in the sport." "It was no surprise for me that he was one to stand up and speak [*] because he is always the one that stands up to speak when there's something to be said or when something hasn't been said but needs to be said. And I don't think he sometimes gets enough credit for that." "He's turned that walk into the paddock into a catwalk. He's played a part in making Formula One culturally relevant outside of just motorsport and sport. And I do think he's someone that has a very powerful voice and uses it for good and others should take some inspiration from that." [📹 High Performance Podcast] __ * [in support of Susie Wolff against the FIA's baseless investigation against her in Dec 2023 - the question asked here was 'One of the most powerful voices of support came from Lewis Hamilton who said that there's no transparency and no accountability. What did his support mean to you?]

Susie's beautiful words about Lewis 🥹🙏 "Lewis [Hamilton] is always someone that has been willing to use his voice for good and has always been someone that's seen the wider picture of how his influence can have a positive impact. Sometimes it's easy to take the trodden path that everyone else does, but he has absolutely forged his own path and he's had such a big impact in the sport." "It was no surprise for me that he was one to stand up and speak [] because he is always the one that stands up to speak when there's something to be said or when something hasn't been said but needs to be said. And I don't think he sometimes gets enough credit for that." "He's turned that walk into the paddock into a catwalk. He's played a part in making Formula One culturally relevant outside of just motorsport and sport. And I do think he's someone that has a very powerful voice and uses it for good and others should take some inspiration from that." [📹 High Performance Podcast] __ [in support of Susie Wolff against the FIA's baseless investigation against her in Dec 2023 - the question asked here was 'One of the most powerful voices of support came from Lewis Hamilton who said that there's no transparency and no accountability. What did his support mean to you?]

sim

42,845 views • 10 months ago

$This is actually crazy Chad Bianco reveals how Democrats got voters to pass letting people steal up to $850 with no consequences Democrats knew voters would never vote for it, so instead they named it “The Safe Schools and the Safe Streets initiative” and voters were tricked into voting for it “Prop 47 made felonies, misdemeanors, misdemeanors, infractions, or not crimes anymore. It increased the, the level of theft to where it was a crime to that $950 threshold. And so that enabled just crime to just run rampant. It. It was profitable now to be a criminal, and there was no consequence” He says Gavin Newsom did this deception on purpose, “Never would the voters agree to that — The voters would never, ever, ever go for that -1 So what they did is they let you pass it and they gave you this sheet of paper and a ballot next to it with yes or no. And they said, ‘do you want safe schools and safe streets?’ And you said, yes, I do. And you said Yes. And that's what Prop 47 was. It was the Safe Schools and the Safe Streets initiative that our attorney General Kamala Harris at the time, our Secretary of State” “They lied to us and convinced us as voters to make that a law. And the thing that happens after that is that law can never be changed unless the voters change it. The lawmakers in Sacramento can't change a law that the voters put into place. So they lied to us. But why are they allowed to put deceiving descriptions on these laws? Because government made their own another law that said it was okay to lie to you.” Democrats are the party of criminals$

This is actually crazy Chad Bianco reveals how Democrats got voters to pass letting people steal up to $850 with no consequences Democrats knew voters would never vote for it, so instead they named it “The Safe Schools and the Safe Streets initiative” and voters were tricked into voting for it “Prop 47 made felonies, misdemeanors, misdemeanors, infractions, or not crimes anymore. It increased the, the level of theft to where it was a crime to that $950 threshold. And so that enabled just crime to just run rampant. It. It was profitable now to be a criminal, and there was no consequence” He says Gavin Newsom did this deception on purpose, “Never would the voters agree to that — The voters would never, ever, ever go for that -1 So what they did is they let you pass it and they gave you this sheet of paper and a ballot next to it with yes or no. And they said, ‘do you want safe schools and safe streets?’ And you said, yes, I do. And you said Yes. And that's what Prop 47 was. It was the Safe Schools and the Safe Streets initiative that our attorney General Kamala Harris at the time, our Secretary of State” “They lied to us and convinced us as voters to make that a law. And the thing that happens after that is that law can never be changed unless the voters change it. The lawmakers in Sacramento can't change a law that the voters put into place. So they lied to us. But why are they allowed to put deceiving descriptions on these laws? Because government made their own another law that said it was okay to lie to you.” Democrats are the party of criminals

Wall Street Apes

99,370 views • 4 months ago

Reporter: “What’s your favorite upgrade to the plane and how much did it cost taxpayers to upgrade the planes?” President Trump: “It cost very little relative to what it would cost if we did it a different way. So this was a gift from a country that has treated us very well… Qatar. I went to Boeing and said, ‘Who has the best [747]?’ They said, ‘Qatar.’ There’s never been a plane like it.” “I said [to the Amir of Qatar] I would like to use it… He said, ‘No, no, I would like to make a contribution to the country.”

Reporter: “What’s your favorite upgrade to the plane and how much did it cost taxpayers to upgrade the planes?” President Trump: “It cost very little relative to what it would cost if we did it a different way. So this was a gift from a country that has treated us very well… Qatar. I went to Boeing and said, ‘Who has the best [747]?’ They said, ‘Qatar.’ There’s never been a plane like it.” “I said [to the Amir of Qatar] I would like to use it… He said, ‘No, no, I would like to make a contribution to the country.”

RedWave Press

584,619 views • 2 months ago

Pocket cofounder akshay found PMF in one of the most unintuitive ways. When customers didn't like his recording app, he made a hardware device to do what the app does. Now he has 300,000 users. "Convenience beats intentions. So if your users have the intention to record, and you don't make it convenient enough, they will not record." "But if you actually make it convenient enough to record, and they want to record even a little bit, they'll 100% record." He explains how he figured all this out: "We actually went and asked these people, 'Why are you using the device 10x more than the app?'" "One of the users was using a different phone that he bought specifically for recording conversations. And he had a battery attached to the phone, on top." "That's kind of what Pocket ended up being. By just watching how people use these recording apps on the phone, there are a lot of limiting factors for recording." "There are people who get incoming phone calls all the time. So if you're recording something, and you get an incoming phone call, it interrupts the recording. If you take the call, your recording stops essentially." "Apart from all of these technical reasons, the real reason is actually that the people who take 10, 15 meetings a day — doctors, consultants — a patient goes out, another comes in — the client goes out, the client comes in — and there's 10-15 back-to-back meetings, they feel awkward in the first few seconds to take out their phone and start recording. They have to unlock their iPhone, set up the recording, and hope the operating system doesn't kill apps running in the background." "So people just felt that, this is much more reliable. A quick-access thing that can immediately start recording. And I don't need to feel awkward placing it on a desk. So it doesn't take attention away from the meeting, like, 'Why is this guy looking at his phone? We just met.'"

Pocket cofounder akshay found PMF in one of the most unintuitive ways. When customers didn't like his recording app, he made a hardware device to do what the app does. Now he has 300,000 users. "Convenience beats intentions. So if your users have the intention to record, and you don't make it convenient enough, they will not record." "But if you actually make it convenient enough to record, and they want to record even a little bit, they'll 100% record." He explains how he figured all this out: "We actually went and asked these people, 'Why are you using the device 10x more than the app?'" "One of the users was using a different phone that he bought specifically for recording conversations. And he had a battery attached to the phone, on top." "That's kind of what Pocket ended up being. By just watching how people use these recording apps on the phone, there are a lot of limiting factors for recording." "There are people who get incoming phone calls all the time. So if you're recording something, and you get an incoming phone call, it interrupts the recording. If you take the call, your recording stops essentially." "Apart from all of these technical reasons, the real reason is actually that the people who take 10, 15 meetings a day — doctors, consultants — a patient goes out, another comes in — the client goes out, the client comes in — and there's 10-15 back-to-back meetings, they feel awkward in the first few seconds to take out their phone and start recording. They have to unlock their iPhone, set up the recording, and hope the operating system doesn't kill apps running in the background." "So people just felt that, this is much more reliable. A quick-access thing that can immediately start recording. And I don't need to feel awkward placing it on a desk. So it doesn't take attention away from the meeting, like, 'Why is this guy looking at his phone? We just met.'"

TBPN

54,300 views • 3 days ago

$Microsoft just betrayed OpenAI and Anthropic, the two companies it helped build. And it could break the entire AI trade... Here's what happened: Inside Excel and Outlook, two of the most used business apps on Earth, Microsoft has started routing tens of thousands of AI requests every week to its own in-house models instead of OpenAI and Anthropic. Microsoft's own AI chief, Mustafa Suleyman, said himself: "We pay a lot of money to Anthropic, so our goal is to reduce and ultimately ELIMINATE that cost." This is the company that poured $13 billion into OpenAI and effectively created the modern AI industry, and it just decided the most advanced models on the market are NOT worth paying for. And here's the thing... Microsoft is not just ripping out OpenAI everywhere - it is being surgical about it. The hardest and rarest tasks can still go to OpenAI or Anthropic. What Microsoft is taking back is the boring, high-volume work, like the email replies, the thread summaries, and the simple spreadsheet formulas. Why does that matter so much? Because that boring, repetitive work is where the actual money lives. The frontier labs assumed businesses would push BILLIONS of these tiny requests through expensive models forever. That endless river of tokens is the entire reason OpenAI and Anthropic are valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Microsoft looked at that river, decided it was massively overpaying, and rerouted it to models it owns outright. So the single biggest customer in the industry just walked off with the most profitable part of the business. And it is not only Microsoft: That same week, CNBC reported that American companies have been escaping to Chinese AI models to dodge rising US prices. Chinese models now handle more than 30% of US companies' AI usage on one major platform, peaking at 46%, up from an average of 11% a year earlier. They cost 60 to 90% less, and on some benchmarks they land within a single point of the best American model. One US startup moved ALL of its AI traffic off Claude and onto China's DeepSeek, and expects to save millions. Meanwhile Meta just admitted it has "excess" AI compute it wants to sell, becoming the first giant to concede it built far too much. Do you see the pattern forming? For two years, the entire AI story rested on one assumption: Every company on Earth would happily pay premium prices for the best model, forever. That assumption literally died in a single week. And the market noticed. More than a trillion dollars has been wiped off AI and chip stocks in a matter of days, as Wall Street finally started asking whether all of this spending will ever pay for itself. What this means for OpenAI and Anthropic: Their models are extraordinary, and it may not matter because their own biggest customers have decided they do not NEED the best model in the world to answer an email, and "good enough" now costs a fraction of the price. When even Microsoft refuses to pay full price for AI, the real question becomes who exactly IS left to pay it. What do you think?$

Microsoft just betrayed OpenAI and Anthropic, the two companies it helped build. And it could break the entire AI trade... Here's what happened: Inside Excel and Outlook, two of the most used business apps on Earth, Microsoft has started routing tens of thousands of AI requests every week to its own in-house models instead of OpenAI and Anthropic. Microsoft's own AI chief, Mustafa Suleyman, said himself: "We pay a lot of money to Anthropic, so our goal is to reduce and ultimately ELIMINATE that cost." This is the company that poured $13 billion into OpenAI and effectively created the modern AI industry, and it just decided the most advanced models on the market are NOT worth paying for. And here's the thing... Microsoft is not just ripping out OpenAI everywhere - it is being surgical about it. The hardest and rarest tasks can still go to OpenAI or Anthropic. What Microsoft is taking back is the boring, high-volume work, like the email replies, the thread summaries, and the simple spreadsheet formulas. Why does that matter so much? Because that boring, repetitive work is where the actual money lives. The frontier labs assumed businesses would push BILLIONS of these tiny requests through expensive models forever. That endless river of tokens is the entire reason OpenAI and Anthropic are valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Microsoft looked at that river, decided it was massively overpaying, and rerouted it to models it owns outright. So the single biggest customer in the industry just walked off with the most profitable part of the business. And it is not only Microsoft: That same week, CNBC reported that American companies have been escaping to Chinese AI models to dodge rising US prices. Chinese models now handle more than 30% of US companies' AI usage on one major platform, peaking at 46%, up from an average of 11% a year earlier. They cost 60 to 90% less, and on some benchmarks they land within a single point of the best American model. One US startup moved ALL of its AI traffic off Claude and onto China's DeepSeek, and expects to save millions. Meanwhile Meta just admitted it has "excess" AI compute it wants to sell, becoming the first giant to concede it built far too much. Do you see the pattern forming? For two years, the entire AI story rested on one assumption: Every company on Earth would happily pay premium prices for the best model, forever. That assumption literally died in a single week. And the market noticed. More than a trillion dollars has been wiped off AI and chip stocks in a matter of days, as Wall Street finally started asking whether all of this spending will ever pay for itself. What this means for OpenAI and Anthropic: Their models are extraordinary, and it may not matter because their own biggest customers have decided they do not NEED the best model in the world to answer an email, and "good enough" now costs a fraction of the price. When even Microsoft refuses to pay full price for AI, the real question becomes who exactly IS left to pay it. What do you think?

Ricardo

93,582 views • 2 months ago

James Currier on how he grew a photo sharing site to 47 million users in 6 months “Most product people start by saying, ‘There’s a problem and we’re going to build a product that’s going to solve that problem. Then we’re going to market it,” NFX founder James Currier observes. Of the 45 companies James has spoken to in the last 18 months, at least 40 of them have said some version of this. “I was also taught this back in the 1990s,” James says. “But through experimentation, I’ve realized that this is actually the wrong way to look at it. The right way to look at it — if you want to grow your business — is to ask, ‘What is the language? How am I going to market this?’ . . . Figure out what the language is and then build the product to fit what the language is.” James gives the example of a photo sharing site he launched years ago: “It said ‘Store your Photos’ on the homepage, and we were not growing. So one day, we literally just changed the homepage to say ‘Share your Photos.’ The team that was working on it said, ‘Our site doesn’t actually share photos. It just stores the photos.’ I said, ‘Well, fix that.’ What ended up happening was they started building features that allowed people to share their photos, and we registered 47 million people in 6 months. And that was back when the Internet was 250 million people.” He continues: “What we realized was that by changing the language, you change how the users are interacting with your site. And you also change your thinking about the product so that the features and subsequent language in the product actually fits with the main value proposition.” James gives another example: “We had a matchmaking site, and the promise there was ‘Find a date.’ It wasn’t growing and we had to buy all this traffic from Google and elsewhere to keep the whole thing going. So what we did was we changed the language and the value proposition to say, ‘Help people find a date.’ When we did that, we registered 28 million people in about 9 months, virally with no cost to us. We changed the language, and then we changed the product subsequently.” Video source: Greylock Partners (2016)

James Currier on how he grew a photo sharing site to 47 million users in 6 months “Most product people start by saying, ‘There’s a problem and we’re going to build a product that’s going to solve that problem. Then we’re going to market it,” NFX founder James Currier observes. Of the 45 companies James has spoken to in the last 18 months, at least 40 of them have said some version of this. “I was also taught this back in the 1990s,” James says. “But through experimentation, I’ve realized that this is actually the wrong way to look at it. The right way to look at it — if you want to grow your business — is to ask, ‘What is the language? How am I going to market this?’ . . . Figure out what the language is and then build the product to fit what the language is.” James gives the example of a photo sharing site he launched years ago: “It said ‘Store your Photos’ on the homepage, and we were not growing. So one day, we literally just changed the homepage to say ‘Share your Photos.’ The team that was working on it said, ‘Our site doesn’t actually share photos. It just stores the photos.’ I said, ‘Well, fix that.’ What ended up happening was they started building features that allowed people to share their photos, and we registered 47 million people in 6 months. And that was back when the Internet was 250 million people.” He continues: “What we realized was that by changing the language, you change how the users are interacting with your site. And you also change your thinking about the product so that the features and subsequent language in the product actually fits with the main value proposition.” James gives another example: “We had a matchmaking site, and the promise there was ‘Find a date.’ It wasn’t growing and we had to buy all this traffic from Google and elsewhere to keep the whole thing going. So what we did was we changed the language and the value proposition to say, ‘Help people find a date.’ When we did that, we registered 28 million people in about 9 months, virally with no cost to us. We changed the language, and then we changed the product subsequently.” Video source: Greylock Partners (2016)

Startup Archive

18,388 views • 9 months ago

“When I saw Jayson Tatum in the moment he did his “We Did It” he looked like he got it…. Its the culmination of all of the stuff to get there” Real shyt, when Jayson Tatum did the “We did it” moment that to me felt like it all clicked for him. It was a rush of visualizing all of the trials and tribulations over the years to get to this point. The C’s aint no microwave made team, this was a team that has been built and molded for years now. This is the process it takes to build championship DNA lord and they just getting started 💯

“When I saw Jayson Tatum in the moment he did his “We Did It” he looked like he got it…. Its the culmination of all of the stuff to get there” Real shyt, when Jayson Tatum did the “We did it” moment that to me felt like it all clicked for him. It was a rush of visualizing all of the trials and tribulations over the years to get to this point. The C’s aint no microwave made team, this was a team that has been built and molded for years now. This is the process it takes to build championship DNA lord and they just getting started 💯

Kevin Garnett

158,622 views • 2 years ago

man anthropic is absolutely cooking microsoft. claude now works natively in word, powerpoint and excel. thats 450M users but how the fuck did anthropic beat microsoft co-pilot? it gets worse - microsoft blew $13B creating co-pilot and owns 27% of openai yet no sign on chatgpt. - claude has access to SHARED context across excel, word and powerpoint. they know the footprint of microsoft's users - very valuable AI data. - only 15M microsoft users pay for copilot, so its clear they need to go model-agnostic - this is the 3rd major microsoft product to leverage claude (cowork and deep research are the other 2) very impressive execution from anthropic tbh, they are trying to be everywhere and anywhere - its working

man anthropic is absolutely cooking microsoft. claude now works natively in word, powerpoint and excel. thats 450M users but how the fuck did anthropic beat microsoft co-pilot? it gets worse - microsoft blew $13B creating co-pilot and owns 27% of openai yet no sign on chatgpt. - claude has access to SHARED context across excel, word and powerpoint. they know the footprint of microsoft's users - very valuable AI data. - only 15M microsoft users pay for copilot, so its clear they need to go model-agnostic - this is the 3rd major microsoft product to leverage claude (cowork and deep research are the other 2) very impressive execution from anthropic tbh, they are trying to be everywhere and anywhere - its working

Ejaaz

473,836 views • 4 months ago

There’s a new claim that “essentially, all that happened was Trump got tired, took control and forced it on Netanyahu, and this is basically the same deal that could have been reached a year earlier,” with the disturbing implication, that’s horrible to say, that IDF soldiers died in vain for a cause that had already been achieved. So, let’s revisit the plans that were laid out by both the current and former American administrations to see if they match up. For example, the Biden plan from June 1, 2024, which was met with considerable enthusiasm, and was even later acknowledged as Netanyahu’s plan. I want to highlight the difference. In the first phase, the IDF should have already pulled back to roughly its current position, and then it was just about releasing humanitarian hostages. As if not all of them are “humanitarian.” Then it transitioned to discussing the release of living hostages. In this phase, the IDF would withdraw from all of Gaza, until the last centimetre, while all the dead hostages remain in Gaza. It’s as different as day and night. Here, everyone is returning, including the dead, and the IDF is still in half of Gaza. This isn’t just about some desire to maintain an occupation or garrison force, but rather to ensure that Hamas disarms — something that didn’t happen in the Biden proposal. So now let’s move on to the Witkoff plan, much closer to us, much better for Israel, but still different. There was talk of releasing half of the dead hostages, but then a temporary ceasefire for two months of negotiations to end the war, and then the IDF would withdraw from more places than it is now, and there would be a guarantee that the war would not be renewed. Once again, we see that there was no connection between the IDF remaining on the ground and the promise that Hamas would disarm, especially while some of the hostages are still there. The greatness of this outline is this issue. I also want to say something general about the matter of responsibility. As ridiculous as it was on October 7 and afterwards to hear from Netanyahu’s supporters that the one who is to blame is the IDF chief of staff, the Shin Bet chief, the attorney general and the Military Advocate General, and that Netanyahu has no part in it — it’s as ridiculous as it is that now they’re saying, “Thank you Trump and thank you Nitzan Alon, and thank you to all of them and to the Qatari prime minister, and Netanyahu and Ron Dermer have nothing to do with it at all.” Indeed, Netanyahu had a very large part in the failure of October 7, and he also has a very large part together with Dermer in this deal. By the way, how does that connect to what Kushner said tonight in Egypt? He said that both the prime minister and Dermer made very big compromises and took risks to see the end of the war. I would like to make a suggestion. Once upon a time, when there was only one channel and people didn’t like the commentators, they said, “Watch the game without the commentary.” I say, let’s watch Trump and Netanyahu’s move without the commentary, because there are a lot of conversations, and this and that, and slander, and sometimes even quotes, but in practice there has never been a president and a prime minister who acted like this, and the results are evident from Iran, through the Golan Heights, through the embassy and now Gaza.

There’s a new claim that “essentially, all that happened was Trump got tired, took control and forced it on Netanyahu, and this is basically the same deal that could have been reached a year earlier,” with the disturbing implication, that’s horrible to say, that IDF soldiers died in vain for a cause that had already been achieved. So, let’s revisit the plans that were laid out by both the current and former American administrations to see if they match up. For example, the Biden plan from June 1, 2024, which was met with considerable enthusiasm, and was even later acknowledged as Netanyahu’s plan. I want to highlight the difference. In the first phase, the IDF should have already pulled back to roughly its current position, and then it was just about releasing humanitarian hostages. As if not all of them are “humanitarian.” Then it transitioned to discussing the release of living hostages. In this phase, the IDF would withdraw from all of Gaza, until the last centimetre, while all the dead hostages remain in Gaza. It’s as different as day and night. Here, everyone is returning, including the dead, and the IDF is still in half of Gaza. This isn’t just about some desire to maintain an occupation or garrison force, but rather to ensure that Hamas disarms — something that didn’t happen in the Biden proposal. So now let’s move on to the Witkoff plan, much closer to us, much better for Israel, but still different. There was talk of releasing half of the dead hostages, but then a temporary ceasefire for two months of negotiations to end the war, and then the IDF would withdraw from more places than it is now, and there would be a guarantee that the war would not be renewed. Once again, we see that there was no connection between the IDF remaining on the ground and the promise that Hamas would disarm, especially while some of the hostages are still there. The greatness of this outline is this issue. I also want to say something general about the matter of responsibility. As ridiculous as it was on October 7 and afterwards to hear from Netanyahu’s supporters that the one who is to blame is the IDF chief of staff, the Shin Bet chief, the attorney general and the Military Advocate General, and that Netanyahu has no part in it — it’s as ridiculous as it is that now they’re saying, “Thank you Trump and thank you Nitzan Alon, and thank you to all of them and to the Qatari prime minister, and Netanyahu and Ron Dermer have nothing to do with it at all.” Indeed, Netanyahu had a very large part in the failure of October 7, and he also has a very large part together with Dermer in this deal. By the way, how does that connect to what Kushner said tonight in Egypt? He said that both the prime minister and Dermer made very big compromises and took risks to see the end of the war. I would like to make a suggestion. Once upon a time, when there was only one channel and people didn’t like the commentators, they said, “Watch the game without the commentary.” I say, let’s watch Trump and Netanyahu’s move without the commentary, because there are a lot of conversations, and this and that, and slander, and sometimes even quotes, but in practice there has never been a president and a prime minister who acted like this, and the results are evident from Iran, through the Golan Heights, through the embassy and now Gaza.

Amit Segal

298,292 views • 11 months ago

Andrew Gallimore: "Some people are getting banned from the DMT realm" "Mantis beings are even punching people in the face" He told AJ from The Why Files how one person described a mantis being punching a user in the face right as they entered the space. The punch was felt and the entire experience ended instantly. The user snapped back to baseline consciousness with the effects just gone like that. People report getting a big X in their field of vision that says no entry. Or an entity that wags its finger and says no no no. Or a clear message that you are not welcome here and we are not letting you in. This is called a lockout. It can last for months or years. Unlike normal tolerance that builds gradually this functions like an on off switch with no straightforward pharmacological explanation. These consistent accounts from regular DMT users continue to raise deep questions about what is actually encountered in that space.

Andrew Gallimore: "Some people are getting banned from the DMT realm" "Mantis beings are even punching people in the face" He told AJ from The Why Files how one person described a mantis being punching a user in the face right as they entered the space. The punch was felt and the entire experience ended instantly. The user snapped back to baseline consciousness with the effects just gone like that. People report getting a big X in their field of vision that says no entry. Or an entity that wags its finger and says no no no. Or a clear message that you are not welcome here and we are not letting you in. This is called a lockout. It can last for months or years. Unlike normal tolerance that builds gradually this functions like an on off switch with no straightforward pharmacological explanation. These consistent accounts from regular DMT users continue to raise deep questions about what is actually encountered in that space.

Interstellar

247,915 views • 2 months ago

Edward Norton on "American History X" (1999) and the challenges he faced while playing the neo-Nazi character of Derek: "We viewed it as a modern-day Shakespearian tragedy. We were approaching it from the point of view of like the skin of it is modern, but it's timeless. It's a classical approach to a tragedy, like Othello or Macbeth or anything like that. This is a guy with enormous potential, he's not a marginal figure, he's like a general. Let you see all the things, all the qualities he has that could've been applied in positive ways and show that rage, anger destroys him. Sure, it's about a skinhead, but in some ways, you want to say, it's a very heightened character. But ultimately, it is about the corrosive effect of anger. And the anger distorts, warps & destroys. That is something people can relate to. It is always better to be able to connect to the fact that a character in his own mind feels right. Like if you're Ralph Fiennes and you're playing Voldemort in Harry Potter, that's a villain. He's a supernatural version of evil. But if you're playing a human character, they have a point of view, and by making him intelligent, it was like an avenue for me to come at it in my own.. in a way that's unexpected. The trappings are what you want to be able to dismiss because they are so extreme, but if he is able to articulate himself; he has a forceful point of view, it becomes tricky because you are sort of going, "oh, I don't like this, but I hear where he is coming from." ("Role Recall: Edward Norton on landing 'Primal Fear' after Leo passed, making 'Fight Club' funny and who's his favorite Bruce Banner", Kevin Polowy, Yahoo! entertainment, 2019)

Edward Norton on "American History X" (1999) and the challenges he faced while playing the neo-Nazi character of Derek: "We viewed it as a modern-day Shakespearian tragedy. We were approaching it from the point of view of like the skin of it is modern, but it's timeless. It's a classical approach to a tragedy, like Othello or Macbeth or anything like that. This is a guy with enormous potential, he's not a marginal figure, he's like a general. Let you see all the things, all the qualities he has that could've been applied in positive ways and show that rage, anger destroys him. Sure, it's about a skinhead, but in some ways, you want to say, it's a very heightened character. But ultimately, it is about the corrosive effect of anger. And the anger distorts, warps & destroys. That is something people can relate to. It is always better to be able to connect to the fact that a character in his own mind feels right. Like if you're Ralph Fiennes and you're playing Voldemort in Harry Potter, that's a villain. He's a supernatural version of evil. But if you're playing a human character, they have a point of view, and by making him intelligent, it was like an avenue for me to come at it in my own.. in a way that's unexpected. The trappings are what you want to be able to dismiss because they are so extreme, but if he is able to articulate himself; he has a forceful point of view, it becomes tricky because you are sort of going, "oh, I don't like this, but I hear where he is coming from." ("Role Recall: Edward Norton on landing 'Primal Fear' after Leo passed, making 'Fight Club' funny and who's his favorite Bruce Banner", Kevin Polowy, Yahoo! entertainment, 2019)

DepressedBergman

26,726 views • 6 months ago

But Obama is the bad guy. Yeah. The logical one is the sociopath who superglued gold-plated decorations from Home Depot all over the Oval Office to make it look the gayest it has ever looked. It looks like Temu Liberace decorated it, for fuck's sake. You know, the guy who loves to sing YMCA? That guy. The guy that's talking about men being gorgeous and muscular and strong and powerful...that guy is the alpha male compared to Obama? Your own leaders told you to fear the scary black guy and dude did nothing to you. You were told Obama would take your guns, and he never did. They told you he was born in Kenya, and you believed them...despite the black man releasing his birth certificate to counter a fucking lie, and that still wasn't enough for you. It will never be enough. How can you believe anything your party tells you after a decade of this MAGA shit that was, and still is, a cult based on LIES? You guys were targeted in GamerGate with misogynistic propaganda to foment HATE. Bannon was part of that. Epstein was part of that. Racists were targeted. You guys were created. Christians were targeted. Not by Democrats. By the Republican Party. Obama didn't do shit to you. Your own party has taken more from you than any democratic president ever could. The problem is in your own house, and you've damned the rest of us to suffer the consequences of your horrific decision with you. So get your heads out of each other's asses, and focus on the one who is actually in power right now. The black guy is bad routine just isn't landing like it used to.

But Obama is the bad guy. Yeah. The logical one is the sociopath who superglued gold-plated decorations from Home Depot all over the Oval Office to make it look the gayest it has ever looked. It looks like Temu Liberace decorated it, for fuck's sake. You know, the guy who loves to sing YMCA? That guy. The guy that's talking about men being gorgeous and muscular and strong and powerful...that guy is the alpha male compared to Obama? Your own leaders told you to fear the scary black guy and dude did nothing to you. You were told Obama would take your guns, and he never did. They told you he was born in Kenya, and you believed them...despite the black man releasing his birth certificate to counter a fucking lie, and that still wasn't enough for you. It will never be enough. How can you believe anything your party tells you after a decade of this MAGA shit that was, and still is, a cult based on LIES? You guys were targeted in GamerGate with misogynistic propaganda to foment HATE. Bannon was part of that. Epstein was part of that. Racists were targeted. You guys were created. Christians were targeted. Not by Democrats. By the Republican Party. Obama didn't do shit to you. Your own party has taken more from you than any democratic president ever could. The problem is in your own house, and you've damned the rest of us to suffer the consequences of your horrific decision with you. So get your heads out of each other's asses, and focus on the one who is actually in power right now. The black guy is bad routine just isn't landing like it used to.

Nicole Minét

75,144 views • 2 months ago