Just ask, "Would Kramer be convinced to get into this?"
AutistoMephisto
- 0 Followers
- 0 Following
- 2 Posts
To go a little more in-depth, if a product would simplify certain aspects of life, make them more straightforward and less prone to a chain of comedic errors, then it’s a good product.
If a product makes things more complex, has more things to go wrong, and more corners and edge cases for some weirdo like Kramer or George to think they’ve spotted a killer side hustle, then it’s a bad product.
DTCC and Digital Asset Partner to Tokenize DTC-Custodied U.S. Treasury Securities on the Canton Network
DTCC and Digital Asset Partner to Tokenize DTC-Custodied U.S. Treasury Securities on the Canton Network - Lemmy.World
I got this from a news/OSINT group chat. The implications are troubling for the USD as the reserve currency of the world. The first being that the US$ is incompatible with tokenization. Then there’s the effect it will have on anyone holding USD. If you’re poor, then you have no savings, and you’re not any better or worse than before. If you’re rich, you already have non-liquid assets, and are also not worse off. If you’re middle class, you have some liquid cash in savings that you should probably drop ASAP.
The Algorithm Finally Works For You
The Algorithm Finally Works For You - Lemmy.World
Interesting piece. The author claims that LLMs like Claude and ChatGPT are mere interfaces for the same kind of algorithms that corporations have been using for decades and that the real “AI Revolution” is that regular people have access to them, where before we did not. From the article: > Consider what it took to use business intelligence software in 2015. You needed to buy the software, which cost thousands or tens of thousands of dollars. You needed to clean and structure your data. You needed to learn SQL or tableau or whatever visualization tool you were using. You needed to know what questions to ask. The cognitive and financial overhead was high enough that only organizations bothered. > Language models collapsed that overhead to nearly zero. You don’t need to learn a query language. You don’t need to structure your data. You don’t need to know the right technical terms. You just describe what you want in plain English. The interface became conversation.
I Went All-In on AI. The MIT Study Is Right.
I Went All-In on AI. The MIT Study Is Right. - Lemmy.World
Just want to clarify, this is not my Substack, I’m just sharing this because I found it insightful. The author describes himself as a “fractional CTO”(no clue what that means, don’t ask me) and advisor. His clients asked him how they could leverage AI. He decided to experience it for himself. From the author(emphasis mine): > I forced myself to use Claude Code exclusively to build a product. Three months. Not a single line of code written by me. I wanted to experience what my clients were considering—100% AI adoption. I needed to know firsthand why that 95% failure rate exists. > I got the product launched. It worked. I was proud of what I’d created. Then came the moment that validated every concern in that MIT study: I needed to make a small change and realized I wasn’t confident I could do it. My own product, built under my direction, and I’d lost confidence in my ability to modify it. > Now when clients ask me about AI adoption, I can tell them exactly what 100% looks like: it looks like failure. Not immediate failure—that’s the trap. Initial metrics look great. You ship faster. You feel productive. Then three months later, you realize nobody actually understands what you’ve built.
Haven't these MFS been saying they won in a landslide have a mandate since January? Or am I just imagining things?
MAGA Maoism is spreading through the populist right
Well damn, we got nomad clans. Is that cyberpunk enough?
Do you see what's going on yet?
JD Vance slams Democrats for "schoolyard bully" attacks