I’m currently thinking about SaaS pricing for solo users.
Most tools charge a flat monthly fee, but I’m considering not charging users in months they don’t actually use the product.
The idea is to avoid the cancel / resubscribe dance and make things feel fairer for people with tighter budgets.
Not sure if this is naive or practical — has anyone tried something similar?
Despite the fact that China's one-party system has its own issues, it is undeniable that this political structure allows China to relatively "concentrate forces to accomplish major tasks." Since the launch of ChatGPT, China has essentially sparked a nationwide "war of a thousand models." In addition to providing enterprises with favorable policies and subsidies, the government has encouraged civil servants at nearly every level of administration to learn about and understand AIGC. Leaders at all levels of government are required to dedicate a certain amount of time to specialized training courses on the subject.
China's system allows complete concentration and pooling of resources that is unparalleled except maybe to war time America. This unilateral policy has failings (One-child policy) but if set correctly will outpace any other nation on earth with just more efficient resource utilization.
Respect to those unsung engineers who made such lasting contributions, and to the author as well. This kind of work is not easy, but truly meaningful.
I do have a question, though: shouldn’t the creation of industry standards also allow individual attribution, similar to how patents credit inventors?
Because of the EU’s strict regulations, many internet products have simply given up on the European market. In some ways, this makes Europe seem a bit “behind the times.” Of course, the world still needs some conservatives to keep things in balance.
A serious issue is that in recent years, graduates in some majors may find it extremely difficult to secure jobs. I've noticed that many companies have replaced positions related to visual design with AI tools.
Graduating only to be unemployed is really miserable.
I think using large language models really accelerates mental atrophy. It's like when you use an input method for a long time, it automatically completes words for you, and then one day when you pick up a pen to write, you find you can't remember how to spell the words. However, the main point in the article is that we need to feed high-quality data to large language models. This view is actually a consensus, isn't it? Many agent startups are striving to feed high-quality domain-specific knowledge and workflows to large models.
And if they need to keep their own output out of the system to avoid model collapse, why don't I?
There's this double standard. Slop is bad for models. Keep it out of the models at all costs! They cannot wait to put it into my head though. They don't care about my head.
I don’t think AI is anywhere near the point of replacing humans yet. The main issue here is whether the use of these tools is forced or voluntary. I’ve seen quite a few companies where the boss tries to fully adopt AI productivity tools, but faces strong resistance during implementation.From the employees’ perspective, the boss might be moving too aggressively without considering the practical realities. From the boss’s perspective, it’s frustrating to see the pushback.This tension seems to be a common challenge at the current stage of AI adoption.
Just to add,many people tend to overestimate the power of AI. At least for now, vibe coding doesn’t play a significant role in building complex software.
I recently read a Stack Overflow research report showing that:“Most respondents are not vibe coding (72%), and an additional 5% are emphatic it not being part of their development workflow.”It also noted that in a future with advanced AI, the #1 reason developers would still ask another human for help is “When I don’t trust AI’s answers” (75%).This clearly shows that human developers remain the ultimate
It wont replace humans in the foreseeable future as they can not reason or react to changes they werent trained on. Bosses are jumping on a hype train making decisions in fields they barely have expertise in, which is the frustrating part. They listen to false promises of other "founders". Bosses not listening to their employees always has been a key factor to frustration at work, these businesses have no right to succeed.
Gotta thank AI — it’s keeping my portfolio from collapsing, at least for now . But yeah, I totally see the point: AI investment might be one of the few things holding up the U.S. economy, and it doesn’t even have to fail spectacularly to cause trouble. Even a “slightly disappointing” AI wave could ripple across markets and policy.
A diplomatic passport from a third-world country? ;-)
Seriously, if the stock market is going to plunge, Pepsi stock is also going to plunge. The simplest way to reduce your exposure to the stock market is to shift assets toward cash: sell shares, keep dollars, maybe in the money market rather than just as cash. Dollars are exposed to the risk of inflation (hyperinflation hasn't happened yet in the US but it's so common that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation doesn't even attempt to list all historical episodes of hyperinflation, just dozens of notable ones) so investors commonly try to move to metals to balance that risk. Cryptocurrencies have emerged as an alternative, and they have the advantage of being more portable in emergency evacuation situations.
It is not known whether Satoshi was a theist, but I was surprised at how many Christian fundamentalists there were on Cypherpunks in the early days. So, possibly that was the idea.
One can't time the market, though. Every time in the past, where I thought to myself, "I should diversify away from the US stock market," when I looked back and did the math, I would have lost more money doing that than leaving it invested. The only way I would have come out ahead was if I sold everything the exact right month in 2000, the exact right month in 2008, and the exact right month in 2020. Who knows in advance what that correct month is?
Diversification is a tool for reducing risk, and reducing risk does reduce the expected return of your portfolio. You can make money by running in front of a steamroller picking up pennies. But most people are not risk-neutral.
Interesting read — and honestly, this isn’t unique to the U.S. or Mexico. Bureaucratic inefficiency and siloed systems seem to be universal in government operations. What’s missing isn’t just “digitization,” but true digital transformation — interoperable systems, shared data standards, and accountability built into the process.With AI advancing so fast, I wonder if we’ll see tools or frameworks that can actually help governments move past legacy workflows instead of just automating the same inefficiencies.
The real insight here isn't about interoperability—it's that we've been treating identity as a data integrity problem when it's actually a semantic mapping problem. Giovanni's "F" isn't a bug, it's a feature of systems designed around Anglo naming conventions trying to force-fit multicultural reality into rigid schemas.
Even perfect APIs won't solve this. Names carry cultural context that gets lost in translation between bureaucratic systems. We need identity architectures that embrace semantic ambiguity rather than eliminate it.
What would a name system look like if it was designed for a multicultural world from the ground up?
I strongly agree with your point. I came across an article that tracked SaaS projects launched on PH between January and June 2024. As of now, 91.2% have fewer than 100 active users, and 84.6% haven’t been updated since the month they launched.
The idea is to avoid the cancel / resubscribe dance and make things feel fairer for people with tighter budgets.
Not sure if this is naive or practical — has anyone tried something similar?
reply