Also when earthquake articles make no mention of the magnitude of them. 2000 magnitude 1 quakes is way, way different than just a few magnitude 5 quakes.
Absolutely. Many people don't realize that earthquakes are measured using an exponential scale. A magnitude 8 quake is 10x stronger than a magnitude 7.
Imagine for a second, that you checkin at a Marriott/Hilton/Fairmont and there was a camera in your hotel room. It's amazing it even lasted this long with airbnb.
My question would be around how much does it cost? Maybe give examples of output without a signup. Basically, you're asking people to create an account for an unknown result and cost. I'd also maybe mention something like save X hours vs doing this yourself. What can people get using this that they cannot get with ChatGPT for example? Maybe have a demo video or something that walks people through it.
edit: So, after reading a bit more you crawl the customers website and find seo ideas? I'm not really sure how it works. Maybe have something up front that really walks the person through it.
I like the comic book design of the website. Looks very cool by the way.
I am prioritizing developing core features over adding billing, etc. However, I can see how not knowing what it will cost can be a turn off. I will add a pricing page just to set the expectations.
> I'd also maybe mention something like save X hours vs doing this yourself.
I am not a fan of saying "this will save you X time" or "write article in 5 minutes". It cheapens the product in a way. After all, I don't know how much time it will save you... it depends on how good of a job you were doing before.
Maybe I could add a section that outlines what activities this will do for you?, e.g.
* Finding authoritative articles and quotes
* Writing an outline
* Writing most of the article itself
* Finding articles on your own website to reference (interlinking)
You will still need to do a fair bit of editing if you want high quality output... or you could just wing it.
Will work on these points. Thank you!
> I like the comic book design of the website. Looks very cool by the way.
Not really the money but expected return on the money from all these features being rolled out. You can 100% bet there was major estimations made on return on investment. Everything they are releasing has some AI magic on it now. The last thing you want to see is chaos in a company you're betting the farm on.
In my opinion, I'd say the shortness and lack of details backs up the story that they had no idea. You'd see way more words if a marketing department had it's hands on something like this. This was 100% a get something out asap job.
Just for once I’d like to see such a statement look like, “You sheep probably want a comment on today’s news. We’re not doing that. We’re just content to buy up all the shares you’re panic-dumping. Looking forward to flipping them back to you next week when you panic in the other direction.”
(Assuming they have some plan that gives them the flexibility to trade shares directly on the market like that. I think $GME had something like this?)
It's hilarious that people are commenting about Microsoft being "down". It's up over a $100 per share since the beginning of the year and at an all-time high.
You still can't justify a claim that nobody panic-sold, given what you know. Let's try to stick to claims we have a basis to believe, instead of fighting noise with noise.
A more reasonable claim from your epistemic state could be something like, "There was no major crash from the news, as might be seen in a general panic."
It began the day up 54.75% YTD and ended the day up 50.6% YTD. They've had single-day downswings as large or larger like 30 times this year alone. Microsoft is fine.
No one is saying they aren't fine, but Microsoft has a lot of shares, and shareholders can be very annoying. If Satya didn't make a statement there'd be dozens of Important People breathing down his neck.
Copying what was posted here in case they update or change it:
----
A statement from Microsoft Chairman and CEO Satya Nadella
Nov 17, 2023 | Microsoft Corporate Blogs
As you saw at Microsoft Ignite this week, we’re continuing to rapidly innovate for this era of AI, with over 100 announcements across the full tech stack from AI systems, models, and tools in Azure, to Copilot. Most importantly, we’re committed to delivering all of this to our customers while building for the future. We have a long-term agreement with OpenAI with full access to everything we need to deliver on our innovation agenda and an exciting product roadmap; and remain committed to our partnership, and to Mira and the team. Together, we will continue to deliver the meaningful benefits of this technology to the world.
What would make you think a marketing department would potentially be involved here? Besides the obvious Marketing = Bad connection prevalent here on HN?
I don’t see any verbiage that implies Microsoft had no idea. If Microsoft was the aggressor, of course they would play dumb and disclose as little as possible.
Related posted here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37150862 and has some useful ideas. My suggestion would be to get a second remote job. You know how to have a job.. just get a second remote one. Even if it's for 3-6 months and then you quite. A full second income is amazing.
I'd strongly recommend forgetting about the gig economy. It's a race to the bottom unless you're willing ti put in multi-year effort to build a portfolio so you can stand out and land larger consulting gigs. This is the reason I say if you need fast cash a second job is the fastest path.
Great way to understand how all this works is watching All-In Summit: Bill Gurley presents 2,851 Miles[1]. Basically, regulate your competition into the ground.
Great way to understand how all this works is listening to Behind the Bastards: The Deadliest Workplace Disaster in U.S. History[1]. Basically, don't regulate anything until a bunch of poor people die.
Edit: To elaborate, it's pretty easy to cherry-pick cases of either over and under regulation and use that to "prove" either side of the argument. There's nothing in the Bill Gurley talk that provides any insight into whether AI should be regulated or not because it doesn't directly engage with issues around AI specifically. Instead, it just says: "tech regulation bad".
