Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jasondigitized's commentslogin

This is the only downside. You really need to curate good content.

I don't know about everyone else's experience but I find Youtube to be pretty good at finding interesting content, especially for music. Curation is necessary but it does work.

Interesting. One of my many many complaints with YTMusic is that it does discovery very poorly. It fills any radio/discovery queue with one or two new songs followed by all the songs already on my playlists.

Other big complaints include no ability to prevent it from substantially using my cell data despite telling it to do everything over wifi. I've taken to just removing network permissions from the app unless I want to add something.


IMO you don’t need curation/algo - you need social network effect where you follow people who repost similar content you like. Your graph grows and if you don’t like something - cut them off. This is how soundcloud works.

I'm not using Youtube Music, just regular free Youtube with an ad blocker.

Works fine for me recommending interesting educational and edutainment content.

I'm quite aggressively removing videos I don't like from my watch history, or flag "don't recommend" channels I know won't be for me. If I'm not careful it'll recommend crap for a while.


Fully agree. There is so much good content and being ad-free is just a really great experience.

Because of basic economics. The opportunity size of AI for NVidia is unlike anything we have ever seen. Of course they pivoted.

They didn't need to do any of that by the way.

I'm gonna need someone smarter than me to show me the numbers on that. Fornite by itself is insanely profitable.

https://www.matthewball.co/all/presentation-the-state-of-vid...

You need an email address to access it but it’s good, if bleak, reading.


A game can be massively popular but many many games fail to hit the mark. Many do not see success and many do not even ship.

Ok, but Fortnite is a massively popular success, even as its popularity slips. Fortnite's run so far could have sustained Epic for years, even without other revenue they get from things like Unreal Engine. Games as a whole may be a risky venture, but we're talking about Epic here; the mystery is not how to succeed in games, but how a company that had an earth-shattering run of success in games is now in such a position.

Just because it's popular, doesn't mean it's financially successful. Take a look at YouTube. They lost money hand over fist for decades.

That's like saying playing baseball must be profitable because of how much money A-Rod made. The returns are skewed.

This. You need to fire your CFO immediately if you don't have billions of dollars in cash after the run you just had on Fortnite.

They should've setup an endowment fund, could've been self sustainable by now.

They could have loads of money and still would need to tighten their belt once usage drops. I could have 100ks in my savings accounts but if my hours / salary was reduced at work, I would still reduce my spending. It's just being smart.

Yes, and that's what a good CFO is hired to do.

The solution is to have the quote manually prepared, entered into the system of record, and then automate the outbound phone call to let the customer know, and agree to the work based on the accurate quote. That's the savings.

So you've saved 30 seconds per customer for a total of 3-10 customers calling per day.

It seems to me that calling the customer to get them to agree on a quote is the most important contact?

It’s like telling a salesman to just enter data into a CRM and trust their livelihood to an AI closer. See how that goes over.


That call is really important. “Do I really need to spend all this right now? Can I just get by with x instead of x,y,z?”

For now I’m not sure it will be efficient to provide models enough context, for one thing, to do it reliably.


Why? Just put it all in the context window.

Yeah, just stuff the entire website and pricing table into the context window.

Documentation rarely reflects how anything is actually done, referred to by good business analysts as 'shadow functions'.

LLMs are already good enough to read corporate email and document shadow functions and hierarchies.

Corporate email documents even less.

No, current LLMs are already good enough to read the subtexts from documents, email, call transcripts where available. They're extremely good at identifying unwritten business practices, relationships, data flows, etc.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: