Burnout and depression turned my life upside down a few years ago, I went from an ambitious high-performer to a lucky run if I get out of bed. I remember hating everything related to a career and goals that I used to love, feeling empty inside, really empty, I'm not talking metaphors here. It is a feeling that I do not wish on anyone. With ups and downs, sometimes feeling very accompanied and sometimes very lonely, I managed to recover after many attempts. I managed to love what I do again and change my meaning of success, of what I want and how. Those who have been through it know that it is a before and after. Since my recovery, I decided that helping this not happen to anyone else would be part of my life goal.
I ve noticed two main narratives in how companies view their competitors.
Either it s a fight to the death approach exactly like what we see between Replit and Lovable (though it seems Replit does more of the provoking ) basically: We speak badly about our competition.
As Artificial Intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly ubiquitous, it raises important ethical considerations. AI technologies are increasingly integrated into our daily lives, from intelligent virtual assistants to facial recognition software. However, as the capabilities of AI continue to grow, so too do concerns around issues such as data privacy, algorithmic bias, and accountability. According to Platformer, Microsoft laid off an entire team dedicated to guiding AI innovation that leads to ethical, responsible, and sustainable outcomes last week. I'm not sure this is the right way to go. What s your opinion about this?
I m just getting started on my SaaS journey and, like many beginners, I m facing the classic challenge choosing the right idea to work on.
I feel like I might be overthinking it. On one hand, I just need to dive in and build something to gain experience. But at the same time, I want to ensure I m working on a valuable idea with real potential.
We run 10+ image models plus Veo 3.1 and Seedance 2.0 behind one studio. Until recently every generation record stored the prompt and the output file and nothing about which model produced it. When there was one model that was fine.
With a router it means every quality complaint ends in a shrug. Someone says the face drifted between the image and the video, and I can't tell them whether that was the model, the seed or the upscale step, and I can't reproduce it either because the router might pick differently next time. So the report goes in a doc and dies there.
Writing model, version and the reason the router picked it onto every output has done more for quality than any prompt work we did this year. Not because the models got better. Because complaints stopped being about the product in general and started being about one model in one situation, which is a thing you can actually fix.
The open question for me is whether users should see it. I want to show the model on every output. My cofounder thinks it just gives people something to argue about and moves the conversation off the work. If you route across models, do you expose that or keep it internal?
So as you have already guessed I have a husky. It loves to add some horror movie vibes to my video calls by singing songs of his people. I occasionally see my colleagues' pets during calls, which triggers different reactions of the meeting members ranging from "oooh" to "oh". What's your take on this?
