Made to Stick by Chip & Dan Heath, and Influence by Cialdini are classics for a reason. Influence in particular made it shockingly clear how our environment shapes not only our decision process, but our personality.

The Goal was such a fun read, the solution is always evident in hindsight but I found myself having small "aha" moments over and over.

Yes this works surprisingly well. Just a bit sad we have to block everything coming in by default

Haha yes HN is definitely one of the few untouched gems of the internet. Perfect for tech-related articles, less so for culture, science, politics and global news

Every major global news story pops up here fairly rapidly, and major science, political and many cultural ones get covered. Like unless you're looking for pop star relationship/breakup news or something. Thing is, stuff moves quite fast around here.

I don't follow closely all these benchmarks but I would love to have some idea of the status of models for these specific use cases. Average intelligence is close for each mainstream models, but on writing, design, coding, search, there is still some gaps.

Even if it's not benchmark, a vibe test from a trusted professionnal with a close use case to mine would suffice.

Your point about ecosystem is true, I just switched main main provider from OpenAI to Anthropic because they continue to prove they have a good concrete vision about AI

I don't know about life-changing but to me there are two major benefits that get me really interested:

- Augmenting CLI with specific knowledge and processes: I love the ability to work on my files, but I can only call a smart generalist to do the work. With skills if I want, say, a design review, I can write the process, what I'm looking for, and design principles I want to highlight rather than the average of every blog post about UX. I created custom gems/projects before (with PDFs of all my notes), but I couldn't replicate that on CLIs.

- Great way to build your library of prompts and build on it: In my org everyone is experimenting with AI but it's hard to document and share good processes and tools. With this, the copywriters can work on a "tone of voice" skill, the UX writers can extend it with an "Interface microcopy" skill, and I can add both to my "design review" agent.

As a designer I'm following the space quite closely. In the not-so-distant future, we might skip most visual software and work directly with code. Especially if we have cool transitional solutions like this

I'm still wondering about how this approach would work when conceptualizing flows, systems, or more complex interfaces

I’m in a similar boat. I do like the idea of code as material and this could be a version of that.

I find conceptual work is sending me back to paper and lower fidelity even more these days with AI. The fundamentals thrive with more freeform tools.

There's also a regulatory component. No way hidden ads will be allowed in major markets like the EU.

I could see a sponsored section in the middle of the reply where the LLM just tells of these vendors align with what the user is looking for

Yes definitely most likely thing to happen.

I'm not sure about that. Reports have shown that models from China or Mistral can achieve 80% or more of OpenAI's performance for a fraction of the cost.

If you're tucked in right behind the absolute frontier models, the economics change completely

I'm currently trying both Raycast windows (beta) and Flow Launcher. I've never really used this kind of launcher before (just the highly frustrating Windows main search feature).

- Raycast has a nice UI that can expand to work well with extensions

- Flow is faster to use. With Raycast you often need to enter an extension to finish your action. To launch a scrip on Flow I just type "r [shortcut] -> enter" while Raycast is "quicklinks -> enter -> [shortcut] -> enter. [edit, with minimal setup using aliases, you can have similar speed. See __jonas comment below]

- Performance-wise, Raycast was often eating my RAM, but a dev mentioned it's expected in the beta, they'll fix it for the launch. Otherwise, both feel snappy

- Both seem to have enough community support and extensions

- I never really tried the AI features, I don't know if it's the right place for me to augment my workflow w/ it

Curious about the experience of others with these tools or similar ones

> Flow is faster to use. With Raycast you often need to enter an extension to finish your action. To launch a scrip on Flow I just type "r [shortcut] -> enter" while Raycast is "quicklinks -> enter -> [shortcut] -> enter

That’s surprising to me, since it’s not how it works in the mac version of Raycast.

There you just type the extension name to trigger it, which you can also set an alias for, so I have it set so that if I type “c” then press space I see my list of vscode projects which I can search. “f” goes into file search (I think that’s the default even)

Good point, turns out I was using aliases wrong! It works with spacebar and makes it as easy to use as flow once you set it up.

F is not set as an alias by default tho

Have you tried Everything by Voidtools? I’m curious how these tools compare with that. I like how fast and simple it is.

https://www.voidtools.com/

Nope, sorry. My main use case is app launch, finding settings, and some scripts. I don't use file search that much.

Small point for Flow here again, because you just have to use the prefix doc: to search through your files, whereas on Raycast, you need to set up an alias and enter the extension. Both have file preview