Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | takklz's commentslogin

This is actually super interesting use case for AI.

It’s no secret that corporate litigation take a significant amount of time and money in lawyers fees (corporate attorneys are expensive obviously). But if you can navigate a case Pro Se via a AI does the cost burden on the corporation effectively turn the tables on the ROI calculation.


I remember where I wanted an intel pentium 4 back in the day so bad!


Same thought I had. Almost everything piece of technology that I use is broken in some way. UI bugs, connection issues, missing obvious features, missing non obvious features that might be specific to me, terrible UI, etc etc.

If AI is so useful that it can fully replace engineers or other humans, why aren’t products next level amazing?

If the barrier to entry for these high margin tech companies becomes so low that they no longer even need employees, isn’t the next step to compete on quality?


Because products never become next level amazing. Hardware got so fast and yet most software keeps getting bloated. Given a choice between writing near perfect software and cramming more features, almost all companies cater to more features (except in some rare domains or cases). Both because the latter is easier and because that's what people demand (not by their words but by their expressed preferences).


The market has reached an equilibrium of the minimum quality a business can get away with before customers switch away. Customers usually prioritize time to market or price before quality. There’s still a niche for excellent quality tech but you will pay much more for it.


1. Software issues are not merely technical, they’re human. Someone has to care about the issue and prioritize it and get it fixed. 2. Many products don’t compete on software because there are more substantive market forces at play.

AI won’t fundamentally alter either of these facts.


https://youtu.be/KRxe2Gw1F0k

Kinda aligns with what you’re saying


The rank and file equity pitch is quickly falling apart…


Think it started that way... I'm currently in a vesting/allocation situation where the incentive is to drive the share price down.


Geeeeeze


Always has been


This.

Character.ai reached out to me for an opportunity, but they've already been carved up.

I think it's great that the rank and file got some of their equity cash-out (based on the other comment), but I imagine it isn't an attractive prospect as a start-up to join at this point.

I just ignored the recruiter. I can't imagine their would be a second liquidity event.


Isn’t the 409a valuation FMV? I thought that the whole point of the 409a valuation was to find FMV? Do you mean par value?


My two cents…

1) They buyout the shares. If they don’t want to do that then…

2) Sell the company.

If either of these can’t happen the company is dead and everyone parts ways. It’s as simple as that. No free rides here.


What? No. A departing founder doesn't necessitate either a buyout or an immediate sale. This happens all the time.


Sorry, you’re right. There should be a third option

3) You keep the shares and hope for the best outcome. (If they don’t want you to then go back to 1 or 2)z


No, you don't.


You don’t keep the shares?


You don't have recourse to force a sale, buyout, or wind-down of the company.


This is a joke right? Seed investors will get 10-30% of a company for under a million dollars which will be blown through in less than a year. That’s means they’re a drag on the cap table right?


The juice has to be worth the squeeze. No sense in fighting against fiduciary duty, minority shareholder oppression, etc., etc. unless there is some sort of value there. This usually means a successful exit before taking action.


I think we're saying the same thing --- that none of this matters, just walk away with the vested shares and be a friend to the company. Diluting his founder shares in subsequent rounds is going to be a nonevent, and diluting him to zero in an acquisition --- unless it's a seller's market or a bidding war --- may be as well. It's just not worth worrying about; I think the only real question here might be "do I take a buyout if offered", and this person is nowhere near that yet.


Ahhh yes same thing


I've listened to so many CEOs in various industries (not just tech) salivating at the potential ability to cutout the software engineering middle man to make their ideas come to life (from PMs, to Engineers, to Managers, etc.). They truly believe the AI revolution is going to make them god's gift to the world.

I on the other hand, see the exact opposite happening. AI is going to make people even more useful, with significant productivity gains, in actuality creating MORE WORK for humans and machines alike to do.

Leaders who embrace this approach are going to be the winners. Leaders who continue to follow the hype will be the losers, although there will probably be some scam artists who are winners in the short term who are riding the hype cycle just like crypto.


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

Search: