与「quote」相关的搜索结果

"Everything I touch with my keyboard and mouse, I try to delegate to my bots." Here's my new episode with @poteto and @pengzheng_, the eng and design leads for Grok @bot, where they showed me the 14 bots they use for work and life, including: → A design bot that turns one keyframe into a full user flow → An eng lead bot that manages a team of eng bots → How to trust your bots with more of your work Some quotes from both: "I like to call it the Michelin kitchen…when you say software factory, it has this connotation of mass manufactured slop." "Sometimes I actually don't even look at the PR until after it's landed and then I'm like, 'Oh, okay. Yeah, that looks good.'" "I think it ultimately comes back to trust. First, watch your bot work and correct it. Turn what worked into a skill. Once it nails the task in one shot, make it a routine." 📌 Watch now: Thanks to our sponsors: @meetgranola: AI meeting notes that don’t suck @RiversidedotFM: All-in-one AI studio for podcasts and video

I have to say - for me it started 2 years ago. I remember the moment so well. I was on vacation in Montenegro. Early night. Everyone is asleep and I am on the balcony watching the cruise ships in Kotor bay as the horizon faded to dark. And I think it was Sonet 3.5 (don't quote me). I had just setup a plugin in NeoVim called Avante by @yetone . And it was magic. Coding with AI at the time wasn't the same - I was going function by function. I was accepting diffs one hunk at a time. But I remember that night - from 10 to like 2 in the morning - I built what I thought would have taken me a week (I was rusty and learning the stack). It was an internal tool - a partial JSON parser / repair tool - so you can take half finished JSON and safely turn it into something that would parse. It is more complicated than it sounds. Anyway. I was hooked that day. At the time I was an executive at a Fortune 50, so coding was not in my job description as such. I had hundreds of engineers... but I have to say - it relit my passions, and now as I am (hopefully) building another startup - I still love it. And I still yell at it. And constantly hunt where it is messing up the architecture and adding bloat and.... well you know how it is.

🚨 META JUST UNVEILED THE VR GLASSES 100 grams on your face - about the weight of a deck of cards. Meta says it has “the best display system that we have ever made,” and people in the demo were literally saying “it is like a computer” and “you could edit a whole movie just using the table.” As Mark explained this is cinema, computer, and a game console all in one, with 3D space, virtual screens, hand occlusion, and DisplayPort over USB-C. James Cameron’s reaction is probably the best quote in the whole segment “I’m inspired by what you’ve created. I’d like to see my work in these glasses.” I am completely one shotted these look amazing!

Stunning stat: "Anthropic’s investors are expecting the company to reach a valuation of $2tn when it goes public in the coming weeks. Add in SpaceX, which began trading at $2tn after its IPO in June, and OpenAI, which is considering raising money privately at $1.2tn ahead of a public listing next year, and these companies alone could be worth well north of $5tn. Now compare that with the entire history of IPOs from 1980 to 2025. The 3,365 tech companies that went public in that period were worth a combined $4.1tn when they started trading." While I've written much about AI's transformative potential across sectors, I've always been dubious about how much value hyperscalers can seize enabling that transformation. As I dissect in my recent report on "The AI Trade" ( it's not about user acquisition. OpenAI claims to have over one billion active users across its services and two million businesses using its AI models. Anthropic has claimed to have more than 300,000 business customers. The question is not whether they can bring users to their services, but rather how much average revenue they can generate per customer relative to the price of building and maintaining their models. The cost of compute is inflating at the same time competition is depressing token pricing power. That's a precarious dynamic when so much hinges on the success of two companies. To again quote the report: "It’s hard to overstate how much hinges on these IPOs. As mentioned in the Executive Summary, OpenAI and Anthropic will account for 13% of AWS revenue and 27% of Google Cloud revenue this year. As for Microsoft, OpenAI alone accounts for roughly 70% of its AI-specific revenue ($24.1 billion out of an estimated $34 billion total for the fiscal year ending in June 2026). OpenAI has committed to tens of billions of spending on chips from the likes of Nvidia and Broadcom. Deepening circularity concerns, tech giant earnings growth has been increasingly driven by paper gains in the private-market valuations of Anthropic and OpenAI. In Q2, Amazon, Alphabet, Nvidia, Meta, and Microsoft reported $160 billion in cumulative “other income”, trouncing the $69 billion in “other income” reported in Q1. To quote the FT: “These one-off valuation boosts, derived in large part from enthusiasm around AI, risk distorting the financial picture at a time when investors are closely scrutinizing tech earnings.” If either Anthropic or OpenAI stumble in their IPOs, it’ll hit tech giants on multiple balance-sheet fronts and likely ripple through the US and global economy. A pin-prick popping of the AI bubble may not be our base case, but if a pin is out there, it’s likely the revenue versus spending trajectories of Anthropic and OpenAI." FT link:

🚨SlowMist TI Alert🚨 💸 @BeatXswap Loss: 2,984,557 BTX (~$77,512) 🔍 Root Cause: The `LiquidityVestingConvert` contract calculates BTX quotes via `_calculateQuote()`, which reads `IUniswapV3Pool.slot0()` spot price as the sole oracle. No TWAP protection, no sanity check, no deviation limit. An attacker borrowed 6,000,000 BTX via flash loan, dumped it into the V3 pool to crash `sqrtPriceX96`, then called `deposit()` twice (10,000 + 2,000 USDT), triggering `POSITION_MANAGER.mint()` at the manipulated spot price and draining BTX from LP positions. 📌 Attacker: 0x67B2f08683A735cfE6f6E57fA86909b62218C2a1 📌 Victim: 0x1e647FAADb05f2124BFCcFC003EDc06D1A90bf5D 0x9a7A92240FBAc4030b65A6E61239928d6Bcc716F 📌 Vulnerable Contract: 0x1e647FAADb05f2124BFCcFC003EDc06D1A90bf5D Powered by Tx:

Yi did NOT say that. According to AI, it may come from Fortune’s profile of her. In the article, Eowyn Chen (who worked under Yi) describes how Yi typically answers people who mock her rural Sichuan background: “She tells people, ‘Sure, I came from a crappy background and made good, so why don’t you do the same?’” says Chen. Yi will not say something that arrogant directly. Luck plays a role in "success". The "direct quote" style is misleading. 🙏

everyone calling Reddit dead because ChatGPT stopped citing it is wrong Promptwatch said Reddit's share of ChatGPT citations went from 3.83% to 0.52% when in April it was the most cited domain in ChatGPT the panic is fair if you built your AI visibility plan on Reddit, you'd be worried about it going to waste but almost nobody opened the other dataset Ahrefs looked at 145M US Google results when the "discussions and forums" block shows up, Reddit is still in it about 84% of the time Reddit lost one channel (maybe, it's not definite yet), but it's still showing up in the other one your buyer uses before they've decided anything and nobody has a comparable baseline for the ChatGPT number either: - Promptwatch had Reddit at 3.83% of citations before the drop - Ahrefs, same platform, around the same time, had it at 16.7% - Semrush once put it near 60% yet everyone quoted an 86% collapse off a number the industry measures four different ways and nobody outside OpenAI can actually explain either one. we all rebuilt our strategy around a number one tracker caught Reddit is miserable to market on it takes months of being useful before anyone lets you mention what you built so continue doing that

A director who doesn't come up to the builder's heels makes a four-hour film about him. Yesterday in Venice, Alex Gibney's nearly four-hour documentary "Musk" had its world premiere. It is a classic case of someone who has spent a career telling other people's stories taking on a man who actually builds those stories with rockets, cars, satellites, and infrastructure, not slides. Alex Gibney is an acclaimed documentarian. An Oscar for Taxi to the Dark Side, Emmys for Going Clear on Scientology, high-profile films on Enron, Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos. His specialty is exposing corporations, cults, and frauds. He does it skillfully and with a thesis. The problem starts when he applies the same method to someone who is not selling an illusion, but hardware that either flies or blows up in front of the entire world. Gibney's fuel is controversy. Elon's fuel is the pursuit of truth hard, engineering truth, the kind that either works on the test stand or it doesn't. It would have been enough to make a film based on facts. Instead we got another rut that fits the slogans of provocation: megalomaniac, confidence man, threat to democracy, an AI avatar reciting old quotes, ex-wives, his father, a former partner. Musk said in 2023 it would be a hit piece. After the premiere, a large share of reviewers effectively agreed with him. I don't know about you, but four hours of falsified formulas would bore me. Instead I watch how much Elon has already done. His energy is extraordinary. Tesla changed the car industry. SpaceX brings rockets back. Starlink works. Starship stands on the pad and prepares for the next flight. This is not a PowerPoint. It is steel, fuel, engines, and people who cannot hide failure in the edit suite. A weak documentary like this is a crumb on the shoulder of his jacket. Now it depends on us when and how quickly that blown-off crumb a utopian attention vampire is simply starved of attention. You could list the names of people who tried to take Elon's energy. Energy is the most precious thing we have. Anyone who steals it with slogans, gossip, and a four-hour indictment that excludes the main subject is sowing under his own feet. Gibney: you reap what you sow. If you have a shred of shame, look at the list of Elon's accomplishments. Look at what kind of person he is for the world and what he does around himself so that things get better cars that drive, internet from orbit, rockets that return, attempts at a brain-computer interface, AI that is supposed to be more than another chatbot. You can dislike his tweets, his political alliances. You cannot honestly erase the scale of what was physically built. A good documentarian should stand, at least for a moment, in the shoes of the person he is portraying. Gibney did not just fail to do that. He took a measure cut for Enron and Holmes and held it up to a man who lands rockets. He left Elon's shoes in the edit suite. Elon walked on barefoot and kept building. One man tells stories about the world from an editing chair. The other moves that world. A four-hour film will not change that. At most it will confirm what people who already disliked Musk already believed. Everyone else can blow the crumb off the jacket and keep going. History does not judge a man by the length of a film. It judges him by what is still in the air when the camera has stopped running. Controversy feeds on attention. Building feeds on repetition. One vanishes when you look away. The other keeps flying. You can cut a man together in four hours. You cannot cut a landing together. A documentary can be switched off. The work cannot.