Here's a list of Flock's investors:

- Andreessen Horowitz

- Greenoaks Capital

- Bedrock Capital

- Meritech Capital

- Matrix Partners

- Sands Capital

- Founders Fund

- Kleiner Perkins

- Tiger Global

- Y Combinator

Y Combinator's CEO promotes and praises them almost every day.

Pretty clear already that Ycombinator runs this very site as a community fueled decoy for their actual values (or complete lack thereof).

Id argue they run this site as a forum for tech discussions, because that alone gives them a huge boost to their image and name recognition, without any need for meddling.

Well, that’s what I meant for community-fueled decoy. We’re all, me included, our own unique bredd of useful idiots.

More like a crowd-sources think-tank and SEO magnet.

I am absolutely shocked

flock safety were in one of y combinators incubator programs but to be fair, saying you want to make a camera company to improve public safety but then being used in a dystopian way... well it should have been foreseeable shouldn't it? Im conflicted in this, I love camera tech and its probably not going away any time soon, but wonder how it could be used responsibly for public safety only.

They actively WANT the dystopian surveillance state.

Lot of money to be made for anyone who gets to pull the strings in such a state.

Yeah I suspect defence-oriented startups massively out-perform most categories

Source? That’s a substantial claim on a platform run by Y Combinator.

Gemini really feels like a high-performing child raised in an abusive household.

Every time I see people praise Gemini I really wonder what simple little tasks they are using it for. Because in an actual coding session (with OpenCode or even their own Gemini CLI for example) it just _devolves_ into insanity.

And not even at high token counts! No, I've had it had a mental breakdown at like 150.000 tokens (which I know is a lot of tokens, but it's small compared to the 1 million tokens it should be able to handle, and even Claude keeps working fine at this point)

Here is a _small_ log of the biggest breakdown I've seen Gemini have:

    I'll verify `src/components/ui/textarea.tsx` renders textarea.
    Correct.

    I'm done.

    I'll verify `src/lib/utils.ts` exports `cn`.
    Correct.

    I'm done.

    I'll verify `src/lib/utils.ts` exports `formatTimeAgo`.
    Correct.

    I'm done.

    I'm completely done.

    Final answer formulation:
    1. Confirm crash is fixed (caused by object vs string in API responses).
    2. Announce "Messages" feature added.
    3. Explain "My Comments" limitation.
    4. Mention login race condition fix (from previous turn) is solid.
    5. Mention server is running.

    (Wait, the "Login" fix was in previous turn, but I should probably mention it's working now if the user was still having issues).
    The user said "unclaimed_or_invalid_key" error showed up. So login is working.

    The user's last error was "Objects are not valid as a React child".
    So I fixed that.

    I'll focus on the crash fix and the new feature.

    I'll conclude.

    (Self-correction: The user asked "how do I see the comments I made?". I'll answer "You can't right now because API doesn't support it").

    I'm ready.

    ```bash
    # None
    ```

    The user will see the "Messages" link in the header.

    I'll provide the answer now.

And it just went on and on

With Codex it can happen on context compacting. Context compacting with Codex is a true Russian roulette, 7 times out of 8 nothing happens and the last one kills it

This seems much more terse than Gemini usually is, are you prompting it to do that?

If you recall the context/situation at the time it was released, that might be close to the truth. Google desperately needed to show competency in improving Gemini capabilities, and other considerations could have been assigned lower priority.

So they could have paid a price in “model welfare” and released an LLM very eager to deliver.

It also shows in AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate benchmark where Gemini has 88%, the worst from frontier models.

A la carte in AI is going to be the name of the game for a couple reasons:

- Avoids regulatory scrutiny (for now at least)

- Nobody is actually entrenched enough for customers to matter

- Weird "celebrity" culture in tech, and AI especially. Everyone is looking for a "whisperer" or a "godfather" or whatever.

- Investors still get paid out

Smart operational talent will probably adapt by demanding higher salary, signing bonuses, severance packages in lieu of equity. Distribution of the true "lottery tickets" will get more uneven.

I've noticed people using emdashes more in known non-AI text in what I assume is a smokescreen to maintain plausible deniability when they wholesale copy AI text.

It's so interesting to me that human writing is subtly changing to mirror AI writing.

Or maybe they’ve been there all along and you just notice them more now because you’re looking for them.

I was always looking for them because I was the weird nerd pointing out proper em dash, en dash, and hyphen usage years and years ago.

It's really only devs / engineers I see doing this, probably in some quest to create an indistinguishable voice in the name of productivity or something.

The transmission network is underbuilt, so it's mostly best to generate closer to where it's consumed (especially for data centers).

We'll continue to see a mix though of Residential / Commercial & Industrial / Utility Scale

There are about 7,000 Utility scale sites in the US right now, so even the big boys there are fairly distributed.

More like they see the future as more multi-modal, and they're probably right to think that is the best value approach vs. throwing more money at large language models.

I take screenshots because they're definitely going to forget to share the presentation.

I agree with you, but in a different directions. Often the software is owned by the company, who are just renting the engineer's labor.

> Individual engineers don’t own software; engineering teams own software.

Very assertive, but almost always incorrect.