The thing is, Apple will have never lost this opportunity. The distribution advantage of the user base is so deep they can basically always implement this at will.

Well, plus a generally technologically illiterate customerbase who believe the time Apple did something was the first time it's ever been done.

Cosmic expansion happens uniformly rather than through a local gravitational pull.

In physics, "we" use the raisin bread analogy where when you bake the bread, the raisins are all getting uniformly distant from each other with no central point of expansion and no obvious sign of pulling in any specific direction such as would be the case for a gravitational effect.

muse is probably an awesome technological innovation and will still completely flop bc it’s a consumer product outside of social from Meta. It’s a solution in search of a problem. I get why the company wants this. I don’t get why any consumer does.

Isn't the functionality just a super-set of what other popular chatbots like chatgpt or claude do? Ie chat interface for llm with various tools on top. It seems like those products have plenty of happy consumers using them, and muse just does that same thing, perhaps with different or more tools.

The problem is no one wants a META agent. so yes LLMs are great. And still no one wants to use a Zuckerberg one.

I don’t get how this differs from any other optimization harness. The problem is clear, but I’m not sure on what this company is doing that is unique to solve it.

You mean like Carney did in January? Trump cannot be shown reason once he has convinced himself his gut feel is correct.

The ideal VC startups are low capex, high ROIC companies.

Energy almost universally requires massive capex to achieve a dime in revenue, and capital intensity never really subsides. YC has funded energy focused startups in the past (eg. Oklo and Helion), but it certainly cannot compete with the kind of scale and ROIC you can achieve in the digital world. Energy is difficult for seed investors.

Ok. It makes sense. YC is not the best place for this kind of companies. Let's see if I understand your point and also to clarify for other people:

- Low capex = the startup doesn't need much money invested in physical assets such as factories, machinery, warehouses, or equipment.

- High ROIC = high Return on Invested Capital. The company generates a lot of profit relative to the capital it needs to operate.

- A VC wants a startup that can grow enormously without requiring enormous amounts of additional capital. YC focus on VC money.

Correct?

Id be more weary of saying I didn't use AI.

People repeat this rhetoric all the time, but I promise you, finance professionals can and do easily migrate to other messaging platforms such as ICE chat. This isn't a moat for BBG

Evidence for this being that BlackBerry Messenger and even AOL Instant Messenger had various amounts of traction during the lifetime of Instant Bloomberg.

Excel succeeds in the business world because users interact with visible data directly on the screen rather than relying on abstract database storage and retrieval.

Non-technical workers can build functional tools rapidly, outperforming traditional software development speeds massively. Engineering CS types completely miss the point on this. If Im making a model for finance I need to see the data live, update fast, get my charts done without messing about with matplotlib etc. Get to solutions and decisions.

Spreadsheets are still prolific bc they enable rapid prototyping, visibility and flexibility that is to this day completely unmatched.

And not a single person cares. What does fully valid even mean anymore?