I remember this company from the very beginning. I was very confused by them, but just the other day they sent an email saying they had hit $100MM ARR and $125MM run rate.

Who is paying? No clue, must be big in China.

I skipped going to their hackathon :')

Had an identical reaction to that $100m email. I decided to try it again with the browser extension. My verdict is it is better than ChatGPT Atlas for the agent mode, so I see use cases for it.

But I am still surprised it's at $100mm ARR. I had thought the company had died after their initial hyped launch and didn't see anyone talking about or using the company at all since then...and we play around with a lot of AI tools. I wonder who their customers are.

I think FUD is working on Meta coming from their archrival Bytedance.

Bytedance recently launched a similar product in China and caused quite a stir, local phone brands are jostling for partnerships, the AI agent phone.

Meta probably don't want to miss the next thing, even if it turned out to be a dud.

How many people get scammed every day on X because the verification badge is a "Spend $1-5" badge?

This was especially plain to see in the crypto side of twitter.

Platforms cannot make statements on the legitimacy of a user without incurring some level of responsibility, regardless if it's "obvious" that a verified badge simply means that you've spent a couple dollars.

The average internet user is closer to your grandmother than you or me, and that is who these laws are meant to protect.

>Platforms cannot make statements on the legitimacy of a user without incurring some level of responsibility, regardless if it's "obvious" that a verified badge simply means that you've spent a couple dollars.

So what's the right level of "responsibility"? Is letsencrypt issuing certificates to websites (which shows a lock icon in browsers) also fooling grandma into sending over her credit card details? What about EV certificates from a few years ago, where you paid ~$300/yr for a green lock? Should the EU get in the business of regulating what levels of verification are required to show lock/checkmark icons?

To continue this train of thought, what happens when the EU decides that unverified users must be hidden by default and can only be accessed by direct lookup?

X users would finally come to the realization that they own nothing and support an entirely unprincipled service?

It will end like Germany where to put anything on the Internet your physical address must be visible.

This is what they've been pushing for with app stores.

Not true. Personal and family matters do not need an impress.

You might want to read Rundfunkstaatsvertrag (RStV), (§ 55 Abs. 1): "Anbieter von Telemedien, die nicht ausschließlich persönlichen oder familiären Zwecken dienen, haben folgende Informationen leicht erkennbar, unmittelbar erreichbar und ständig verfügbar zu halten: Namen und Anschrift, bei juristischen Personen auch Namen und Anschrift des Vertretungsberechtigten."

Google translate: " Providers of telemedia services that are not exclusively for personal or family purposes must keep the following information easily recognizable, directly accessible and permanently available: name and address, and in the case of legal entities, also the name and address of the authorized representative. "

> Personal and family matters do not need an impress.

Does advocating for one political position or another count as a personal or family matter?

An actual human employee at Twitter vouching for someone’s existence seems far more reputable than being able to purchase a Visa gift card in a convenience store.

Verification was “this account is who it says it is”. Not “this account has $10 to spare”.

I remember it being just a "good boy" badge.

People routinely had their checkmark removed when they said something controversial.

> People routinely had their checkmark removed when they said something controversial.

It was not indeed happening "routinely".

https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/15/16658600/twitter-verific...

Still something that defeats the purpose, no?

A verification badge should be something that says "this person indeed is who they claim to be" not "they can spend a couple of bucks a month" nor "we like him enough to give them a checkmark". Both are extremely unhelpful. The latter probably even more unhelpful since it is very subjective.

Verification came with moderation tweaks for high-profile accounts to combat things like brigading via mass abuse reports. That's why consistently bad behavior tended to lose the check.

Probably should've been two different flags, but it wasn't.

That's a very outdated algorithm, which is why X was willing to open source it.

So campaign for an update.

Not so good for taxpayers.

Basically irrelevant to taxpayers. Their salaries or triple their salaries will add up to a difference of a couple dollars on the average tax bill. Doge didn't actually cut any of the big expenses. It was only intended to cut the effective things.

It was never about saving money for the tax payers! They voted for this.

It was but the system is too corrupt

Which is also them

> Please forward your next raise to me, since it will only raise your taxes.

Joking aside that's not really how taxes work (in the USA anyway).

A raise might move you into a higher top marginal tax rate, but only the money you earn above that new bracket threshold gets taxed at the higher rate, everything below the threshold continues to get taxed at the same rate as before.

Raises don't increase your taxes (though you might end up with a slightly higher top tax rate solely on the new money you weren't making at all before).

A date is given and then after that, the gift cards are worthless.

Delaware Ruling: https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=389200

I love it, this is great. Thanks for posting!

Hack reveals that startup is doing exactly what it said it was doing

Okay, is this just an ad then?

I find ChatGPT's voice to text to be the absolute best in the world, nearly perfect.

I have constant frustrations with Gemini voice to text misunderstanding what I'm saying or worse, immediately sending my voice note when I pause or breathe even though I'm midway through a sentence.

There's a huge difference between internal and external reporting from an effort and benefit perspective.