18 ms·
AI startup claims to automate app making but actually just uses humans
- jakozaur 7y agoMajority of AI startups are starting with manual approach to generate training data set for future algorithms... Plus it is a faster way to validate demand for given business model.
- andr 7y agoI think demand for VC-subsidised labor and real estate will always be high.
- thepaperone 7y agoThe majority of AI startups use AI instead of a glorified outsourcing house to manually do what the entire purpose of the business model claims it is doing. But I guess i'm expecting too much from an Indian startup.
- charliepark 7y agoThat second paragraph is unkind, unnecessary, and unwelcome.
- notyourday 7y agoSo their founders should be charged with securities fraud and go to jail if they do not tell the investors that it is what they are doing.
- withusx5 7y agoAre there any proven examples of a company doing this (starting with a manual approach), receiving investment, and eventually developing a working AI product?
- pushtheenvelope 7y agoseems like many self-driving car startups follow this model?
- nordiccoder2 7y agoThere is no such thing as a self-driving car, and there won't be for at least 20 more years.
- bananocurrency 7y agothanks! that's clearly what the above comment was asking. . .
- freehunter 7y agoDepends on how you define AI. If you're talking hands-off, learned-from-scratch ML and deep learning. I'm not sure. If you're talking "used a human to learn the steps and then slowly automated those steps", then you're describing basically every company that's ever existed.
- EpicEng 7y ago>If you're talking "used a human to learn the steps and then slowly automated those steps", then you're describing basically every company that's ever existed. So, obviously not that definition then....
- RosanaAnaDana 7y agoThat's a pretty weak definition then. Might be your issue right there.
- zaroth 7y agoThere was a fairly hyped scheduling assistant which had human intervention to start... Ah here [1] it is, X.ai. [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11520681 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11520681 * Interestingly, searching on Google for “x.ai human” lead me back to the HN discussion as the 4th link! I’m seeing HN discussion surface in organic search results a lot more lately.
- rgrieselhuber 7y agoDon’t they all?
- kahlonel 7y agoSmells like Theranos. It's surprising how easy it is to fool VCs these days.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- saagarjha 7y agoAt least it can't literally kill people…
- jbverschoor 7y agoStress kills people
- saagarjha 7y agoThat's true of any job, though.
- izzydata 7y agoOther than the scale of funding and being medical related which were the wild parts about the Theranos scandal.
- mkagenius 7y ago> Duggal “was telling investors that Engineer.ai was 80% done with developing a product that, in truth, he had barely even begun to develop.” Due diligence? I mean, I understand VCs are not the smartest bunch but if you are investing $30M, please do the due.
- papito 7y agoMust be easy money, then.
- goatinaboat 7y agoRemember Pixelon? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixelon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixelon
- manigandham 7y agoVCs use portfolio theory. Quantity over quality. Due diligence takes too much time, effort and money that can be better spent just getting into another deal.
- perfmode 7y agoan apparatus of justification when i played counter strike we called it spray and pray i should call it the portfolio theory of ballistic delivery
- TuringNYC 7y ago>> VCs use portfolio theory. I dont buy this argument. I used to help manage a large portfolio. Portfolio theory does not mean that you can put in garbage and magically get more than garbage (actually, it did with CDOs, since they were tranched, but even that ended up tragic if you recall 2008.) Portfolio theory, esp with A-round and beyond VC where your portfolios are smaller (~15 to 30 entities) requires due diligence.
- manigandham 7y agoYou don't know it's garbage. Disqualification is easier than qualification. Funds say "no" to the obviously bad or incompatible. Whether something is a "yes" takes research and is never certain. The entire game is picking the winners so how much are you going to dedicate to predicting that (which is massively unpredictable) vs just investing in another shot that may be a winner.
- flixic 7y agoI wouldn’t see it as a problem if human actions were systematically recorded into a structured dataset to be used as training data. But it seems from the article that the labor is not used for this purpose at all.
- xenocyon 7y agoSpeaking more generally, I do think it is a systemic problem in the world of AI that we have to rely so much on human-labeled data, often done by low-paid workers in other countries (like Amazon's Mechanical Turk) or harvested off friction deliberately inserted into the human experience (like CAPTCHA). The AI promise was that eventually the need for human labeling would end, but the curve currently is going in the opposite direction and it's reasonable to question whether it will ever reverse.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- nordiccoder2 7y agoAI is the biggest fraud of the 21st century. Especially Deep Learning. Deep Learning is a bubble that has no application in reality. And I mean NONE. Even in cutting edge FAANG companies that claim to use modern AI techniques, Deep Learning is barely used. Because it's simply not reliable enough for real datasets. Classical statistical techniques, along with human domain expertise are what runs the world. Not new-fangled hyped up stuff.
- toxik 7y agoThis is absurdly wrong, DL is used in industry all the time.
- nordiccoder2 7y agoShow me one example where Deep Learning is used in production?
- scotradamus 7y agoSee my comment above. Image processing alone has saved millions of dollars in engineering hours alone.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- sgt101 7y agogoogle translate ?
- scotradamus 7y agoI dont really agree with your comment. DL is used heavily in the semi industry for image segmentation, defect classification, simulation speed cut-down, and plasma optimization. It's been a game changer, saving engineers up to 30% of their time.
- ajross 7y ago
- tiborsaas 7y agoProbably the AI part is in the configurator, at most spec generation. Development is still done by humans. https://imgur.com/a/hlsALdj https://imgur.com/a/hlsALdj So a fancy new SAP but with cheap consultants.
- lawlessone 7y agoprobably automated the selection of templates in Android Studio and xcode ,lol.
- areyouroot 7y agoI could imagine how their conversations with investors are going. “When we said we use AI we meant An Indian”
- RosanaAnaDana 7y agoYou just made me spit protein shake onto my keyboard. You gonna buy me a new keyboard?
- pdonis 7y ago"The company claims its AI tools are “human-assisted,” and that it provides a service that will help a customer make more than 80 percent of a mobile app from scratch in about an hour" By the 80/20 rule, that would no doubt be the 80 percent that takes only 20 percent of the time to write; the remaining 20 percent that the tools can't do is what takes 80 percent of the time to write.
- sbuccini 7y agoIs this securities fraud?
- TrackerFF 7y agoOne thing I've noticed in fundraising is that many potential investors almost expect you to have some AI-driven solution. Many don't even know what AI is, and would't be able to sniff out bullshit no mater how much due diligence there's involved. Dumb money is flowing in, as long as you have a great pitch and sleek presentation.
- ng12 7y agoAny sufficiently advanced statistical model is indistinguishable from AI, at least for the purpose of VC dollars.
- hzia 7y agoAt GitStart we use a global pool of devs and mentioned that upfront. We have still deployed a ton of models to improve quality and SLAs, but embrace our human nature upfront. This is bad faith to the extreme.
- bit_4l 7y agoSo they feed their AI with food instead of data
- omarhaneef 7y agoFor all those people asking why the VCs did not catch this: what sort of diligence would you do? I don't know the company or the details. Assume two scenarios: 1. The target company is willing to lie, fabricate code, mix in tensorflow etc. 2. The company will not outright lie, and will answer honestly. However, they are very optimistic about their chances, and about their ability to deliver some sort of AI-enabled solution. Right now they have -- let's hypothesize -- some sort of funnel and they route bits of code to different developers. They think they will replace some of it. They are using various AI libraries. Suppose you believe that even if the AI won't eventually code the whole app from scratch, it will make huge strides in certain areas that we don't even know about. These strides will dramatically reduce the cost of making an app (eventually, you believe). Suppose you think that this company is basically an exploration of those areas. In other words, be generous to the diligence undertaker. Now, how would you know? What steps would you take to that you suspect these people did not? (Because this is the internet and no one knows for sure: this is a real question, and not a rhetorical attack on people asking why VCs were "tricked")
- gowld 7y agoIt's not an unsolvable problem. Software is much easier to read than to write. It's much easier to see if something works than to make it yourself.
- omarhaneef 7y agoYes, but let's say they are just exploring the problem but they haven't solved it. You can see that they are breaking the problem into various cost estimates, and other features, and just running a simple regression to figure out which features they should target for automation. The problem with ML is that you don't know now if it will work. You just have an intuition that, eventually one of these areas will be able to be automated. You notice that their approach to the front end is to make various modules (log in etc) that the AI can automatically deploy in various starter packages. Kind of simplistic at the moment, but maybe it will yield something?
- mLuby 7y ago>Software is much easier to read than to write If you mean software is easier to use than create, sure. But if you mean it's easier to understand existing code than write new code, countless rewrites suggest it's not so simple.
- vagsmith 7y agoso if humans do it, is it called 'Organic Intelligence' which could then be called 'Artisanal Intelligence' aka AI.
- onlyrealcuzzo 7y agoHa! This company tried to recruit me a little bit ago. The CTO walked me through the business model, and it was pretty obvious they were just a typical agency. I pointed that out, and he got defensive and tried changing subjects. In their defense, there is a slight twist in that they subcontract to hundreds of other agencies when those agencies have additional capacity. Essentially, they arbitrage on that. But, yeah, the pitch that they use AI to build apps -- it's pretty ridiculous. They don't. Even with a very open mind to that phrasing, it's still a huge stretch.
- rohan404 7y agoDisclaimer - I'm a VP E at Engineer.ai To clarify, while we intend to use AI to solve a variety of different problems, we're not using it for actual code synthesis (ie. building apps). Instead we are leveraging code reusability and programmatic stitching/merging for our software assembly line. In addition to that, we are leveraging various AI/ML techniques throughout the rest of the product development lifecycle, for areas such as pricing/specing/ideation, infrastructure management/scalability, code reusability itself and matching, creator (developer/QA/design) resource matching, sequencing and dependency prioritization, and more.
- golemiprague 7y agoSince when engineering use the word "leveraging"? any sentence with this word is marketing fluff and should be treated with suspicion
- smt88 7y agoYeah, none of that sounds like AI. It sounds like standard features of IDEs and PaaS. I can't imagine you have a programmatic way to save much time on pricing/specinf/ideation because machines can't do that yet. Also, the clear message of the company was "AI writing code that would otherwise be written by humans". Again, would strongly suggest you stop posting anything about this situation without consulting a lawyer. Based on your HN posts, you can't claim ignorance anymore.
- codesushi42 7y agoGood grief. When will people wake up and realize that AI today is just capable of "curve fitting"? Yes, that is a bit of a simplification. But not far off. Neural networks depend on back propagation. They are really just another type of optimizer for maximum likelihood, using gradient descent. They work better on high dimensional, non linear data than other methods before. But if the function you are attempting to model is non differentiable, neural networks won't help you. They certainly aren't capable of performing magic tricks like writing an app for you.
- navigatesol 7y ago>They certainly aren't capable of doing magic tricks like writing an app for you. It's the money-men that need to realize it. Practitioners know that it's simply rebranded statistical methods. The usage is exactly the same. That said, some of the things these guys offer are useful; but branding it as "AI" is another story. By the way, is SoftBank going to implode, or what?
- EGreg 7y agoSoftbank implode? Why?
- sgarman 7y agoPresumably the OP is referring to the insane amount of money Softbank has invested in the AI space.
- navigatesol 7y agoBecause they are a massive fund throwing money into every half-baked idea coming out of Silicon Valley? https://www.zdnet.com/article/softbank-group-looking-to-ride-ai-unicorns-into-the-future/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/softbank-group-looking-to-ride... That image was copped form an investor presentation. How can anyone take that seriously?
- MiroF 7y agoI get the backlash against the hype, but to suggest that DL is simply "rebranded statistical methods" is just wrong. Yes, backprop existed before the recent explosion, that doesn't mean they're haven't been major leaps forward.
- plexiglass 7y agoWizard of Oz prototypes aren't meant to scale...
- Maro 7y agoCouple of comments: 1. Fake it 'til you make it is pretty accepted in startup world. It's only a problem if you don't actually make it. If you do, then you're a hero---even if you made wildly unrealistic projections initially [and got lucky]. It's kindof unfair, but nobody said life is fair :) 2. Most software people (like me) assume that due diligence goes deep into software. I've been through DDs at several companies, including my own startup: it's not that deep. I would say growth metrics, financials, legal structure, executive team is more important. 3. If you haven't read the Theranos story, read it. It's a good example what can happen in the extreme, edge case.
- smt88 7y ago"Fake it til you make it" should not extend as far as lying to your investors. If "fake" for this company meant that they told customers there was AI and there wasn't, no big deal. Customers agree to a service at a certain price. Why do they care how the company accomplishes it? Investors, however, do care about whether cost-saving "AI" works today vs. in 2045.
- KaoruAoiShiho 7y agoThis is yet another black mark on softbank. Seriously? This should be day 1 of DD for anyone looking into any AI companies.
- RocketSyntax 7y agoSo it's an "I" startup? Almost like you get more than you paid for, haha.
- linker3000 7y agohttps://xkcd.com/2173/ https://xkcd.com/2173/
- rohan404 7y agoDisclaimer - I'm a VP E at Engineer.ai We actually wrote a blog post a little while ago that might answer a lot of the questions I'm seeing here: https://blog.engineer.ai/a-little-bit-about-ai-and-more-straight-from-the-builders-mouth/ https://blog.engineer.ai/a-little-bit-about-ai-and-more-stra...
- smt88 7y agoThis post doesn't clear much up. The things you describe that are done by AI sound like project bootstrappers, libraries, or code-gen (in an IDE). None of those require "AI". I just ran a tool that bootstrapped most of a CRUD app for me. Was it AI? No, because the program I ran didn't do any app-specific coding. My honest advice is to talk to a lawyer and get this company off your resume ASAP.
- caymanjim 7y agoThe HN title is "AI startup that raised $30m claims to automate app making just uses humans". That's a painful and confusing sentence. The real title is "This AI startup claims to automate app making but actually just uses humans". Can someone set a more grammatical and accurate title?
- jshowa3 7y agoVC funding needs to stop. It's a complete cancer on the software industry. All this money going towards half-baked promises that are completely overvalued, only to fund companies for decades that never turn a profit. Maybe I'll hire an animator or something and go to VC firms and ask them for money by showing them an animation of a new flashy product I've never designed. Better than working an honest living it seems.
- PopeDotNinja 7y agoIf I were using that company & found out after the fact that they were mostly people, I might feel a little misled, but I also kind of wouldn't care. AI is a hot buzzword, but what I really care about is can I input resources (time, money, unpolished diamonds, whatever) in one end of your black box and get predictable results out the other end. If the answer is yes, do whatever you want (in an ethical manner). Whatever you're building, whether it's powered by people, software, IBM Watson, or free range chickens pecking buttons for treats, I'm happy if it works at a price I care to pay. Until we've truly built self-replicating machines, I just assume whatever you're selling me requires a lot of people to stay competitive anyway. There's no farm-to-table AI raised by AI farmers yet.
- braythwayt 7y agoSo, question: Why is this fraud, but Uber isn't? This company claims they're using humans to build apps while they develop an AI platform out of hand-wavium. Uber claims they're using humans to drive cars while they develop self-driving cars out of hand-wavium. Seems like the same model to me.
- RosanaAnaDana 7y agoYeah. This gives me about 0 pause. Imo personal opinion, 'AI' at this point is about augmentation of human action to reduce costs (time, materials, human attention, compute, etc), and actually, if you know what you're doing, it works and can make you money. My group works extremely heavily in this space. We use a combination of human annotation and ML to speed up human annotation and improve the products of the ML component. Rinse, wash hands, recur until 95% of predictions are 95% accurate or better. Use ML to find the 5% of predictions that aren't up to snuff and lay hands on them (this is the part where you have to pay people). There is nothing shameful about including humans in the process.
- braythwayt 7y agoWell, it just goes to show you, it's always something — if it ain't one thing, it's another.
- Nasrudith 7y agoTruth and the fact one is about goals vs what they are currently doing. Having unrealistic goals isn't fraud if everything is disclosed properly but making claims about what you have now is. Claiming that you plan on researching the cure for cancer while you flunked high school biology and plan to do your research by trying to research ancient books would be an extraordinarily stupid investment but if you applied the money towards said fool's errand there would be no fraud there. Claiming you have invented robots when they are really just metal suits with hired people inside would be fraud.
- uasm 7y agoI like where this is going. Almost daily now, we're seeing reports of "AI startups/companies/products/features" getting unmasked. Technical people knew it all along, but corporate-speak, prefabricated demos, half-baked products and puff pieces were slowly inflating that bubble. Glad it's bursting.
- mikeash 7y agoDid they update their web site? Because as it stands now, it’s clear that they‘re a standard agency connecting developers to people who want work done, with some vague stuff about AI helping to match them.
- xenadu02 7y agoAny language or system sufficiently detailed to accurately describe the steps necessary to solve the problem turns into a programming language. A very large number of companies have tried to automate software development with little success. What is supposed to make these folks special?
- orf 7y ago> The company was sued earlier this year by its chief business officer, Robert Holdheim, who claims the company is exaggerating its AI abilities to get the funding it needed to actually work on the technology. According to Holdheim, Duggal “was telling investors that Engineer.ai was 80% done with developing a product that, in truth, he had barely even begun to develop.” Ouch.
- modi15 7y agoContrarian view. Read the article top to bottom - there is no fraud here. This is exactly how it should be done. VC's dont know shit about AI and you cant expect them to. Anyone building a cutting edge AI product, SHOULD NOT build it before selling it product. First use humans to build/sell the product and then in parallel train the AI to take over. Often the training phase is best done using the human taskers. The CEO - 'Sachin Dev Duggal' is doing it exactly right. Anyone claiming otherwise, including the journalist who wrote this post, don't know what they are talking about.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> Anyone building a cutting edge AI product, SHOULD NOT build it before selling it product. If they are selling a service and AI is part of the blsckt-box implementation, sure. If “its being done automatically by a machine” is your selling point, and you haven't built a product that does that when you sell the product, it's fraud, pure and simple.
- modi15 7y agoIf we are talking pure and simple, ALL business takes what you would call 'fraud' to get there.
- lazyjeff 7y agoI'm pretty sure we already all knew they were using humans 9 months ago. Take a look at the comments here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18391280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18391280 It seems like they were fairly explicit about it, so I'm not sure if the outrage is justified. komali2 even noted explicitly, "There doesn't appear to be AI involved. A very good business model, but no AI."
- madamelic 7y agoAs someone who used to work at one of these places: shocking. It pretty much always is this way. They pretend it is AI, then when it comes out that it is pretty much all humans, they pivot to admitting it is "human-assisted". The humans were truly creating data that was being fed back in, that wasn't a lie. Engineers would have to poke at the bot a bit to get it out of corners it would get itself into occasionally. The big issue is the VC nature of the business. You are fighting a shot clock on an extremely hard problem. So you have to rush things out to get to the next step, then realize at the next step all of the data you collected, oops, can't be used because there was a small issue. Or maybe they realize a model was inaccurate and has to be rebuilt. I truly don't think a VC-funded true AI company is possible, especially for hard and fairly unbounded problems (speech is one thing, engineering is just... that's insane). If someone made a sustainable AI company that could run infinitely, that company would have a huge shot due to that financial position.
- goatinaboat 7y agoYou could call it “artificial artificial intelligence”.
- crazygringo 7y agoYup, for many years that was Amazon Mechanical Turk's actual marketing slogan. I haven't seen them use it lately, but I might have missed it somewhere.
- zomg 7y agotheir investors should have clarified what the "A" in AI stood for -- actual intelligence! :)
- mandeepj 7y agoSimilar approach used by a lot of self-proclaimed self-driving car companies. They have a driver and an engineer in the front seats but can't stop from saying we have self-drivings cars on the streets :-) . Also, the same pattern with Cloud hosted companies. It might be true these days but back in the day - a lot of them were claiming to be hosted in the Cloud to look cool but actually, they were using colo data centers.
- Inu 7y agoThey already tried this kind of thing in the late 18th century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turk
- gumby 7y agoI was a going to register "soylent.ai" and put up a roll of shame but the ai registrars charge an arm and a leg. Perhaps someone else will.
- m-p-3 7y agoThey took "fake it till you make it" to another level.
- lordnacho 7y agoThis reminds me of a couple of KYC companies, the ones that help you check a user's passport and other docs. They talk a lot about algos, then when they demoed it to me it comes out that they actually send my picture to India for a human to look at. There's literally 24h service with real people there doing the "image recognition".
- qaq 7y agoPeople are very creative at spinning consulting shops as AI software something or other to get a higher PE. The most prominent example being Palantir.
- sajan45 7y agoThey contacted me for a Software Engineer position, 2 months back by them. I checked Glassdoor review, majority of those are stating that CEO is not a person you will like to work with and several of them saying it is just manual labor, no AI, everything they market is fake. I am glad I trusted those reviews.
- sebringj 7y agoI was attempting something like this but the company paying me to do it lost patience around 30 days where I was only able to identify widgets visually from mockups from past training data. This was a nice step but going to know what to do with those widgets contextually got pretty rough.
- rightbyte 7y agoYou had 30 days to do an automated website builder with visual input? How can the stakeholders be that dellusional.
- sgt101 7y agoAnyone remember Spinvox : https://kernelmag.dailydot.com/features/report/2573/spinvox-the-shocking-allegations-in-full/ https://kernelmag.dailydot.com/features/report/2573/spinvox-... My eyes popped open when I read who the author of this was ! Utterly Loathsome - but apparently doing some journalism in 2012.
- hhas01 7y agoLOL, obvious #MagicalPixieDust peddler is obvious. Real AI is currently three-to-eight years away, just as it has been for the last 40 years. They shoulda just said it uses “computers”. In the meantime, you know what does work here and now? Building up a domain-specific language to the level of that domain’s expert users, empowering those users to tell their machines what they want without requiring a CS degree to do it. Small steps make Progress.
- DoreenMichele 7y agoI recently wrote two blog posts that touch on this. I honestly think many people cannot tell real automation from "a box full of little elves with a tech interface." (I often compare it to the MIB2 scene where Will Smith opens the automatic mail sorting machine and reveals a multi-armed alien rapidly flinging mail, not robotic parts.) It's made me less aggravated with certain things to realize that. It also makes me wonder if founders are genuinely being intentionally deceptive or just unclear where to draw that line themselves. How much AI inside the box do you need to qualify as an AI company when advertising what you do and wooing VC money? I bet some people honestly don't know and some of those people may be in decision-making positions at such companies. Serious tech people may be clear on that, but most companies involve more than just tech people. If your PR people don't really get it and your tech people don't have adequate power to insist "You cannot market the company this way," then it will get sorted out in ugly headlines and court cases and the like.
- rland 7y agoI think people come up with the idea of marketing things as having AI behind them, before the implementation is fully realized. Once they have funding and employees, they can't exactly back down. So they have to put humans behind the solution as a stopgap. In their minds, it's temporary: they're just gathering more data, they have real paying customers that they want to keep until their solution is ready, etc. The little lie becomes a big lie and sooner or later it will blow up for a lot of companies. Uber's house of cards is a very transparent example, but there are many others who don't even disclose that humans are at the wheel.
- DoreenMichele 7y agoOn the upside, it means that dystopian dreams of automation taking all our jobs and creating an 80% permanent unemployment rate are laughable. There will be plenty of paid tasks for people. They will just be online, remote and we will need to sort out how to make this make financial sense for all involved parties so it doesn't turn into a permanent underclass.
- cartercole 7y agoi mean they need to generate a training set first right?
- ljm 7y agoIt’s not a lie if you think ‘artificial intelligence’ means ‘pretending to be clever’
- NicoJuicy 7y ago37 k. for an app and it uses AI. Didn't got through the bullshit test :)
- Wowfunhappy 7y agoRelevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2173/ https://xkcd.com/2173/ > "Yeah, I trained a neural net to sort the unlabeled photos into categories." [...] Engineering tip: when you do a task by hand, you can technically say you trained a neural net to do it.
- welder 7y agoReminds me of Kite - AI Autocomplete and Docs for Programmers. Just always s/ai/marketing/
- paultopia 7y agoI mean, "do things that don't scale," amirite?
- iMage 7y agoI'm always amazed by the funds that companies manage to acquire from VCs without a (developed) product. Having recently read Bad Blood it's horrifying to see how often similar situations arise.
- jacobsenscott 7y agoI'm happy we are starting to move on from all the AI hype and BS. Hopefully some of that VC money will start shifting to something useful. Mitigating climate change, or educating children, or feeding children ... Nah. Just kidding. VCs just want to pretend they are Tony Stark.
- codeisawesome 7y agoHmm, I met these folks in Lisbon late last year, at Web conference. They did tell me it’s humans building, and their play was to build MVPs quickly with AI APIs - which I thought was honest and useful. Of course, I’m not a VC :D
- NieDzejkob 7y ago> The number of companies which include the .ai top-level domain from the British territory Anguilla has doubled in the last few years, the WSJ reports. This sounds like some statistics manipulation. Why limit yourself to Anguilla?!
- jrahmy 7y agoMaybe you're joking, but .ai is the ccTLD for Anguilla. I don't think they meant to imply the companies in question reside there.
- mic47 7y agoThe automation they described sounds like automation of part of project management. why they are not selling that? :-D