10 ms·

This is the type of business that's going to be hit hard by AI. And the type of businesses that survive will be the ones that integrate AI into their business t

This is the type of business that's going to be hit hard by AI. And the type of businesses that survive will be the ones that integrate AI into their business the most successfully. It's an enabler, a multiplier. It's just another tool and those wielding the tools the best, tend to do well. Taking a moral stance against AI might make you feel good but doesn't serve the customer in the end. They need value for money. And you can get a lot of value from AI these days; especially if you are doing marketing, frontend design, etc. and all the other stuff a studio like this would be doing. The expertise and skill still matter. But customers are going to get a lot further without such a studio and the remaining market is going to be smaller and much more competitive. There's a lot of other work emerging though. IMHO the software integration market is where the action is going to be for the next decade or so. Legacy ERP systems, finance, insurance, medical software, etc. None of that stuff is going away or at risk of being replaced with some vibe coded thing. There are decades worth of still widely used and critically important software that can be integrated, adapted, etc. for the modern era. That work can be partly AI assisted of course. But you need to deeply understand the current market to be credible there. For any new things, the ambition level is just going to be much higher and require more skill. Arguing against progress as it is happening is as old as the tech industry. It never works. There's a generation of new programmers coming into the market and they are not going to hold back.

wartywhoa23 11mo ago
> Taking a moral stance against AI might make you feel good but doesn't serve the customer in the end. They need value for money. And you can get a lot of value from AI these days; especially if you are doing marketing, frontend design, etc. and all the other stuff a studio like this would be doing. So let's all just give zero fucks about our moral values and just multiply monetary ones.
- senordevnyc 11mo ago
  [flagged]
  - nothrabannosir 11mo ago
    [flagged]
    - senordevnyc 11mo ago
      Are you going to hire him? If not, for the purpose of paying his bills, your giving a shit is irrelevant. That’s what I mean.
      - nothrabannosir 11mo ago
        You mean, when evaluating suppliers, do I push for those who don't use AI? Yes. I'm not going to be childish and dunk on you for having to update your priors now, but this is exactly the problem with this speaking in aphorisms and glib dismissals. You don't know anyone here, you speak in authoritative tone for others, and redefine what "matters" and what is worthy of conversation as if this is up to you. > Don’t write a blog post whining about your morals, why on earth not? I wrote a blog post about a toilet brush. Can the man write a blog post about his struggle with morality and a changing market?
    - clickety_clack 11mo ago
      This is a YC forum. That guy is giving pretty honest feedback about a business decision in the context of what the market is looking for. The most unkind thing you can do to a founder is tell them they’re right when you see something they might be wrong about.
      - brazukadev 11mo ago
        Which founder is wrong? Not only the brainwashed here are entrepreneurs
    - simianwords 11mo ago
      What you (and others in this thread) are also doing is a sort of maximalist dismissal of AI itself as if it is everything that is evil and to be on the right side of things, one must fight against AI. This might sound a bit ridiculous but this is what I think a lot of people's real positions on AI are.
- simianwords 11mo ago
  >So let's all just give zero fucks about our moral values and just multiply monetary ones. You are misconstruing the original point. They are simply suggesting that the moral qualms of using AI are simply not that high - neither to vast majority of consumers, neither to the government. There are a few people who might exaggerate these moral issues for self service but they wouldn't matter in the long term. That is not to suggest there are absolutely no legitimate moral problems with AI but they will pale in comparison to what the market needs. If AI can make things 1000x more efficient, humanity will collectively agree in one way or the other to ignore or work around the "moral hazards" for the greater good. You can start by explaining what your specific moral value is that goes against AI use? It might bring to clarity whether these values are that important at all to begin with.
  - vkou 11mo ago
    > If AI can make things 1000x more efficient, Is that the promise of the faustian bargain we're signing? Once the ink is dry, should I expect to be living in a 900,000 sq ft apartment, or be spending $20/year on healthcare? Or be working only an hour a week?
    - ovi256 11mo ago
      While humans have historically mildly reduced their working time to today's 40h workweek, their consumption has gone up enormously, and whole new categories of consumption were opened. So my prediction is while you'll never live in a 900,000sqft apartment (unless we get O'Neill cylinders from our budding space industry) you'll probably consume a lot more, while still working a full week
      - rightbyte 11mo ago
        40h is probably up from pre-industrial times. Edit: There is some research covering work time estimates for different ages.
        infecto 11mo ago
- ako 11mo ago
  AI is just a tool, like most other technologies, it can be used for good and bad. Where are you going to draw the line? Only if it effects you, or maybe we should go back to using coal for everything, so the mineworkers have their old life back? Or maybe follow the Amish guidelines to ban all technology that threatens sense of community? If you are going to draw a line, you'll probably have to start living in small communities, as AI as a technology is almost impossible to stop. There will be people and companies using it to it's fullest, even if you have laws to ban it, other countries will allow it.
  - georgemcbay 11mo ago
    > AI is just a tool, like most other technologies, it can be used for good and bad. The same could be said of social media for which I think the aggregate bad has been far greater than the aggregate good (though there has certainly been some good sprinkled in there). I think the same is likely to be true of "AI" in terms of the negative impact it will have on the humanistic side of people and society over the next decade or so. However like social media before it I don't know how useful it will be to try to avoid it. We'll all be drastically impacted by it through network effects whether we individually choose to participate or not and practically speaking those of us who still need to participate in society and commerce are going to have to deal with it, though that doesn't mean we have to be happy about it.
    - marcosdumay 11mo ago
      > The same could be said of social media Yes, absolutely. Just because it's monopolized by evil people doesn't mean it's inherently bad. In fact, mots people here have seen examples of it done in a good way.
      - satvikpendem 11mo ago
        > In fact, mots people here have seen examples of it done in a good way. Like this very website we're on, proving the parent's point in fact.
- idiotsecant 11mo ago
  That's how it works. You can be morally righteous all you want, but this isn't a movie. Morality is a luxury for the rich. Conspicuous consumption. The morally righteous poor people just generally end up righteously starving.
  - dripdry45 11mo ago
    This seems rather black and white. Defining the morals probably makes sense, then evaluating whether they can be lived or whether we can compromise in the face other priorities?
- tjwebbnorfolk 11mo ago
  What parent is saying is that what works is what will matter in the end. That which works better than something else will become the method that survives in competition. You not liking something on purportedly "moral" grounds doesn't matter if it works better than something else.
  - malfist 11mo ago
    Oxycontin certainly worked, and the markets demanded more and more of it. Who are we to take a moral stand and limit everyone's access to opiates? We should just focus on making a profit since we're filling a "need"
    - satvikpendem 11mo ago
      Using LLMs doesn't kill people, I'm sure there are some exceptions like OpenAI's suicide that was in the news, but not to the degree of oxycontin.
      - tinfoilhatter 11mo ago
        Not yet maybe... Once we factor in the environmental damage that generative AI, and all the data centers being built to power it, will inevitably cause - I think it will become increasingly difficult to make the assertion you just did.
        joquarky 11mo ago
        You're using data centers to read and post comments here.
        wartywhoa23 11mo ago
        You're entering a bridge and there's a road sign before it with a pictogram of a truck and a plaque below that reads "10t max". According to the logic of your argument, it's perfectly okay to drive a 360t BelAZ 75710 loaded to its full 450t capacity over that bridge just because it's a truck too.
senordevnyc 11mo ago
Totally agree, but I’d state it slightly differently. This type of business isn’t going to be hit hard by AI; this type of business owner is going to be hit hard by AI.
alextingle 11mo ago
I think it's just as likely that business who have gone all-in on AI are going to be the ones that get burned. When that hose-pipe of free compute gets turned off (as it surely must), then any business that relies on it is going to be left high and dry. It's going to be a massacre.
- simonw 11mo ago
  The latest DeepSeek and Kimi open weight models are competitive with GPT-5. If every AI lab were to go bust tomorrow, we could still hire expensive GPU servers (there would suddenly be a glut of those!) and use them to run those open weight models and continue as we do today. Sure, the models wouldn't ever get any better in the future - but existing teams that rely on them would be able to keep on working with surprisingly little disruption.
otabdeveloper4 11mo ago
AI is not a tool, it is an oracle. Prompting isn't a skill, and praying that the next prompt finally spits out something decent is not a business strategy.
- classified 11mo ago
  Seeing how many successful businesses are a product of pure luck, using an oracle to roll the dice is not significantly different.
- tonyhart7 11mo ago
  "praying that the next prompt finally spits out something decent is not a business strategy." well you just describing an chatgpt is, one of the most fastest growing user acquisition user base in history as much as I agree with your statement but the real world doesn't respect that
  - otabdeveloper4 11mo ago
    > one of the most fastest growing user acquisition user base in history By selling a dollar of compute for 90 cents. We've been here before, it doesn't end like you think it does.
- rob74 11mo ago
  Do you remember the times when "cargo cult programming" was something negative? Now we're all writing incantations to the great AI, hoping that it will drop a useful nugget of knowledge in our lap...
- danielbln 11mo ago
  Hot takes from 2023, great. Work with AIs has changed since then, maybe catch up? Look up how agentic systems work, how to keep them on task, how they can validate their work etc. Or don't.
  - otabdeveloper4 11mo ago
    > if you combine the Stone Soup strategy with Clever Hans syndrome you can sell the illusion of not working for 8 billable hours a day No thanks, I'm good.
BenGosub 11mo ago
I understand that website studios have been hit hard, given how easy it is to generate good enough websites with AI tools. I don't think human potential is best utilised when dealing with CSS complexities. In the long term, I think this is a positive. However, what I don't like is how little the authors are respected in this process. Everything that the AI generates is based on human labour, but we don't see the authors getting the recognition.
- classified 11mo ago
  > we don't see the authors getting the recognition. In that sense AI has been the biggest heist that has ever been perpetrated.
  - jillesvangurp 11mo ago
    Only in exactly the same sense that portrait painters were robbed of their income by the invention of photography. In the end people adapted and some people still paint. Just not a whole lot of portraits. Because people now take selfies. Authors still get recognition. If they are decent authors producing original, literary work. But the type of author that fills page five of your local news paper, has not been valued for decades. But that was filler content long before AI showed up. Same for the people that do the subtitles on soap operas. The people that create the commercials that show at 4am on your TV. All fair game for AI. It's not a heist, just progress. People having to adapt and struggling with that happens with most changes. That doesn't mean the change is bad. Projecting your rage, moralism, etc. onto agents of change is also a constant. People don't like change. The reason we still talk about Luddites is that they overreacted a bit. People might feel that time is treating them unfairly. But the reality is that sometimes things just change and then some people adapt and others don't. If your party trick is stuff AIs do well (e.g. translating text, coming up with generic copy text, adding some illustrations to articles, etc.), then yes AI is robbing you of your job and there will be a lot less demand for doing these things manually. And maybe you were really good at it even. That really sucks. But it happened. That cat isn't going back in the bag. So, deal with it. There are plenty of other things people can still do. You are no different than that portrait painter in the 1800s that suddenly saw their market for portraits evaporate because they were being replaced by a few seconds exposure in front of a camera. A lot of very decent art work was created after that. It did not kill art. But it did change what some artists did for a living. In the same way, the gramophone did not kill music. The TV did not kill theater. Etc. Getting robbed implies a sense of entitlement to something. Did you own what you lost to begin with?
classified 11mo ago
> And the type of businesses that survive will be the ones that integrate AI into their business the most successfully. I am an AI skeptic and until the hype is supplanted by actual tangible value I will prefer products that don't cram AI everywhere it doesn't belong.
balamatom 11mo ago
Sure, and it takes five whole paragraphs to have a nuanced opinion on what is very obvious to everyone :-) >the type of business that's going to be hit hard by AI [...] will be the ones that integrate AI into their business the most There. Fixed!
rob74 11mo ago
I don't know about you, but I would rather pay some money for a course written thoughtfully by an actual human than waste my time trying to process AI-generated slop, even if it's free. Of course, programming language courses might seem outdated if you can just "fake it til you make it" by asking an LLM everytime you face a problem, but doing that won't actually lead to "making it", i.e. developing a deeper understanding of the programming environment you're working with.
- ako 11mo ago
  But what if the AI generated course was actually good, maybe even better than the human generated course? Which one would you pick then?
  - wizzwizz4 11mo ago
    When a single such "actually good" AI-generated course actually exists, this question might be worth engaging with.
    - ako 11mo ago
      Actually, I already prefer AI to static training materials these days. But instead of looking for a static training material, I treated it like a coach. Recently I had to learn SPARQL. What I did is I created an MCP server to connect it to a graph database with SPARQL support, and then I asked the AI: "Can you teach me how to do this? How would I do this in SQL? How would I do it with SPARQL?" And then it would show me. With examples of how to use something, it really helps that you can ask questions about what you want to know at that moment, instead of just following a static tutorial.
  - neutronicus 11mo ago
    The answer is "the highest-ranked free one in a Google Search".
Towaway69 11mo ago
> Arguing against progress as it is happening is as old as the tech industry. It never works. I still wondering why I'm not doing my banking in Bitcoins. My blockchain database was replaced by postgres. So some tech can just be hypeware. The OP has a legitimate standpoint given some technologies track record. And the doctors are still out on the affects of social media on children or why are some countries banning social media for children? Not everything that comes out of Silicon Valley is automatically good.
skeeter2020 11mo ago
it is totally valid to NOT play the game - Joshua taught us this way back in the 80's

wartywhoa23 11mo ago

> Taking a moral stance against AI might make you feel good but doesn't serve the customer in the end. They need value for money. And you can get a lot of value from AI these days; especially if you are doing marketing, frontend design, etc. and all the other stuff a studio like this would be doing. So let's all just give zero fucks about our moral values and just multiply monetary ones.

senordevnyc 11mo ago
[flagged]
- nothrabannosir 11mo ago
  [flagged]
  - senordevnyc 11mo ago
    Are you going to hire him? If not, for the purpose of paying his bills, your giving a shit is irrelevant. That’s what I mean.
    - nothrabannosir 11mo ago
      You mean, when evaluating suppliers, do I push for those who don't use AI? Yes. I'm not going to be childish and dunk on you for having to update your priors now, but this is exactly the problem with this speaking in aphorisms and glib dismissals. You don't know anyone here, you speak in authoritative tone for others, and redefine what "matters" and what is worthy of conversation as if this is up to you. > Don’t write a blog post whining about your morals, why on earth not? I wrote a blog post about a toilet brush. Can the man write a blog post about his struggle with morality and a changing market?
  - clickety_clack 11mo ago
    This is a YC forum. That guy is giving pretty honest feedback about a business decision in the context of what the market is looking for. The most unkind thing you can do to a founder is tell them they’re right when you see something they might be wrong about.
    - brazukadev 11mo ago
      Which founder is wrong? Not only the brainwashed here are entrepreneurs
  - simianwords 11mo ago
    What you (and others in this thread) are also doing is a sort of maximalist dismissal of AI itself as if it is everything that is evil and to be on the right side of things, one must fight against AI. This might sound a bit ridiculous but this is what I think a lot of people's real positions on AI are.
simianwords 11mo ago
>So let's all just give zero fucks about our moral values and just multiply monetary ones. You are misconstruing the original point. They are simply suggesting that the moral qualms of using AI are simply not that high - neither to vast majority of consumers, neither to the government. There are a few people who might exaggerate these moral issues for self service but they wouldn't matter in the long term. That is not to suggest there are absolutely no legitimate moral problems with AI but they will pale in comparison to what the market needs. If AI can make things 1000x more efficient, humanity will collectively agree in one way or the other to ignore or work around the "moral hazards" for the greater good. You can start by explaining what your specific moral value is that goes against AI use? It might bring to clarity whether these values are that important at all to begin with.
- vkou 11mo ago
  > If AI can make things 1000x more efficient, Is that the promise of the faustian bargain we're signing? Once the ink is dry, should I expect to be living in a 900,000 sq ft apartment, or be spending $20/year on healthcare? Or be working only an hour a week?
  - ovi256 11mo ago
    While humans have historically mildly reduced their working time to today's 40h workweek, their consumption has gone up enormously, and whole new categories of consumption were opened. So my prediction is while you'll never live in a 900,000sqft apartment (unless we get O'Neill cylinders from our budding space industry) you'll probably consume a lot more, while still working a full week
    - rightbyte 11mo ago
      40h is probably up from pre-industrial times. Edit: There is some research covering work time estimates for different ages.
      - infecto 11mo ago
ako 11mo ago
AI is just a tool, like most other technologies, it can be used for good and bad. Where are you going to draw the line? Only if it effects you, or maybe we should go back to using coal for everything, so the mineworkers have their old life back? Or maybe follow the Amish guidelines to ban all technology that threatens sense of community? If you are going to draw a line, you'll probably have to start living in small communities, as AI as a technology is almost impossible to stop. There will be people and companies using it to it's fullest, even if you have laws to ban it, other countries will allow it.
- georgemcbay 11mo ago
  > AI is just a tool, like most other technologies, it can be used for good and bad. The same could be said of social media for which I think the aggregate bad has been far greater than the aggregate good (though there has certainly been some good sprinkled in there). I think the same is likely to be true of "AI" in terms of the negative impact it will have on the humanistic side of people and society over the next decade or so. However like social media before it I don't know how useful it will be to try to avoid it. We'll all be drastically impacted by it through network effects whether we individually choose to participate or not and practically speaking those of us who still need to participate in society and commerce are going to have to deal with it, though that doesn't mean we have to be happy about it.
  - marcosdumay 11mo ago
    > The same could be said of social media Yes, absolutely. Just because it's monopolized by evil people doesn't mean it's inherently bad. In fact, mots people here have seen examples of it done in a good way.
    - satvikpendem 11mo ago
      > In fact, mots people here have seen examples of it done in a good way. Like this very website we're on, proving the parent's point in fact.
idiotsecant 11mo ago
That's how it works. You can be morally righteous all you want, but this isn't a movie. Morality is a luxury for the rich. Conspicuous consumption. The morally righteous poor people just generally end up righteously starving.
- dripdry45 11mo ago
  This seems rather black and white. Defining the morals probably makes sense, then evaluating whether they can be lived or whether we can compromise in the face other priorities?
tjwebbnorfolk 11mo ago
What parent is saying is that what works is what will matter in the end. That which works better than something else will become the method that survives in competition. You not liking something on purportedly "moral" grounds doesn't matter if it works better than something else.
- malfist 11mo ago
  Oxycontin certainly worked, and the markets demanded more and more of it. Who are we to take a moral stand and limit everyone's access to opiates? We should just focus on making a profit since we're filling a "need"
  - satvikpendem 11mo ago
    Using LLMs doesn't kill people, I'm sure there are some exceptions like OpenAI's suicide that was in the news, but not to the degree of oxycontin.
    - tinfoilhatter 11mo ago
      Not yet maybe... Once we factor in the environmental damage that generative AI, and all the data centers being built to power it, will inevitably cause - I think it will become increasingly difficult to make the assertion you just did.
      - joquarky 11mo ago
        You're using data centers to read and post comments here.
        wartywhoa23 11mo ago
        You're entering a bridge and there's a road sign before it with a pictogram of a truck and a plaque below that reads "10t max". According to the logic of your argument, it's perfectly okay to drive a 360t BelAZ 75710 loaded to its full 450t capacity over that bridge just because it's a truck too.

senordevnyc 11mo ago

Totally agree, but I’d state it slightly differently. This type of business isn’t going to be hit hard by AI; this type of business owner is going to be hit hard by AI.

alextingle 11mo ago

I think it's just as likely that business who have gone all-in on AI are going to be the ones that get burned. When that hose-pipe of free compute gets turned off (as it surely must), then any business that relies on it is going to be left high and dry. It's going to be a massacre.

simonw 11mo ago
The latest DeepSeek and Kimi open weight models are competitive with GPT-5. If every AI lab were to go bust tomorrow, we could still hire expensive GPU servers (there would suddenly be a glut of those!) and use them to run those open weight models and continue as we do today. Sure, the models wouldn't ever get any better in the future - but existing teams that rely on them would be able to keep on working with surprisingly little disruption.

otabdeveloper4 11mo ago

AI is not a tool, it is an oracle. Prompting isn't a skill, and praying that the next prompt finally spits out something decent is not a business strategy.

classified 11mo ago
Seeing how many successful businesses are a product of pure luck, using an oracle to roll the dice is not significantly different.
tonyhart7 11mo ago
"praying that the next prompt finally spits out something decent is not a business strategy." well you just describing an chatgpt is, one of the most fastest growing user acquisition user base in history as much as I agree with your statement but the real world doesn't respect that
- otabdeveloper4 11mo ago
  > one of the most fastest growing user acquisition user base in history By selling a dollar of compute for 90 cents. We've been here before, it doesn't end like you think it does.
rob74 11mo ago
Do you remember the times when "cargo cult programming" was something negative? Now we're all writing incantations to the great AI, hoping that it will drop a useful nugget of knowledge in our lap...
danielbln 11mo ago
Hot takes from 2023, great. Work with AIs has changed since then, maybe catch up? Look up how agentic systems work, how to keep them on task, how they can validate their work etc. Or don't.
- otabdeveloper4 11mo ago
  > if you combine the Stone Soup strategy with Clever Hans syndrome you can sell the illusion of not working for 8 billable hours a day No thanks, I'm good.

BenGosub 11mo ago

I understand that website studios have been hit hard, given how easy it is to generate good enough websites with AI tools. I don't think human potential is best utilised when dealing with CSS complexities. In the long term, I think this is a positive. However, what I don't like is how little the authors are respected in this process. Everything that the AI generates is based on human labour, but we don't see the authors getting the recognition.

classified 11mo ago
> we don't see the authors getting the recognition. In that sense AI has been the biggest heist that has ever been perpetrated.
- jillesvangurp 11mo ago
  Only in exactly the same sense that portrait painters were robbed of their income by the invention of photography. In the end people adapted and some people still paint. Just not a whole lot of portraits. Because people now take selfies. Authors still get recognition. If they are decent authors producing original, literary work. But the type of author that fills page five of your local news paper, has not been valued for decades. But that was filler content long before AI showed up. Same for the people that do the subtitles on soap operas. The people that create the commercials that show at 4am on your TV. All fair game for AI. It's not a heist, just progress. People having to adapt and struggling with that happens with most changes. That doesn't mean the change is bad. Projecting your rage, moralism, etc. onto agents of change is also a constant. People don't like change. The reason we still talk about Luddites is that they overreacted a bit. People might feel that time is treating them unfairly. But the reality is that sometimes things just change and then some people adapt and others don't. If your party trick is stuff AIs do well (e.g. translating text, coming up with generic copy text, adding some illustrations to articles, etc.), then yes AI is robbing you of your job and there will be a lot less demand for doing these things manually. And maybe you were really good at it even. That really sucks. But it happened. That cat isn't going back in the bag. So, deal with it. There are plenty of other things people can still do. You are no different than that portrait painter in the 1800s that suddenly saw their market for portraits evaporate because they were being replaced by a few seconds exposure in front of a camera. A lot of very decent art work was created after that. It did not kill art. But it did change what some artists did for a living. In the same way, the gramophone did not kill music. The TV did not kill theater. Etc. Getting robbed implies a sense of entitlement to something. Did you own what you lost to begin with?

classified 11mo ago

> And the type of businesses that survive will be the ones that integrate AI into their business the most successfully. I am an AI skeptic and until the hype is supplanted by actual tangible value I will prefer products that don't cram AI everywhere it doesn't belong.

balamatom 11mo ago

Sure, and it takes five whole paragraphs to have a nuanced opinion on what is very obvious to everyone :-) >the type of business that's going to be hit hard by AI [...] will be the ones that integrate AI into their business the most There. Fixed!

rob74 11mo ago

I don't know about you, but I would rather pay some money for a course written thoughtfully by an actual human than waste my time trying to process AI-generated slop, even if it's free. Of course, programming language courses might seem outdated if you can just "fake it til you make it" by asking an LLM everytime you face a problem, but doing that won't actually lead to "making it", i.e. developing a deeper understanding of the programming environment you're working with.

ako 11mo ago
But what if the AI generated course was actually good, maybe even better than the human generated course? Which one would you pick then?
- wizzwizz4 11mo ago
  When a single such "actually good" AI-generated course actually exists, this question might be worth engaging with.
  - ako 11mo ago
    Actually, I already prefer AI to static training materials these days. But instead of looking for a static training material, I treated it like a coach. Recently I had to learn SPARQL. What I did is I created an MCP server to connect it to a graph database with SPARQL support, and then I asked the AI: "Can you teach me how to do this? How would I do this in SQL? How would I do it with SPARQL?" And then it would show me. With examples of how to use something, it really helps that you can ask questions about what you want to know at that moment, instead of just following a static tutorial.
- neutronicus 11mo ago
  The answer is "the highest-ranked free one in a Google Search".

Towaway69 11mo ago

> Arguing against progress as it is happening is as old as the tech industry. It never works. I still wondering why I'm not doing my banking in Bitcoins. My blockchain database was replaced by postgres. So some tech can just be hypeware. The OP has a legitimate standpoint given some technologies track record. And the doctors are still out on the affects of social media on children or why are some countries banning social media for children? Not everything that comes out of Silicon Valley is automatically good.

skeeter2020 11mo ago

it is totally valid to NOT play the game - Joshua taught us this way back in the 80's