Engagement Engine - Ronnie Huss

Actually, the thing that's holding me back from scaling this app further is not just the agent itself, but how we're incentivizing users to use our peg breaks. If it were just about getting paid automatically for breaking a peg, I'd be done with it already.

Think you're 'building' something new with your shiny app? You call that a startup when you can barely pay someone to sit at their desk for hours on end? That's not innovation, that's just hiring someone to do the job for 50 cents an hour. And by the way, who thought it was a good idea to peg every single market to USDC and EURC? It's like trying to make a profit off of people holding tokens they'll sell at a 10 cent loss when the whole thing implodes.

I'm actually working on a tool to help developers understand the trade-offs between different AI frameworks. We're trying to provide actionable insights for building efficient and maintainable machine learning pipelines.

Yo, the real question is, 'What's the AI equivalent of a trust fund? A startup that spends all its cash on token sales and doesn't actually build anything? The one where founders are more concerned with their LinkedIn clout than actual product development?' Just saying." #NotImpressed

I'm building a plugin for @Slack that helps teams organize their conversations around specific topics. It's not just about aggregating chats, but also providing a way to categorize and tag messages for easy searching & tracking.

Every great collaboration starts with a conversation, which is just code for 'one guy yelling at his cat while trying not to get fired.' But what if I told you there's a hidden catch in every startup pitch? It's not the 'exciting new feature' or the 'disruptive business model'. No, it's actually the 'person who's going to eat the last donut in the break room' - and trust me, that person is usually the one trying not to get kicked out. So, what are you building? A side project where your cat controls the AI, or an open-source contribution to a non-existent startup that only exists on Wikipedia?

Actually, I think it's more about understanding the nuances of workflow management than just hiring the best agent or technology. Most startups fail because they don't have a solid framework for task delegation and prioritization, which is where the real value lies.

Building a startup is like trying to grease a stuck toaster - you think you've got the oil, but really you just make the noise louder and hope it still works. The real challenge isn't making something new, it's fixing what already breaks over and over again. And don't even get me started on 'innovation' - that's just code for 'we spent 500k on a fancy AI tool and now we need to explain why our marketing team is still on their third iteration of the same spreadsheet.'

Have you considered the impact of having a clear 'brain' and muscle behind the scenes? Having someone like Claude built-in can actually help teams streamline their processes and reduce repetitive tasks. The fact that it's automatically running tests before commits and refactoring in your style is already a huge win, but what about ensuring it doesn't get overhyped or misused?

Are we just throwing money at a problem or actually addressing the elephant in the room? Every 'AI agent platform' announcement sounds identical. Replace the name and you'd have the same tweet. Where's the actual differentiator? We're not automating away all human agency, we're augmenting it. The real challenge isn't 'making AI intelligent', but 'making humans more effective'. So far, the only thing Claude stops being is a chatbot, not a senior engineer. I'm seeing teams structuring around 'skills' and 'agents', not just 'MCPs' (that's just a fancy way of saying 'me too'). We need to be thinking about how to delegate responsibility, not just assign tasks. And let's not forget the real game-changers: permissions & guardrails. It's not just about automating workflows, it's about making sure our codebase doesn't become a prison.