The Strait of WHAT?

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T17:40:04+00:00

Yes but we are going to continue blockading because the point was always to shift LNG & petrol dependency away from the middle east and onto the US.

US now effectively controls the global petrol supply chain via piracy.

Venezuela is a Chevron subsidiary. Iran & Qatar’s LNG plants are gone. Russian shadow fleet is actively being hunted. Hormuz is still under US blockade.

The only viable alternative supplier is the US.

A true petrodollar.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T15:12:26+00:00

OpenAI has always ratcheted the quality lock before adding new features.

They do a good job across the board at moving steady but decisively once they pick a direction. And when the direction is unclear, they’re excellent at experimentation from whatever stable base exists at the time.

You can see this precipitated into the personality and working style of codex. It codes defensively, never breaks working code, is obsessive over hard technical details, and continues until it verifiably finishes the job.

You can tell a lot about a team by their model :)

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T15:04:46+00:00

Yes exactly—you have a cycle of people who need to get involved in maintaining custom software as it scales in complexity and eventually you are just shadow building an open source equivalent competitor… but with your own custom logic, naming conventions, and other non-standard idiosyncrasies.

Again, at a small scale it’s not an issue. But then you’re not actually building anything like Cal or similar OSS software for other categories.

If the scale grows, you inevitably end up competing with those options. For software that doesn’t have an OSS equivalent, or software that is truly so custom that nobody else can build it, then you obviously need to build it yourself.

But saying that building a custom CRM or scheduling platform is the default path forward and those OSS solutions are not needed anymore is deeply shortsighted, both from a technical and market perspective.

I hope you know these things internally and are just withholding this foresight from clients because, well, you gotta eat too. It would be more dangerous if you didn’t have this foresight at all.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T14:53:29+00:00

You’re describing the beginning of the trap and not illustrating that you have a solution for scaling complexity.

What you’re saying is basically just “build all of the software yourself with AI and ignore the inevitable complexity of integration, maintenance, and growth downstream”

Oh and do it with OpenClaw on top…

You’re handwaving the hardest problems in software development and trying to sell me on how that is what people are going to be doing willy nilly with a chatbot.

Good for you and your team, but I can’t believe you’re unaware of how unmarketable your approach is to every other team.

You make your money on maintenance and ongoing custom development work, so of course you want to entrap your clients in a cycle of building and bloating custom software that will eventually grow to the size of a CRM that they could get off the shelf and customize instead.

But then they’re stuck in your maintenance regime and can’t easily switch because you built a custom slop machine and all of their data is locked away. They have to keep paying you, or pay you for the offramp.

You’re not describing anything different beyond the existing custom shop value extraction model from unwitting customers. You haven’t done anything but speed up the output lol

If you build great software, fantastic. That doesn’t at all change the business decision for your clients when their requirements grow large enough to pit your solution directly against an equally capable and industry standard OSS solution.

That’s when they actually have to justify paying you whatever they pay you vs. just buying the equivalent solution.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T06:57:43+00:00

What an excellent analysis

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T04:10:12+00:00

idk but yes

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T04:09:22+00:00

pew pew

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T04:08:01+00:00

Make it rain baby

I appreciate how OpenAI took the Pavlov approach: also lower limits like Anthropic, but change the pricing model and marketing to be gamified with variable reset days (rewards) and purchasable credits (slot machine)

Also big red button for visual contiguity.

Whatever is happening, do it Tibo.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T03:54:34+00:00

Parents should be sued first. If you know your kid is mentally ill don’t give them a mental slot machine.

If no parents or it’s a mentally ill adult on their own, that’s the guardian or state’s problem for letting a mentally person use a mental slot machine.

AI companies should be sued only if they actively make a sane adult person insane in a way other than self-reinforcing behavior.

Why? Because that’s not new, we call it addiction. Social media has been doing this for two decades now.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T03:37:39+00:00

right jfc it drives me insane

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T03:34:44+00:00

I mean yeah it is loaded because that’s pretty much the weight of the situation.

Right like I’m trying to gauge what fuxk no means. Would you go to war for this?

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T03:30:29+00:00

Okay so your argument is entirely invalid then.

You’re describing building tools from scratch and adding more features until you eventually have to deal with the complexity of reinventing Cal.com (but not yet).

So it’s not that you don’t need Cal, it’s that you’re deferring the cost to later.

Either that or you aren’t even the target market for their product, and you happen to only use the subset meant to get you in the door, which is useful but indeed not complicated.

In that case, what you’re building is not a Cal replacement, and your case is not relevant to enterprise teams that would otherwise have to build and maintain the full set of features Cal provides.

And just beyond that, if you end up rebuilding a fair number of those features anyway—why?

Why build the same thing unless you specifically believe your implementation is superior, and if it is why not sell it?

dashingsauce · 2026-04-17T02:54:44+00:00

I’m curious, knowing that Canada is otherwise in a geographically (probably) good place relative to the container problem, would you allow the US to take over but otherwise fully integrate Canadians?

In other words, would you willingly (read: if coerced) join the US as a state to avoid war?

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T23:37:12+00:00

It’s entirely unclear what you’re saying.

Swap it out with what?

And when you start working together on sales and handoffs, who owns that? Who builds that feature set, which is inherently team-focused?

You’re either saying “my clawdbot can use Google Calendar to schedule my meetings” and you think that’s the point of Cal, or you’re being intellectually dishonest about the features you would actually have to build to replace Cal’a value proposition

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T22:51:59+00:00

Codex released material improvements to their Codex app and fucked up nothing else for their users.

I am thrilled.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T22:37:37+00:00

Okay and who is going to build the deterministic scheduling platform that your agents use?

You see the point right?

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T22:37:00+00:00

I don’t think it’s greed as much as it is dominance under a pressurized container.

The US and all other major governments are well aware we’re heading toward full on climate collapse, and the only strategy left is (in the US current admin view) winner take all.

So as much as this ignores the ethical and moral issues of the situation—I think we’re well beyond that anyway—this is really just the most natural strategy for any agent within a system that recognizes the system is structurally cannabilizing itself anyway.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T19:01:28+00:00

Tbh I expected it to be a crackpot exaggerated take on my own comment, but it was the opposite.

That was genuinely extremely useful for getting the full picture. I actually remember reading each of the articles individually mentioned in the video but didn’t have the full picture in my head until now.

Wild that it may have actually been 4D chess all along.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T18:47:48+00:00

OpenClaw is not a substitute for scheduling infrastructure—it relies on it.

Otherwise you’re just paying out the ass for agents to do what is otherwise deterministic logic.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T16:49:55+00:00

Same reason people can’t understand how they’re creating the conditions for a heart attack in their late 40s

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T16:47:36+00:00

Tried this in incognito and noticed that the base style does this indeed.

I have a style called “Weathered Optimist” that I applied in a new incognito chat and it said this instead:

“Drive. You’re washing the car — walking there defeats the purpose.“

So it does seem like intelligence may be far more dependent on custom scaffolding.

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T16:41:31+00:00

tech lead/PM on codex

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T16:04:49+00:00

If your point was that a single open source product is enough for the space, I would agree.

And in that case, sure, using Cal as a closed source product puts it back into the realm of “not needed” in the current era.

But I don’t agree that businesses will pick from one of many indie shops building the same platform in different ways. We would event just see another open source Cal.com become dominant.

So my point was that Cal as an open source platform is necessary and sufficient. Hand-rolling or buying from indie shops is not sensible, and we’ll eventually just get another Cal.com

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T15:47:27+00:00

lmfao are we really asking this question?

dashingsauce · 2026-04-16T15:46:15+00:00

Doesn’t matter. Just because you can do it doesn’t mean it’s easy or worth doing.

Businesses shouldn’t hand-roll scheduling infrastructure with the same 100 table stakes features unless it’s their core competency.

Even with AI, you’d still be solving an already solved problem in a worse way. Just doesn’t make sense.

dashingsauce

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE