4/ What’s next.These are early days. As media becomes easier to generate and transform, I believe we will see two big transformations.Rise of multi-hyphenate creators. As the cost of transforming content becomes trivial, creators will publish content in multiple formats, giving.

3/ The future: Game mode/Story mode.The future will be a different kind of breaking the fourth wall. Audiences will break the linear narrative and go seamlessly between laid back passive experiences to being active participants guiding their own experiences. In the world where.

Blazing-fast image creation – using just your voice. Try Grok Imagine.

2/ The opportunity: Audience as co-editor. But including the audience as co-creators opens up the door for a new type of creative work where the experience doesn’t need to be pre-determined. Today, this is best exemplified by video games. Video games are movies where you have.

1/ The status quo: Creativity boxed in by the choices of the creator. Creative work is boxed in by the medium for which it is created. Writers, podcasters, and directors follow the conventions of the medium, whether its the 90 minute movie or all too predictable story arcs in.

Game Mode / Story Mode.What if your favorite show wasn’t just something you watched—but something you could play?.📺 Story Mode → sit back.🎮 Game Mode → step inside the action.

Robinhood making it easier to invest for everyone and the push to lower interest rate is eerily similar to “Sunshine” Charlie Mitchell and the City National Bank in 1920s.

Text to speech generation. 3/10.The good. Passable quality, easy to integrate, and cheap tools. The bad. OpenAI’s TTS felt abandoned. No way to control speed, limited number of voices, and no great way to refine the output with pauses.

Image generation. 4/10.The good. Detailed prompt engineering goes far. The bad. a) Challenging to create multiple coherent images b) Lack of negation in the prompt, you can’t say ‘don’t do this’.

Design tools. 2/10.The good. Cursor chose reasonable defaults and built-in integrations with a design library made getting started a breeze. The bad. Design tools felt immature, with generic designs and limited control. There is so much potential for someone to get this right.

Coding tools (cont).The bad: Required babysitting to do the right things. a) Lacks context of the codebase and made redundant choices that needed refactoring. b) Overly aggressive in making changes beyond what it was asked to do caused regressions.

Building as a team of one- The good and the bad. Coding tools. 7/10.The good: Coding felt like pure magic. Telling Cursor what I wanted and seeing it write code felt like I had superpowers. It wrote code, partnered on debugging, and installed dependencies.

How did I build it?. Chat GPT to draft product requirements, fed into GammaAI to create designs, V0 to generate front end, and imported to Cursor for building out the full app. Firebase powers the backend and auth, Stripe powers payments, and OpenAI for generative AI.

What did I build?.An app that enables people to generate and listen to their own bedtime stories with AI. It accepts payments, sends notifications when stories are ready, and enables people to save, like, and share the stories they create.

We will see an explosion of creativity as ideas are brought to life by people who couldn't build software before. Not only will there be more ideas, but we will see the quality of products improve as iterating becomes easier.

Inspired by @clairevo Figma Config talk, my goal was to see how far I could get as a team of one. I took the bedtime stories my daughter and I create for fun with ChatGPT and made it into a full product. My first reaction as a technical person but not a software engineer?

Building products with AI is completely wild. In 10 days, I built a storytelling app without writing a single line of code. Everything on has been created with AI. The code, the designs, and the content is all generated.

I am obviously biased on Apple vs Patreon discussion. But @benthompson proposal of Apple collecting 30% on Patreon’s earnings, rather than the creators earnings, really feels like an elegant solution that rewards each platform for the value it creates.

When we look back, the biggest example of monopolistic harm from Apple would be the way it held back the wearable ecosystem by limiting connectivity API support for non-Apple devices.