I work in a space where one could imagine a Claude replacing our product.

I think someone stated it clearly - they can't take on these kinds of businesses until they build out the risk side and the personnel, all of which is a human problem not a tech one. A lot of processes still require physical steps and backstops because it's not possible to source all the data needed to act on it in the first place. Then you have audits and reconciliations, a bunch of strict workflow rules and atomicity to reach levels of software that bigger financial institutions would accept.

My gut reaction to stuff like this is a mix of "oh shit, they could take over my company" and "they're the next script kiddy that thinks software is anywhere near a majority of the work in some software spaces".

Building a startup on an LLM is like building a house on a foundation of quicksand. As the LLM gets better it naturally erodes your moat. It's a completely different dynamic compared to the internet. It's why I'm watching this from the sidelines.

> Will the big labs leave anything for external competition?

No, why would they if they have the choice?

> what happened to platformication of everything?

Business happened. The web works differently from how it used to. The users are different. LLM inference and AI tools is a different core product from search and ads. That, and we have the benefit of hindsight now. Maybe a Google newsroom would've actually been a good idea in 2006 in hindsight, who knows.

Also realistically you could say the same thing about Google Maps and Street View. That probably also killed some startups. Google isn't running a charity for startups.

> Will the big labs leave anything for external competition?

Is this a serious question?

Without the big labs with deep pockets investing to change the consumer mindset do you think a small company with no funding has any chance of even existing?

I remember when paying $1.99 for a mobile game on iOS was considered too expensive and now it seem most consumers are primed to spend more on in-app purchases every week. That mind-shift did not happen overnight.

It was not that long ago $200 for ChatGPT subscription was considered extravagant but now even wrappers can charge this price without hesitation - some of them do.

What Anthropic is doing is priming the market of which they will be potentially one of the main beneficiaries as long as they can continue existing. But I don't think anyone will go to Anthropic directly to source their financial services agent. They will go to financial service companies that use Anthropic to build the capabilities.

> in the early internet you wouldn't see google creating their own news site

Google News was definitely a thing (and actually still exists).

It's not wise to build a startup that is just a feature of the product that you're building on.

What's even sadder is it can work for way too long.

I'm not sure if this was tongue-in-cheek or not, but Yahoo created its own news site in 1996: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_News and FB had Zynga's Farmville as well.

But Google did move into a lot of spaces: maps, mail, docs, etc.

This is premature caution/fear.

Why control part of the world when you can control it all?

Less cynically, you might say that "use AI to do <obvious thing>" is not really a viable startup pitch anymore. That's not necessarily bad.

History suggests otherwise. railroads, telecoms, search all consolidated. The natural equilibrium for transformative infrastructure is winner take all. AGI/ASI won’t be different but will be nearly every vertical and governments will legislate too little too late.

I don't think Claude Design killed menu competitors and I don't think this will too

I am not sure if people are using claude design, security review stuff and other tools they have built so far.

Building is the easy part. There are lot of service level stuff that I am sure anthropic will not be able to provide, therefore they are trying to partner with other orgs in that realm.

I am very skeptical about their stuff now.

If you are builder, I believe you should avoid anthropic, it can be default to monopolistic behavior, I am not saying they are doing it, but they could, where in they see what you are building, if you have traction, position a product in that realm. Just saying.

> Will the big labs leave anything for external competition?

Unfortunately no.

The TAM for Anthropic and OpenAI is anything that runs software or a screen.

Any software or technology business that has high margins that Anthropic and OpenAI are not doing will be a target.

After both their IPO's mandates Wall Street them to push for more growth by competing in other technology business areas or they will get punished in the markets.

It is ROI or bust.

You’re advocating for less competition? AI startup valuations are out of control. People are raising $20m seed rounds.

If you can’t prove PMF and differentiation with $10m, I’m sorry but you’re not a serious enterprise.

And if what you’re building is “pitch deck AI”, I mean, come on.

> tfw you've been huffing your own copium so much that you forgot you're selling shovels

lol these agents are missing the point re. What people actually do in these jobs.

This is an attempt to inflate token generation to fool people into increasing anthropic’s valuation.