[hansmayer]

I don't have to try at all - I think anyone who spent as much as an internship, let alone years at a modern tech corp would have no trouble distilling the absolutely clear message - we are spending too much for too little value. And actually wtf am I explaining myself? Every major tech outlet interpreted it like that too. It's not that hard Simon.

[simonw]

I think that both you and the other major tech outlets interpreted that poorly.

[hansmayer]

Oh really? How about the king of non-tech-outlets and digestible, shallow bites for the not-reading-books-middle-class, the Business Insider?

https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-coo-andrew-macdonald-ai...

You know their business is literally correct interpretation of the C-Suite statements.

[simonw]

I think Business Insider are not a particularly high quality publication - they're prone to clickbait - and that headline is an example of why I think that.

Hah, I just checked their homepage and here they go again amplifying that COO fragment from that podcast:

https://www.businessinsider.com/tokenmaxxing-debate-uber-exe...

> "That link is not there yet, right?" Macdonald said in comments that went viral, racking up over 2 million views on X. "I think maybe implicitly there is more that is getting shipped, but it's very hard to draw a line between one of those stats and, 'OK, now we're actually producing 25% more useful consumer features.'"

Yeah, something going "viral on X" is clearly a sign that it's quality information!

[hansmayer]

So no one got it right? Myself, tech outlets, non-tech outlets, everyone on twitter, etc?

[simonw]

That's why I wrote a whole section about it. I was deeply disappointed at how little thought people had appeared to put into this before amplifying the misleading headlines.

For someone who cares about media hype - https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author%3Ahansmayer%20hype&type... - you don't seem to be very discerning with regards to this particular story.