from a financial perspective they would assume one persons data is worth maybe 50$ a year (a random number) on top of maybe another 50$ in subscriptions they can sell. Assuming most such products service the business for up to 3 years, you are looking at an additional 300$ upfront that the business loses giving the data away to someone like Apple. Also the value gain from purely having such a business of subscriptions and data collection is probably another 100$ per customer. Thats close to 500$ for that thing.
Someone like Casio could just sell it for 500$ and collect their future cashflows right away. However, the customer turnout might be significantly less than 55$ they are selling it for.
So the only way to sell it for profit is to keep the data and make a subscription (which may or may not exist yet for Casio).
They could just sell it at an honest price with an honest profit. It’s an upsell from cheap F91Ws so they could have made more money just by selling me a thing that reads from Apple Health. It doesn’t even need to track steps itself.
I also disagree my email address and step data is worth $450 to them.
Let’s be honest. This thing is not innovative. It’s going to be using cheap commodity chips. Its selling point is nostalgia. I find it hard to believe it’s not already profitable at $55.
My non-technical cofounder managed to vibe code a holding page with Claude Design and it walked him through deploying it to Netlify.
However for some reason it had him deploy a single HTML file with all the assets encoded as a huge base64 blob in the code that required a massive amount of JavaScript to extract and render.
It's been doing this for our non-technical folk. Giving users a gigantic single file for deployment. We saw one user deploy a JS file with around 3K-5K elements in an array, storing unique IDs of items they wanted to list.
Welcome to Software Development, Lindsey from HR - here's your first database!
People just don't really understand how these things work yet, and they don't know what to ask for, I'm hopeful that they eventually do become more tech-literate, but not sure yet.
It’s cool. One issue I have is that the colours for “Castle & château” and “Ruin” are very similar.
When you tap a marker often you can’t see the castle in the photo because it’s cropped to fit a rectangle with an unusual aspect ratio. That element should be allowed to adjust its height so the image is scaled at its own aspect ratio rather than cropped. Eg you can only see the mounds of Berwick Castle and Bamburgh Castle in the North East of England.
I think this could kill LLM development. What's the point in pushing boundaries, when your business model is already hard to profit from, only to be blocked from selling your work to the entire world? Where's the incentive to continue?
> Structured outputs are generally available on the Claude API for Claude Opus 4.8, Claude Mythos Preview, Claude Opus 4.7, Claude Opus 4.6, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Opus 4.5, and Claude Haiku 4.5
