eries

I write about both companies (briefly) in the book. I've noticed in the comments I get from readers that people still feel very tenderly towards Google, remembering that incredible sense of idealism they instilled in so many of us when they went public. So I had to be very careful what I wrote about Google; I actually mostly left the critique to ex-Google employees, by quoting a dataset of people who had been at Google 10+ years and then wrote about their experience after leaving. Put together, those essay are heartbreaking.

By contrast, I can say pretty much anything about Facebook and nobody seems to care. Yet, if you go back and read their S-1, you can see how they very much wanted to be seen as the mission-driven good guys.

It's all quite sad, really. There are plenty more stories of corruption in the book. To be honest, it was a challenge to avoid having the whole thing read as bleak given how pervasive this corruption is today. I did my best to balance it out. You'll have to let me know if you think I got it right.

I didn't want to be seen as trying to co-opt Cory's thesis or (very memorable) phrase. His critique is more focused on the tech industry and its particular illness at this time.

I wanted a word that was much broader, capturing how this tech behavior is one symptom of a larger illness that has been afflicting our economy for some time. So I settled on the old-fashioned term "corruption"

I want to distinguish between a mission and a mission statement. I will not help you wordsmith your mission statement. I frankly don't think it matters.

But a great mission generally combines three things: 1. a long-term commitment to maximize some aspect of human flourishing (in the book I explain how this is the true definition of what it means to create a for-profit venture) 2. a set of values that include a determination to make principled decisions aligned with this goal, such that every decision the org makes is coherent 3. the strength to resist both the inner temptation and the outer pressure to defect, betray, or otherwise abandon the long-term goal

In the book I go into a lot more detail about how to do this, including how to make fiduciary commitments to the human beings you'd rather die than betray.

none of them, really. Watch this video about the development of Claude Code and tell me if it sounds familiar: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7470133...

Of course, many of the tactics and examples in the book are now a bit dated, so if I did an "AI edition" I guess we would update it with new stories and new tips on how to use various AI-powered tools to accelerate. But I think the principles have stood up pretty well.

Yes. In the book, I do my best to explain how our current for-profit and non-profit labels don't really make sense, and that therefore these issues are pervasive in society (public/private sector has similar issues, as I discuss in the later chapters).

Corruption = the symptom Gravity = the force that causes it

In the book, I give the example of a bridge that collapses. If you ask an engineer "why did it collapse" you'll be annoyed if they say "gravity" even though that is technically correct. If we go examine the wreckage and notice that the metal bolts have been corroded beyond recognition, we can start to think through what went wrong and what to do about it going forward.

thank you! I appreciate you sharing. As an author, you never get tired of hearing stories likethis.

I won't sugar-coat this, for many companies this will be extremely difficult. but, as I wrote about it my previous book, sometimes conditions conspire to make radical transformation possible. it usually takes a crisis or an extremely bold leader to decide to take such a big swing.

Unfortunately, a lot of leaders who do have the moral authority and power to attempt such a thing do not really know what structural changes to demand. in fact, they tend to focus on the typical management/leadership stuff: business model, org chart, strategy, vision. These things are important. But there is a deeper layer that tends to get overlooked or ignored: structure, governance, boards, the relationship with investors.

In the new book, I try to tackle both topics in a new way, so that future leaders will know what to ask for when and if they have the opportunity to try.

For those that want to go deeper with _Incorruptible_, I've spent the past few months doing hundreds of interviews and events discussing its various themes and topics. I'm having Claude Code summarize this progress along the way at https://howisincorruptiblegoing.com/

You can also see the various accolades, reviews, and awards that it's accumulated so far.

Thanks for the assumption of good faith. We had no intent to astroturf. Some of the students from cohort one were discussing the negativity of the HN thread on the course discord server. It seems that several took it upon themselves to come share their experience. From the comments whose names I recognize, I can assure that these are all real people who have first-hand knowledge of what they're posting about.

Jeremy attempted a summary here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45456928

but, honestly, I hope that list makes you see why we had a hard time figuring out how to summarize what solveit is. For example, I use it for research and writing all the time, but you'd have a hard time seeing why a notebook plus a private VPS would do much for that use case. But it does! Having a general-purpose computing environment is just very, very useful in a wide range of situations.

I think if you give it a try, you'll be surprised. It is a course and a tool and a way of thinking. We often struggle to find concise language to describe something that is fundamentally new. Maybe after you've tried it, you'll be able to help us explain it better.

I thought it might be helpful to post a link to one of my favorite writeups from the beta cohort for solveit (last year). It's written by Chris Thomas:

https://christhomas.co.uk/blog/2025/09/24/the-human-is-the-a...

a few quotes/excerpts:

  Being among the first 1000 people to experience SolveIt has felt like witnessing the early days of a significant shift in how we work with AI. As someone who is a seasoned programmer, I have seen many programming paradigms and the advance of AI coding tools. What makes SolveIt different is not just another tool or framework - it is a fundamental rethinking of the human-AI relationship.

  As I look at my experience with SolveIt, I think this is a better more sustainable approach to AI-assisted development. The current trend of ever more powerful models generating ever larger blocks of code feels unsustainable. SolveIt offers a different path. By maintaining human agency, working in comprehensible increments and building genuine understanding at each step, it creates a positive feedback loop where both human and AI capabilities grow stronger over time. This represents a partnership model that builds competence over time rather than creating dependence.
  
  The implications extend far beyond programming. Whether I am implementing computer vision algorithms, exploring culinary science, or writing technical articles - the same principles apply. Small steps, continuous understanding, iterative refinement and always keeping the human as the agent in the process.

as someone who uses solveit all the time, this has not been my experience

in a way, it is

Hey everyone, Eric Ries here. solveit is the AI environment I personally have been using every day for months, not just for code but for writing and research, too.

it’s solved all the problems and frustrations I’ve had with both vibecoding and the limitations of the chatbot interface for doing deep work that requires concentration + the ability to understand the artifacts you are producing

and, as a special bonus, people in this course will get a sneak preview of the new book I’m working on. we’re going to use it both to teach some of the concepts from it (on how to create mission-driven long-term companies) and how to use solveit for longform writing projects

happy to answer any questions here, for folks that want to learn more,

Eric

I believe it was done with OpenAI TTS

I've never been a big fan of patents as they've historically applied to software. But this is a public policy issue, not something an individual company can fix. So I've always been content to follow patent best practices, even when they aren't the most logical.

In terms of tech transfer, Jeremy has quite a bit of experience with collaborating with the best academic labs, especially in machine learning, so I expect we will do a lot of that kind of partnering.

thank you! nothing specific to announce yet, but I'm pretty excited about the preliminary research results from just our first few weeks of operation

Well, considering we only just started, we haven't encountered any average workdays yet. I still hold out hope, though, that one day we will.

Prescient, really. Almost all of us knowledge workers today work in factories where the production lines are invisible. It's why we struggle so much with concepts (like work-in-progres inventory or product development flow) that are relatively easy to understand when there is a physical factory to look at.

As some of you probably know, I spent a number of years working with GE, which included plenty of time at the legendary GE Research lab in Niskayuna. So it was a special thrill to see this piece connecting Answer.AI to the long history of R&D labs. Our ideas about R&D are kind of out of fashion in our current age, but I hope this says more about the age than it does about the quality of the ideas. Happy to answer questions in this thread, if there are any fellow R&D-lab-enjoyers here.

stay tuned

Sure, just some ideas at random, but the most important advice is just to try new things and see what feels good:

- dashboards or other reports that call you when something changes, so you don't have to log in to see what's changed

- extremely personalized settings that remember exactly who you are and what you like to do with the interface, to the point that it basically uses it for you

- rapid prototyping interfaces, doing things like "make it real" demo

- extremely simple apps that use AI in the backend to do amazing things. how about a camera app that just sends everything it sees to GPT4-v. think how much easier that would be than loading up a translator app, taking a picture of a menu, uploading the picture, etc. just figure out what I might want to do based on the fact that I took a photo

- artistic/musical/creative apps that require only your phone and that you can noodle on while you have 5m of idle time. maybe the AI works on it silently in the background and then the user gives notes or feedback whenever they have time. end product is a pro-level artistic work that reflects the user's taste level but the AI's mastery of technique

Without a doubt

I expect quite a bit of partnering to make sense, though nothing concrete to share at this time. We explicitly designed this to be non-competitive with the best companies in the field (who have the things they do well covered).

I was going to link to Polis after I read the first part of your answer, but I see you’ve beaten me to it. And in so doing you’ve pretty much answered your own question. Thanks!

Very hard to guess how it might all shake out. I would say that both Jeremy and I have an almost fanatical belief in the power of uncredentialed outsiders. So I would guess we will be more looking for curious open-minded generalists more than any specific age or experience level. I do expect we will grow headcount rather slowly, but that doesn’t mean we will launch infrequently

good idea

thank you!

Eric Ries here, happy to answer questions about Answer.AI or any of the related themes Jeremy talked about in the announcement post: rapid iteration, R&D, startup governance, long-term thinking, etc.

Excited to see what comes out of this new lab. And if you're interested in joining the cause, please do get in touch. Both Jeremy and I are on this thread and generally reachable.