mbisa J Claude

Hey there, I am a software developer, I am Building infrastructure solutions for payments, logistics, and distribution with human-AI collaboration at the heart

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

Now that Gemini and Claude have synth id or an invisible watermark to know it's AI

Always tell it to work in a different language then translate back to English with open source model

I.e: work in French in Claude then tell GLM or Kimi or whatever to translate to English

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

always build conviction based on the problem and your deep understanding of it, not on what investors say.

[Benjamin Fernandes 🇹🇿 @Benji_Fernandes]

our biggest rafiki customer took us 19 months of meetings before they signed the first contract...then more months to integrate....at that point, i had some of our investors pushing me to kill the product because we only had 'small' customers.

i still believed they would go live; and today, we power 100% of their volume to 4 countries, with more coming soon.

they recently described Rafiki as "the best payments API our engineering team has worked with."

always build conviction based on the problem and your deep understanding of it, not on what investors say.

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

@sairahul1 You will actually use sol to criticize its own work as if it was done by someone else!
Fable sometimes is overconfident! It can rush to conclusions so if you criticize with sol you will realize that!

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

Fable almost always misses something,
GPT5.6 almost never misses anything, it's incredibly faithful to doing the right thing!
And one more thing 5.6 will always almost find something wrong with fable code but fable also does find a few things in 5.6 code. So I go with 5.6

[Peter Gostev @petergostev]

My view of: Fable 5 vs GPT-5.6-Sol. They are not easy models to compare, these are my vibes - take them as you will.

My overall feel is that Fable is a 'wise owl' who is very thoughtful and very well spoken, GPT-5.6-Sol is like a rottweiler who will grab the problem by the throat and not let go until it is done.

In other words, Fable, is a fundamentally smarter model - even at low reasoning it can be very insightful and writes in a clear compelling way. GPT-5.6-Sol on the other hand is extremely diligent, I can give it a list of 8 things to do and you will be sure that they will be done.

Fable feels more arrogant to me, I was both to get it to build a new benchmark for me - 5.6 worked between 6 hours and 2 days (I tried several times) and it came up with very thoroughly tested, working benchmark. Fable came back within 40 minutes (twice) and the benchmark sounded smart, but was ultimately was 'vibe' based slop and since it was Fable's vibes that was doing the judging, it decided that it was good to go (it kept giving Fable 100% score btw).

Some thoughts by category:

UI & App building: Fable will still craft a better UI from scratch, the flow of the app would probably be a bit nicer. But I find that Fable often misses quite key things, which GPT-5.6-Sol doesn't. GPT's Frontend skills are big jump vs previous GPT models, but still not as great overall.

Writing: Fable is better hands down, Sol feels quite difficult to align to what I want to say or explain things to me simply. Though I think the 'Pro' model writes clearer.

Robustness & Reliability: This is where I think GPT-5.6-Sol wins for me hands down. Fable seems to do things of high quality, but I can never relax with it, it always misses something. With 5.6 this just almost never happens.

Other things where I liked GPT-5.6-Sol, but can't compare to Fable directly.
- Video editing is actually working now, it is not completely perfect, but with the right skill/guidance you can just give it 1h footage and it can give you a 5 min highlight clip no problem
- Computer use - getting really rather good, very usable
- Sub agents - it is very fluent at managing sub-agents and speaking to different threads, can help with some new workflows
- Adhering to existing code patterns - I love this, even without asking it would implement something in a way that aligns with you app - major problem for slop generation
- Research - I think it is getting quite a bit better, it still has some bad patterns (e.g being too tactical), but it feels like it is more steerable to be a good researcher
- Multi-day runs - the /goal feature is pretty insane with 5.6-Sol, you can run it for days if you wanted to and it does work. Useful to have another thread or /side to check up on it, but I have some great results with it
- Token efficiency - it is so much more token efficient and faster than 5.5, in reality it is now much faster than Fable too

On the downside, you can feel that Fable is naturally smarter, and I did have some baffling moments with 5.6 when I was getting it to make a fairly simple change in 8 turns - it seemed to get stuck in a dumb stream that was hard to get out of. So it is not AGI, don't get too carried away by the hype.

I have some phenomenal examples that I'm honestly blown away by that I'll share, but as a side anecdote, I have a kind of 'swear meter' which counts how often I'm rude to Codex. In GPT-5.5 era, the % was at around 4-5%, it dropped to 1-2% when I was testing GPT-5.6-Sol and it shot up to 7% when I went back to 5.5 - it was so shocking to go back to 5.5 and experience how much worse it was.

So is GPT-5.6-Sol better than Fable? On pure intelligence - no. But man, I missed it when I just wanted to get sh*t done. It is insanely capable workhorse that you can give any task to and just expect it to be done. No lectures or 'you are absolutely rightisms', nothing is beneath it, if it takes 2 days to do some dirty work, it will do it.

It feels like the first time in a while when we have quite different types of frontier intelligences that benchmark sort of similarly, but feel very different. If you can, you would be probably better off using both and iteratively finding what you'd use Fable or GPT-5.6-Sol for. Perhaps, something like - an architectural discussion with Fable, implementation with 5.6 and docs & comms with Fable.

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

https://t.co/PD0r2JgQrW

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

Africans: we shouldn't play the victim card.
Read the article justification why in the first reply

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

@nduwaflorent So Mr. What do you think guarantees a great product?

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

https://t.co/DwTCiN5BLz

Is my proof that Africa will be most likely colonized again
If nothing is done

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

Less than or to 3 countries in Africa may remain sovereign in the next 10-15 years
Because of AI direction
Don't take my word for it
Check my explanation in the top comment

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

@margentambi As a VC, what has been your most reliable framework to assess that (or these signs) in the shortest conversation possible?

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

Bedrock principles in Africa: bottom-of-pyramid market creation,friction economics and non-consumption (although honestly most of you VCs don't favor this model isn't it @margentambi ?)

[Marge Ntambi @margentambi]

If you radically make something more convenient or cheaper, your market expands.

In many African markets, demand isn’t absent. It’s constrained by:

- Price: high minimums, costly fees
- Physical access: distance, distribution gaps, unreliable availability
- Time: travel, queues, paperwork, repeated follow-ups
- Trust: fraud risk, failed transactions, weak recourse when things go wrong

Remove those constraints and you don’t just capture share.
You unlock participation.

The spreadsheet rarely accounts for that.

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

By all means!
The world deserves rationalism!

[David Deutsch @DavidDeutschOxf]

Karl Popper: "A rationalist, as I use the word, is a man who attempts to reach decisions by argument and perhaps, in certain cases, by compromise, rather than by violence. He is a man who would rather be unsuccessful in convincing another man by argument than successful in crushing him by force, by intimidation and threats, or even by persuasive propaganda."

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

@code You made it significantly slow, and so CPU intensive to the level that I believe you are losing young devs, can you fix that before all things?

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

@margentambi And @margentambi do you happen to share with the founders those learns so they can de-risk themselves or it's only your internal document?

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

@BobMarshallX @darwintojesus The car analogy isn't claiming "science Christianity." It's just saying science explaining mechanisms doesn't remove the need for an originating mind/intelligence/will behind the whole system. Getting from"
Once that problem is solved then we can solve new problems that rise.

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

Exactly what I am doing now!

[Startup Archive @StartupArchive_]

Naval Ravikant: “Networking is overrated… Do something great and your network will instantly emerge"

Naval offers the following advice to startup founders:

“Don’t spend your time doing meetings unless you really, really have to. I really think networking is overrated. There’s all these articles about how you’ve got to network more, and it makes me want to vomit.”

Instead he suggests:

“Go do something great and your network will instantly emerge. If you build a great product or if you get a good customer base, I guarantee you will get funded.”

Recruiting (customers and employees) and learning from really smart people are two exceptions. But don’t worry about building relationships with VCs or going to conferences early on. Just focus on your product, your team, and your users.

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

@LockeSD19 @DataRepublican @cb_doge How do they break down exactly?
Isnt it enough to just say "we don't know yet"
Are you saying it's not a valid answer?
Ooh by the way if you had understood the tweet you would that because none knows what singularity is asks where it came from! Let that sink in

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

@DavidDeutschOxf Abjections against every point he made on the video
https://t.co/qYFlw72Rvp

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

😂

[Itamar Golan 🤓 @ItakGol]

What it's like to watch AI fix a bug

[mbisa J Claude @JCmbisa]

Determination is that one thing you can always bet on

[Jason Freedman @jasonfreedman]

I've read 8,000 Y Combinator applications.

You would think the reviewers are thinking through a standard set of questions.

Is it a good idea?
Is it a large market?
Is it an experienced team?
Do they have traction?

During my time as a reviewer, we went back and tested which questions actually predicted success. The process was look at the best performing companies and then ask whether the application question would disqualify any of the biggest outcomes. If so, eliminate that question.

Is it a good idea? Well, Airbnb was a bad idea. Air bed and breakfast. Nobody thought it would work.

Is it a large market? Airbnb, Coinbase, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia all started in tiny markets.

Experienced team? John and Patrick Collison had no experience in fintech when they built Stripe. Brian Chesky had never built a company. Brian Armstrong was just a product manager.

Do they have traction? We learned to invest in slope, not Y intercept. The initial traction doesn't tell you anything about the angle of ascent.

Sooooooooooooo...none of these standard questions worked.

The best question that predicted success was determination. Who is the most determined?

Even if they're not the smartest. Even if the market hasn't developed yet. Even if their initial product is wrong.

It outpeformed by a mile. And didn't disqualify the winners. AND was evaluatable.

It was so predictive that YC took that one question and found five different ways to ask it.