ChatGPT for every employee is useful.
It is not an AI strategy.
The AI power law:
10-15%: individual acceleration
30-50%: department overhaul
3-4x: company reinvention
The breakout gains come when AI becomes the operating layer.
@mach1ai#AI#AIAgents
Is your AI output technically acceptable but painfully forgettable?
That’s the problem with most “AI productivity.”
The work gets done.
The words make sense.
The structure is fine.
But the edge is missing.
No judgment. No taste. No voice. No accumulated pattern recognition from years of actually doing the work.
That’s what I’ve been experimenting with lately: not just using AI to create output, but teaching it how I think, write, frame, and operate.
In this demo, I built a Codex skill from my own business writing.
I had it study hundreds of real business emails, identify the patterns in how I communicate, and turn that into a reusable agent skill.
Then I tested it on a real workflow:
+ summarize and structure a FloQast blog post
+ rewrite it in my professional voice
+ create a polished Word doc
+ generate a sharper web page version
+ preserve the core ideas while making the output feel more useful and alive
The point is not that AI can write a blog post.
We already know that.
The point is that AI gets exponentially more valuable when it starts carrying your expertise, your standards, and your verve.
Generic agents are table stakes.
Trained agents are where the leverage starts.
One of our customers sells hardware through the channel, where partners get different pricing and terms.
We built a model of how an agent handles that complexity. Here's what it looks like:
@dailystoic "Performative cringe" is your virtue signaling. You're demonstrably unhinged in this post, and it undermines your credibility.
@dailystoic are you open to backing your 'cringe' post here with a full refund for the tickets I purchased for your SF event?
Mach 1’s latest capabilities in helping operators build and deploy agents into their business.
In this demo, I recreate a sales agent for Trace, the same kind of agent we built three years ago. What once took months can now be built and deployed in under 10 minutes.
Mach 1 brings intelligence to your operations, helping teams build agents that can handle complex, real-world processes.
CONSENSUS IS COMFORTABLE. IT IS ALSO DANGEROUS.
In the military, we call it a tunnel. Everyone moving in the same direction, focused on the same objective, blind to everything on the flanks.
It feels like cohesion. It is actually vulnerability.
Patton won in North Africa and across Europe, not because he had the biggest army but because he thought differently than his opponents expected. He moved when they thought he would wait. He hit flanks when they were guarding the center.
Divergent thinking was a tactical weapon for him.
The same is true in every boardroom, every locker room, every organization trying to solve a hard problem.
When your team stops producing friction, start worrying. Friction means people are actually thinking. They are pressure-testing ideas. They are catching what you missed.
A room full of nodding heads has never built anything great. It has, however, approved a lot of bad plans with total confidence.
Hire people who will disagree with you. Build an environment where that is not just tolerated but expected.
The goal is not harmony. The goal is the best possible outcome. Sometimes those two things look nothing alike.
This is the only incompetent thing I’ve personally seen you post. I was on the board of a software company acquired by PE that was full of incredible talent and the company results were quite impressive post PE purchase.
In this particular case I’m referencing the company was Mississippi based and later moved HQ to Atlanta — I’d put that team pre and post PE up against any Silicon Valley startup
Why dis on an entire category of people?
I don’t know many billionaires but I do know some billionaires and many centimillionaires and, among that group, I know several who have moved out of California for tax reasons already. This proposal is obviously more morally dubious than a tax. So, it seems reasonable to expect wealth to leave the state and wealthy people generally include ecosystems of activity.
It’s very difficult to argue for more taxes (or worse in this case) when the level of waste and mismanagement is so extreme.
You continue to distinguish yourself as anti technology and anti business.
If being a congressman didn’t seem mind numbingly boring to me I’d seriously consider running in my district to inject common sense back into politics in some small way.