If I say "doing $FOO is a losing proposition", and I believe what I say, why on earth would I then move on to actually doing $FOO?
I am pointing out that there is nothing to be gained by joining this recursive race - anything you produce using LLMs I can clone using LLMs, but anything I produce using LLMs can be cloned by someone else, using LLMs.
Why would you assume that I want to insert myself into this recursively descending race to the bottom?
Because they don't yet know that it is a losing proposition?
> and if nobody does it, isn't your original assertion false?
False dichotomy, it isn't an all-or-nothing scenario like you present, it's the fact that there are enough cloners to make every race a race to the bottom in a matter of days.
> Any argument relying on everyone cloning things with LLMs doesn't work if everyone doesn't clone things with LLMs.
Only if you believe your false dichotomy.
What opportunities? Anything you spend effort over, like PMF and discovery, etc... I can now clone with a few bucks of Claude Code and charge less than you for the same product, at the same quality level :-/
Where is the opportunity here? Technology and knowledge used to be the moat a startup or bootstrapped individual could use to produce a sustainable business.
Why exactly are you excited about producing something that can be cloned for less cost than it took you? Especially as the quality will be almost exactly the same?