robotys @robotys

https://t.co/3pyCBO0Ufl (work) https://t.co/bm0we6i1Vr (me) https://t.co/dUQT4UJlVI (write) Kuala Lumpur Joined June 2008

Tweets

26K
Followers

24K
Following

399
Likes

20K

Sabba Keynejad @sab8a

a week ago

Alright, this blew up!! Almost 1K bookmarks is insane. Didn’t expect that when I wrote it. I spilled everything I’ve learned about churn over the last 10 years. If you’re struggling with churn, give this a read.

Sabba Keynejad @sab8a

2 weeks ago

x.com/i/article/2071…

28 22 441 125K 1K

9 15 247 81K 625

View Details

robotys @robotys

a week ago

Baru update blog. Bersawang macam apa je --> robotys.net/post/panduan-s…

0 0 5 707 0

View Details

Alex Nguyen @alexcooldev

a month ago

Normal day of building in public. One thing I’ve learned: I only publicly share apps in saturated markets. For apps in unique niches, I even publish them under separate developer accounts. Why? Because if your growth comes from organic traffic, every screenshot, revenue chart, and strategy thread is free market research for competitors. If your app runs 100% on paid ads, share everything. Competitors can copy your product, but they still need to buy users. But if you’ve found a niche with strong organic virality, silence is often the best moat. Build quietly. Scale quietly. Dominate quietly. Then, when the market is saturated and you’re already the #1 player, tell the story. Building in public is great. Until you realize you’re accidentally onboarding your future competitors. 🥴

Eliana @eliana_jordan

a month ago

i saw one of the craziest building in public stories on tt. a founder posted a video about an app idea for meal planning on a budget. the app didn’t even exist yet. the video got 10m+ views. great validation, right? not exactly. while he was building it, someone copied the

85 5 267 89K 154

36 12 263 28K 183

View Details

smbizdotmy @smbizdotmy

a month ago

Macamana nak tahu kerja mana yg nak kena buat dulu? Ni caranya -->

0 3 6 339 5

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

@azreehanifiah Keep vibing brotah

0 0 0 60 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

Vibe Coding is the fastest way to know that your (first) idea sucks. A lot. Yet: Keep vibing.

Boring_Business @BoringBiz_

a month ago

This is the tough lesson that a lot of people are learning the hard way AI might have made building apps a lot easier, but it also set the barrier to entry at zero Because anyone can do it, there is no moat left The only edge left in the future will be sales and marketing

462 254 4K 630K 1K

1 0 3 276 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

"Are you a body that has a soul, or a soul that a body? Interestingly, you can choose which one you want to be."

0 0 0 90 0

View Details

@

a month ago

I think the challenge is that everyone can now build apps But 1) almost nobody has distribution (like an audience), or 2) the money to pay for distribution (ads or UGC), or 3) the creative genius to get distribution for free (classically called guerilla marketing)

@

57 years ago

0 0 0 0 0

173 424 6K 1.5M 4K

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

@DasAlienz This with kopi o is rm4. Ok ja cheap cheap.

0 1 23 2K 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

@margaretmelonii Thats caused by fluid dynamic. Imagine inside the car is an aquarium instead of air, will have same effect. Outside air is flowing but inside is not.

0 0 2 1K 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

@mojasama Jap, JAKIM ada bagi sijil halal ke kat kes "daging tak halal dijual" tu?

0 0 1 621 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

@thechosenberg "it takes a village to raise a child (project). If the child failed, then the whole village has failed him/her (the project)."

0 0 0 262 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

@thechosenberg "Personally, i'll take accountability on all projects under me. Mistakes do happen and i'm not shy from learning from it. However, if other party try to put blame on my team, i'll be the first in line to defend it. As mistakes was never done alone in any collaborative works."

1 0 1 1K 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

a month ago

x.com/ihtesham2005/s…

Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005

a month ago

52 1K 6K 278K 7K

0 0 0 92 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

2 months ago

x.com/anjneymidha/st…

Anjney Midha @AnjneyMidha

2 months ago

if you run an ai lab, pls ensure your team has read this before putting any charts out into the world

53 122 2K 1.3M 3K

1 0 0 172 0

View Details

robotys @robotys

4 years ago

Ini adalah thread tempat aku kumpul buku menarik aku nak baca nanti. Jemput bookmark. Lesgo -->

1 45 164 39K 238

View Details

Ihtesham Ali @ihtesham2005

a month ago

Two math olympiad champions wrote a training manual in 1993 on two old Macintosh computers, and every American kid who has won a major math competition in the last decade learned to think from it. Their names are Sandor Lehoczky and Richard Rusczyk. The book is called The Art of Problem Solving. Most people in math know it as AoPS. Since 2015, every single member of the US International Math Olympiad team has been an AoPS student. Not most of them. Every one. That statistic sounds impossible until you understand what the book actually does. Lehoczky and Rusczyk were not professors. They were competitors. Lehoczky earned the sole perfect AIME score in 1990 and led the national first place team. Rusczyk was a USA Mathematical Olympiad winner and a perfect AIME scorer in 1989. They had both survived the same brutal selection process the book was designed to train students for. And the first thing they decided was that almost every existing math textbook was teaching the wrong thing. School math gives you formulas. You memorize them. You apply them. You pass the test. Then you sit down in front of a real competition problem and the formula does not apply, and you have nothing underneath it. That is the gap. The gap is not knowledge. It is thinking. The entire premise of AoPS is that problem-solving is a transferable skill, not a bag of memorized tricks. A student who genuinely understands why a technique works can adapt it, combine it with something else, and deploy it in a context they have never seen before. A student who only memorized the technique freezes the moment the problem looks different. The book teaches the difference between a formula and a method. A formula tells you what to compute. A method tells you how to see. The students who win olympiads are not the ones who know more formulas. They are the ones who have trained themselves to look at an unfamiliar problem and recognize its structure. To see that this problem is secretly asking the same question as a problem they solved three weeks ago, just dressed differently. Rusczyk calls this "learning to read the problem." Not reading the words. Reading what the problem is actually asking underneath the words. The second thing they built into the book is tolerance for being stuck. Most students treat confusion as a signal to stop. The book treats confusion as the starting point. Every chapter pushes students past the point where the obvious approach runs out. That moment of running out is not failure. That is where the actual thinking begins. Lehoczky once described it this way. If you can solve a problem quickly, you are not learning. You are performing. Learning only happens when you are past the edge of what you already know. The book was written on old Macintosh computers in 1993. Rusczyk launched the AoPS website in 2003. Today the community has over one million users. Thousands of students enroll in AoPS online courses every year. Most winners of every major American math competition are AoPS alumni. A platform built by two kids who were good at math competitions has become the infrastructure that produces the next generation of mathematicians, engineers, and scientists who are good at thinking. The formulas you memorized in school will eventually be obsolete. The thinking you trained will not. What is one problem in your life right now that you have been avoiding because you do not yet know the right formula to solve it?