Here’s my interview with Shishir Mehotra, the CEO behind Grammarly’s “expert review” feature which attributed writing advice to people - including me lol - without permission. Or, as you will hear us talk about a lot, compensation. www.theverge.com/podcast/898715/superhuman-grammarly-expert-review-shishir-mehrotra-interview-ai-impersonation

March 23, 2026 - 13:55 UTC

180
326
2740
Did ChatGPT write his answer????
1
0
19
Sure fucking reads like it, but I'm also prepared to believe this is just how people like this think and talk
0
0
4
I'm reminded of the slogan used by striking secretaries at Harvard many years ago: "You can't eat prestige." Low (or no) pay isn't offset by the cachet of working at Harvard -- or the cachet of being cited as an "expert" on some website without your permission and with faked quotes.
0
0
3
Incredible interview! Though I'm dying to know if Superhuman has legal review of new features because 🍿.
0
0
0
"This is not the first time I've seen a situation like this"

Yeah, we figured.
0
0
2
Really said, "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"
0
0
4
So they use your name because you're well known and respected but you shouldn't be compensated because you need exposure since you're not well known?
0
0
10
"Dollars are what I pay my mortgage in" is going to live in my head.
0
0
0
lmao did their lawyers seriously allow him to do this interview??
1
0
8
You mean the same lawyers that presumably greenlit the feature? Those lawyers?
1
0
6
AI doesn't exist without trampling copyright
0
0
1
Props to Shishir for not backing out, but still doesn't make this ok. But man, what a banger Brendan Carr Decoder show would be
1
0
0
Under no circumstances do you have to hand it to this guy...
1
0
2
I had to turn it off after 10 minutes, he was totally insufferable.
0
0
2
I hope his lawyers are reading this and weeping with despair
0
0
1
Some people are just not worth giving time to. This man should be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible in every venue possible, because he's a lying parasite who shouldn't be a part of society.
0
0
0
You have the patience of a saint for not erupting into Mount Patel in this interview. I keep pausing it to cool down
0
0
0
Good on Shishir Mehotra for showing up for a tough interview, even if it does sound like he's desperately trying to avoid saying something that would incriminate Grammarly.
0
0
0
Great job holding his feet to the fire
0
1
0
incredible work
0
0
0
lol he thinks it's not impersonation because people knew it was an AI feature. Obviously nobody thought that it was actually the experts sitting behind a keyboard typing to them, but if the AI claims to be faithfully representing what you would say then of course it is impersonation.
0
0
2
Most of this is way over my head. But my takeaway is these companies are pushing out “features” as fast as they can with no oversight within their own companies let alone outside. At no point does “is this ethically right or societally healthy” factor for them. Just whatever they can get away with.
1
0
17
I can kind of understand the rush to being first to market back when the technology was newer, when, even if many of us knew better, it still seemed like this might be the Next Big Thing.

But now, as it’s increasingly clear that even big investors are starting to admit to themselves it’s a flop?
1
0
0
Reads like he’s offering you exposure in lieu of compensation.
0
0
3
CEO is the easiest position to replace with an AI: I mean, all they do is pump their stock price as a job - super-easy to do automatically and the corporation saves millions and you're not stealing anything because the CEOs have never produced anything original or of value in their lives.
1
0
69
...and, what the fuck does his response even mean? Yes or No, dude...
0
0
15
See what happens when you replace creatives with AI? See?
0
0
2
This is like a tech version of an @ichotiner.bsky.social interview, and it's wild that someone with such little self awareness (Shishir) can be in such a position of power.
0
0
2
It all boils down to “We feel we should be able to use your name and labor to make money for ourselves, at no cost to us.”
0
0
11
They’re all scumbags
0
0
0
Butcher the hogs
0
0
2
That fellow sure did Chotiner himself a couple tree times there.
0
0
1
I imagine anyone should be able to post a written "interview" with the CEO as long as they correctly attribute all the made up quotes...
0
0
2
Grammarly gets to make money off your name but all you get is clicks?
1
0
6
I don't imagine anyone will get clicks if the feature gives you crap advice
0
0
1
This is amazing. If only all interviewers had your commitment
0
0
3
paraphrasing, "We respectfully disagree with the lawsuit, we clearly say the service portions are *inspired* by named real person's work, linked here."

So you're trading on someone else's reputation to gain legitimacy for your service?

That opt-out really really needs to be an opt-in.
0
0
8
I wouldn’t say the two of you talk about compensation a lot. You ask a lot of very good questions, and Mehotra tries very hard to not talk about compensation at all. At least, not from his company. He did float some theories about how writers could be compensated by others. Great job, but ugh.
0
0
1
Watching it now, about 33 minutes in, and I recognize this look. I *felt* this look. This is trying to get a straight answer from someone (usually a product manager for me) and getting a lot of non-answers and deflection.

Should be captioned as *screaming internally*
1
0
455
This is a photo of a man who is not entertained by your bullshit.
0
0
42
The constant referring back to "If you can get 1000 people to give you $100 a year" line, while completely ignoring how what they're doing is actively getting between creators and artists and those 1000 people to begin with, is what has me fired up. Plus that calc not factoring the revenue split.
1
0
1
It's that classic scam artist line of "I'm paying you in exposure and if you're not an idiot you'll use that exposure to make more money for less work" that they'll always use to blame you for not hustling enough when their parasites finish sucking you dry.
0
0
2
who tneeds a constant grammar monitor. who is this for? people who've had a piece of rebar driven through an important language center in their brain?
0
0
0
This was fascinating, thank you. Though since I read it instead of listening, I’m convinced this CEO just sent his AI agent to sit in the interview and deflect your questions. It almost read like a human talking to a robot. Are you sure you talked to a person? 🤣
0
0
4
The real cost isn't the attribution—it's training their users to trust AI-generated "expertise" over finding the actual source. Now readers won't even look for the original.
1
0
57
also, while google search is now rewriting article headlines… call me silly but these LLMs don’t seem good for writers or journalism. 🤔
0
1
30
This was a *really* good interview.
1
0
118
It's been a loooong time since I've heard one this good.
1
0
9
What’s wild to me is Mehrotra‘s argument that they should be able to take and use a creator’s work/image without compensation, and then also say they are creating a business opportunity for said creators.
Why would anyone “partner“ with a company who has shown they have no willingness to pay you?
0
0
5
this is funny, but there's no way your lawyer thinks this was a good idea
0
0
0
That’s a lot of words to say “…you’re getting exposure!”
0
0
0
I haven't posted this in a hot minute :)

youtu.be/mj5IV23g-fE?is=z-Gvl72KibVU0xLv
0
0
5
It’s remarkable to me that the CEO of an AI company just “knows” AI is polling so low because people are worried about their jobs. Like, they don’t have any internal research on this?
Could it also be a shit product we didn’t ask for being forced on us while damaging the environment and economy?
0
0
0
So he’s not clueless, just evil. Got it. Thanks.
0
0
3
It just sounded like yet another tech bro willing to torch their whole business because AI might be good for their share price. Users be damned.
0
0
54
This was fantastic. Very well done. Brava and thank you.
0
0
32
Further evidence most tech CEOs are complete con artists that failed upwards their entire careers.
0
0
1
I'm surprised you didn't follow a different line of questioning: If he thinks it's so bad, why was it released?

Maybe he doesn't review every feature that is released in depth, but did he review release notes and greenlight the release? Did this small team just ship a feature without permission?
0
0
0
It seems like his final answer was $0?
0
0
2
the part where he called writers “idea generators” made me want to destroy all computers
0
0
5
Shishir Mehotra seems to think were all stupid, needy, unable to think for ourselves and so desperate for feedback.
He's embalmed in AI Kool Aid.
0
0
6
"It's an combination of multiple different writers and thinkers, so it's not stealing." Unreal lol.

Verbally, no different than:
1
0
27
0
0
8
Man, he must think you’re running a charity over there at The Verge
0
0
0
Hilarious how Nilay just blasted through the Decoder Questions™ at the beginning of the interview to quickly get to the meat and potatoes - how much money do you think you should pay me?

Loved this!
1
1
6
Shishir you are the ceo of grammarly how is it structured how do you make decisions, ok so how much do you think you should pay me?
0
0
0
Really great interview. I think Shishir's opinions are just not compatible with a human society and he simply cannot see that
0
0
1
Isaac Chotiner wept 👏🏻 👏🏻
0
0
0
Not even an attempt to answer your question.
1
1
5
Listened to the pod. One key takeaway is holy shit are there actually people who talk like this guy? (Obvs there are, case in point this interview)

He needs to listen to himself on repeat for a week, then maybe he'll learn to talk like a human person instead of like a marketing AI agent. Brutal.
0
0
1
AI helps thieves like Shishir Mehotra to create a degree of separation between themselves and their victims.
0
0
4
Good stuff starts at 12:19 youtu.be/Y5eC5wdQPZs?t=740
0
0
4
Oh man you should have pulled his head off his body right about then.
0
0
1
the way i leapt from my seat. incredible interview, nilay
3
0
379
I blurted out an intelligible noise so loud at that moment
0
0
4
man if they want to play like their AI slop deserves the scrutiny and regulations applied to fair use and journalism? fucking let 'emmmmm
0
1
10
Good, not just letting him move on from it, just pushing him on "You used my likeness without my permission, HOW MUCH WILL YOU PAY ME FOR DOING THAT?"
1
0
180
It was clear that you didn't agree on what the problem is, though maybe because of the lawsuit he was trying to alter the topic while pretending not to. He seems to think the problem was that the feature didn't resemble your (and the other "experts"') editorial guidance *enough*.
1
0
20
Yeah. I’m not sure if it was genuine, but I think that’s the message he wanted to deliver.
0
0
3
Great interview. I enjoyed it and y‘all need to be paid. Or not stolen from in the first place
0
0
1
as someone else astutely pointed out, AI is a parasite that markets itself as a predator
0
0
18
You should just pivot to this totally different "skill" set, become a concierge prompt engineer, and be grateful for this "opportunity" is certainly a take.
0
0
2
AI tech-bro bunkum relativism.
0
0
2
The idea that “it’s not impersonation if we explicitly spell out exactly what and who we’re impersonating and how to reach them“ makes me want to throw a brick
0
0
5
That interview was wild. Great work by the way. I really don't understand anyone who's genuinely interested in engaging with an AI model version of someone they admire, or need advice from. I really don't get it at all. I'm hoping this whole business model just fails
0
0
1
Another thing to file under “no one asked for this.” Almost every new AI feature being crammed into apps seems to have been created to satisfy some tech overlord or VC rather than actual users
0
0
7
this is insanely brutal (compliment). holy shit.
0
0
2
Did you hear that Superhuman has 40 million daily users? Just wanted to make sure you caught that. I lost track how many times it came up, but maybe you missed it. 🤣
0
0
0
Shorter Shishir Mehotra: “you get paid in attribution. now, stfu.”
0
0
2
Them: we want you do it for love

Me: sure, for the love of money
0
0
4
Bottom line, they still think it's okay to steal and re-market your work, and to exploit your professional reputation for profit
#AIIsTheft
0
0
6
It's honestly remarkable to me that someone can say this to the face of one of the people they so clearly committed a huge legal violation against.

The lack of basic ethics demonstrated here is staggering.
0
0
44
"It's important to me that as many puppies are fed to the puppy-crushing machine as possible.""

- Shishir Mehotra is the CEO of Grammarly, and an expert on machines.
1
0
3
Notice how I never actually said this was a quotation from Shishir Mehotra?
0
0
1
Fantastic interview! I hope Mehotra knows that he makes me want to puke.
0
0
0
Why does this line here bother me so much "We seamlessly blend AI right into your experience, so you don’t have to think about AI", is it my natural distrust of AI or because this feels predatory.
1
0
4
Partly I hate that line bc almost every SaaS company is cluttering their UIs with inconvenient intrusive LLM stuff that doesnt work good but takes effort to undo/avoid/disable and I bet they all say its "seamless"

But partly, its patronising af. Users hate AI... but we know better!!
0
0
3
And they all heard what we were doing and said, “Boy, it’d be really amazing to develop an ongoing connection with my fans. What happens when they put my book down? Can I still be with them and help them along the way?”

Lol this did not happen
0
0
2
We got you clicks, we hope, what more do you want from ME?
1
1
47
The embodiment of paying in "exposure."
0
0
14
Where exactly were all these qualifications supposed to be? From the screenshots I saw, looked like clear impersonation. bsky.app/profile/krebsverena.bsky.social/post/3mg3bfp55qs2y
3
1
77
It's also crazy because based on the screenshots I've seen they could have totally presented this as a system that pulls up relevant writing advice from other writers (they do, after all, already quote and cite anyways), and they just... didn't?
1
0
12
I think he’s referring to this format for the actual “expert suggestions”:
0
0
16
That there's a direct through-line between this CEO badly trying to justify his life choices and me just shouting into the void three weeks ago gives me quite a bit of joy at an otherwise very taxing time.
1
0
141
Someone should start a line of butt-plugs and call it "Grammarly". I think the CEO would suddenly have new thoughts about the use of a name.
0
0
3
I really liked the pushing about how many people agreed to ship the feature. But like not one person thought about the legal rights?? FFS
0
1
3
And he never once took responsibility for shipping it - it was a team decision. Doesn’t the buck stop at the top?
0
0
1
Really appreciated (from an author who Anthropic owes quite a lot of money to) how you didn't let him slide off the hook.
0
0
4
PLEASE read the entire thing, it's savage.
1
0
22
dude just keeps getting backed into corners he should've taken more humanities in college
0
0
7
“We weren’t impersonating you, we were simply facilitating impersonation of you on an unprecedented scale.”
0
1
6
Imagine trying to say “We’re paying you in exposure” to people who are already experts in their field.
0
2
24
Wow, that's *brutal*.
0
0
2
This is a good episode
0
0
17
Just downloaded before I saw this. Get him!
0
0
0
Using a whole bunch of messy words to try and say 'But you're paid in exposure 8D' As if anyone would want to be exposed to this mess, let alone consider that nonsense a form of payment.
0
0
4
Three questions in being enough to say your userbase is at fault cause they're using the product wrong is already very telling of where this is going.
0
0
1
The tech bro version of: no we won’t pay your band but think of the exposure!
0
0
4
Now that is a dude who has drank too much of his own urine (and then admitted to it in an interview).
0
0
1
"Just think of all the exposure this will give you!"
0
0
4
As an executive friend would say, "they are selling out of another man's bag".

Of course, they aren't gonna admit to it with a double-barreled case staring at them.
1
0
0
In clear cut terms, to the extent they manufactured text that wasn't yours then slapped your name on it, they broke the cardinal rule of licensing.
0
0
1
goodfellas clause applies

www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XGAmPRxV48
0
0
0
Wow I didn't know Coffeezilla wasn't the only person who could grill an interviewee to smithereens. I can absolutely believe you were a lawyer.
0
0
0
Really good episode. I actually thought Shishir did fairly well in the second half. Definitely lots of PR training but he didn’t get rattled which in itself is a feat after the first half.
1
0
0
You must have listened to a very different show than I did because he kept trying to bring up his ex-wife and wouldn't shut up about all his botox injections.
0
0
0
“We believe we should pay you $1 per shred of integrity in our business model”
0
0
1
Genuinely an incredible interview that somehow also made me despair even further --- they already know they're stealing people's livelihoods and telling them to be grateful for being robbed, and they just don't give a shit.
0
0
10
I am constantly impressed by your ability to interview people that are insanely deranged.

The one thing that keeps getting me is: All these LLMs keep saying they'll create more jobs, when the exact opposite is happening. They keep saying this, but not saying what jobs it will massively create.
0
0
5
This is like my (male) colleagues telling me I "should be flattered" when they plagiarized and/or took credit for my hard work. Both are rationales for exploitation and abuse...and laziness.
0
0
21
As someone who has no background in USA law: why was his answer problematic?
0
0
0
@courtneymilan.com @pluralistic.net.web.brid.gy @mmasnick.mastodon.social.ap.brid.gy (although likely you've seen this already)
0
0
0
wasn’t it quoting made up garbage
1
0
7
the worst lol
0
0
13
Does he answer the question?
0
0
0
Did you prepare for this interview any differently, equipped with a reasonable expectation that he'd say something dumb that would come up in the class action suit?
0
0
1
Christ, what an asshole
0
0
0
"Why did you do this?"

"Oh it's just how the underlying OpenAI or whatever model works"

Then what are *they* providing?
0
0
5
He acknowledges that AI overviews steal authors’ traffic and then recommends Expert Review as the solution… I confess I don’t know very much about AI but this shit strikes me as deeply anti-human.
1
0
5
Also, “being able to talk to my heroes anytime I want” strikes me as something a 10-year-old would put in their dream bedroom, next to “chocolate spigot” and “portal to another dimension”… which makes me realise he is a sad thwarted creative. Still, he can fuck all the way off.
1
0
4
(The answer is clearly a negative number... he feels you should be grateful)
0
0
4
So their intention is not just to steal, but copy as well, and only make attribution when they feel it's necessary?
1
0
110
Its not theft or impersonation,... its a secret third thing that everybody agrees is totally fine to do without compensation...
3
0
160
He uses 'attribution' like it's some get-out-of-jail free card for basically stealing stuff.
2
0
3
That‘s been the go-to excuse for dingbats stealing other people’s work since forever:

“But look, I gave you CREDIT! That makes it okay! It’s exposure, you should thank me for stealing your stuff!”
0
0
1
By his lights, he probably thinks it is, given that it's more than we creatives ever got from any of the big AI companies.
0
0
0
Rights of Publicity...they don't apply if I don't mention it, geeez
0
0
0
Get ‘im, Nilay
0
0
5
lol WHAT lawyer told them it was okay to do this interview I’m guessing none
2
0
30
If listening to a lawyer was part of their process they’d never have released this ‘feature’ in the first place.
0
0
10
They probably asked an LLM.
0
0
18
Smoked his ass lmao
0
0
0
The other clue is how their toxic adverts on YT are all about faking answers in convincing ways for students.
0
0
1
“Is it dollars?” - my favorite!

I noticed you keep complaining that you were attributed to advice you would never give

But whether the advice is correct or not, they’re not allowed to use it
1
0
2
If you’re the king of saying “let’s raise the stakes of this headline by adding emotional impact” (paraphrase there)

Then it would STILL be wrong for them to show a suggestion for that which states you’d probably give that advice.
1
0
2
I am incredibly impressed at how you were able to keep such a straight face during this interview 😂
0
0
2
Great interview. Skin was crawling with agitation the whole time. Always good when an interview makes you think you need a doctor.
0
0
1
Sounds like another instance of “we’re sorry we got caught doing this”
0
0
1
That's fine!
I'm gonna write some zombie erotica & attribute it to him. He'll get all kinds of clicks & name recognition!
1
0
9
Only the nastiest Shrek/Thomas the Tank Engine fanfics must be attributed to him.
0
1
5
Brazen and cowardly response from the ceo
0
0
4
Mehotra has the ethics of grade-school bully. Just think if his customers could turn the table:
“I attributed Grammarly so I don’t need to pay for it.”
Think that would fly?
0
0
0
Nothing but word salad. Incredible
0
0
1
You're our @ichotiner.bsky.social
0
0
0
His whole claim that he's just providing attribution - when you didn't say the thing - is just the dumbest take ever. He really didn't think that through.
0
0
5
oh my god he's literally claiming that he's paying you in exposure
0
0
12
Excellent interview. I enjoyed it at the end where he got down to brass tacks about LLMs essentially being regression to the mean of their trained texts. But overall, it appears to me as if Shishir his advocating for a type of feudal serfdom where we produce the essential content for his product… 😑
0
0
0
To be clear, I do not hope Grammarly uses all my work, in a commercial way, even if that is transformational or educational. If only there was a structure for thinking about reasonable trade offs or u dunno what might be “fair” that wasn’t made by a greedy CEO in his venture capitalist’s interest
0
0
5
This is at times the Chotiner of tech interviews, incredible job
0
0
17
Great interview. Regarding this exchange clipped below, Mehotra's response is utter bullshit. I spent a big chunk of my career as a tech product manager. There's no way a product manager and couple of engineers implemented such a feature on their own without higher management approval.
1
0
5
Not going to stray outside his lawyers advice.

Knocking him off that would be hammering on IP/licensing law in real time, but one needs a background in cross domain expertise to do so.

If they'd generated advice for cartoons and borrowed Disney, they'd be still climbing out from under the C&D.
1
0
0
1) It’s still BS that they didn’t just get people’s permission from the outset.

2) I think the tech WILL get good enough to mimic certain editors, but the real question is, at that point, is it not the same principle as plagiarism?
3
0
7
3) No matter how many times he says it and how many disclaimers they state, it IS absolutely impersonation.
0
0
7
But if they asked for permission, only a handful of people would’ve agreed to this totally benign use of their professional reputation
0
0
1
I don't think LLMs can edit a magazine article like a decent editor because it isn't a person who has an actual lived experience in the world.

Instead it has weights applied to tokens derived from magazine articles, with people occasionally giving it a thumbs up or a thumbs down.
2
0
1
“What is ‘A man who should be hit with their own Tesla’?”
Bc you know he owns a cyber truck
0
0
15
this is a fascinating read! thank you for asking all those questions and not letting the CEO escape, holy cow
0
0
16
Mehotra's claims that this is simple attribution are absurd. And his claims that you wouldn't be able to talk about anybody without monetization are spurious. This is LLMs impersonating you. That needs consent and payment. We all, famous or not, need our likeness / name / image to be protected.
0
0
3
It may not actually be impersonation, though it's clearly some level of false endorsement and use of intellectual property that should definitely be compensated. However, I still can't get over that any lawyer could have said this interview was a good idea while a lawsuit is actively pending!
1
0
6
If I had to guess, this guy did the interview either against his lawyer's advice or without even informing them to begin with because he thought he was so smart that he could do it without incriminating himself
1
1
5
"We chopped your facsimile with some of that guys'. Since they aren't a claimant and you are two people instead of one singular abhorrent amalgamation, it's okie dokie K?"
0
0
0
Great job, Nilay in getting to structural bullshit behind products, process, legal arguments, and future plans for more LLM “expert review” fails, this time produced by desperate authors. Grammarly was respected. “Superhuman” = overhyped, underperforming products, bad faith toward writers.
0
0
1
I'm puzzled by the concept of you providing"writing advice" via an AI app. Is the AI encouraging others to write like you (mimicking your style) or is it impersonating you in offering comments?
1
0
0
The latter. It provides suggestions from an AI editor that (poorly) mimics what he would say.
1
0
0
This was a good one. Telling moment was Shishir saying they came up with the feature for users who wanted to be given advice by their fav authors, idols etc.

If the AI was talking as if it were that person, from (the AI’s projection) of that person’s POV, that’s impersonation.
0
0
0
“So your answer is $0”
1
0
476
Dude came from YouTube, he thinks that user content should be given to them.
1
0
80
If you allow this Guy to completely ignore your question and make his point, what do you think the purpose of this interview was ?
0
0
3
Well done.

If it was such a good deal for creators, he would have asked us first.

He didn't, and he knows damn well why.
1
0
4
"You hope people use it" sounds suspiciously close to the whole "paid in exposure" shtick we all recognized as bullshit decades ago.
0
0
1
"how challenging a world it is for experts and idea generators these days"
0
0
2
They want to pay you in exposure when they're the ones profiting off of using your name.
0
0
3
Somewhere at Grammerly there is a lawyer saying I told you so
0
1
0
All these euphemisms to avoid using the P-word. Pay the experts!
0
0
1
I can't believe these people still talk to you. They really think they're going to "win" the interaction. It's astounding how dumb they are
0
0
3
This was fire from beggining to end
0
0
0
It's astounding to see them out actually defending this "feature", as opposed to apologizing and walking it back.

I've already uninstalled and deleted my account, but it's still crazy to me.
1
0
165
There’s a lawsuit here — of course they’re pretending everything was above board. Saying “yeah, we fucked up *hard*” is probably not the best strategy, even if it’s true.

Grammarly should 100% lose that case and they suck tremendously, but they’re not going to admit culpability while being sued.
1
0
39
Another outstanding interview. Go get him Nilay!

Also it's hilarious that AI is polling behind ICE. That's awesome. 🤣👏
0
1
8
So attribution not of what one actually said but a kind of "vibe coding" of what one's purported to have said, but didn't? That's not attribution. More akin to non-consensual AI pornographic videos - appropriation of the mind vs the body, but both with reputational damage and identity theft.
0
0
13
That first paragraph sounds like an ai response
0
0
0
Peak CEO move here describing something that no one has asked for and calling it a "need"
1
0
12
I see they’re also going with “it’s already stolen, so we can steal it too!”
1
0
6
I like how he keeps saying the "product failed to deliver, we never should've launched that!" Oh, word? Then WHY DID YOU!?
2
0
11
how about this part? "I want my head of sales to sit next to me and tell me I’m about to recommend the wrong product." which is a thing that manifestly did not happen in this very event
1
0
9
I'm still surprised how this passed legal review.... assuming they have a legal team review new features cause....you should have a legal team reviewing new features, especially those that reference 3rd parties.
2
1
2
I would prefer he be sued for all he's worth rather than be interviewed.
0
0
0
This timeline we’re in is utter shit
0
0
37
That’s a lot of words to say “I’m not paying you, you should be paying me.”
0
0
9
Chotinered his ass
0
0
0
Lol I can tell from this excerpt he's about a worthwhile to speak to as an LLM
0
0
6
Funny that he responds to a question about droit moral with boilerplate "you put it out there, it's ours now" copyright fairground ethics.
1
0
228
You want your work to be copied and monetized by others. You want it.
1
0
147
Great work @reckless.bsky.social.
0
0
1
I don’t believe him, that they decided to kill Expert based on just the feedback. Yes they killed it before there was a lawsuit, but did anyone send a cease and desist before that? I bet they did.
0
0
28
You really let your inner lawyer out on that one 🔥
0
0
2
Impersonating…. ….. Inspired
0
0
5
excellent interview, thanks
0
0
42
Well, fuck this guy.
0
0
1
Dump Mehotra into a dumpster with Grammarly like the trash they both are, I do not need a glorified Speak 'N Spell to be my spellchecker
0
0
0
This was a really excellent episode
0
1
8
Seems like a lot of word salad to say “Lol, we’re not paying anyone anything”
0
0
4
Hot damn! Well done!
0
0
0
Hmmm seems to be a big difference between “linking to my work in a way that ultimately helps me get paid” and “using my name without permission in a commercial product that makes YOU money”

But what do I know
1
0
28
We do not comment on ongoing lawsuits would have been a better response but CEOs gotta CEO their way to losses.
0
0
9
The last time I saw anywhere near this much bullshit in one place, a lot of people went to jail. I haven't wanted to punch my monitor so much in a long time. As frustrating as it was, thank you for getting an AI douchenozzle's BS on record without capitulating an inch.
0
0
3
Excellent job holding his feet to the fire. I wish more CEOs could get grilled mercilessly like this.

His answers were clarifying & solidified my rage. Shishir my guy I promise I will NOT EVER use your product, never fucking ever. Hope you choke on your stupid AI 🤩
0
0
13
he could have just said "we're paying you in exposure"
0
1
6