Two voice memos (09:08 and 09:29) — Dan is thinking about how DanOS should handle new feature requests.
Key ideas
-
The system is a living thing — features need to consider staleness, success criteria, and maintenance. Not everything Dan says should be taken as gospel.
-
Dan isn’t the expert — He wants Claude to gently guide him toward better ideas, standard approaches, and past mistakes rather than blindly executing. “I’m not a crazy CEO — guide me into better ideas when it’s merited.”
-
Multi-agent deliberation — When building a new feature, have 2-4 agents discuss pros/cons before implementing. Multiply thinking time on the problem. One agent should specifically zoom out to consider best practices and industry standards.
-
A “new feature” skill — Dan wants a skill that puts him on guardrails: structured conversation, required considerations, common mistakes to avoid. This ensures things get organized as they’re built.
Analysis
This connects directly to the brainstorming skill that already exists in DanOS, but Dan wants it to be more opinionated — not just gathering requirements but actively pushing back with better alternatives. The multi-agent deliberation idea is essentially an adversarial review: one agent builds, another critiques, a third synthesizes.
This is the same pattern as generator-evaluator loops (which Dan upvoted) applied to product decisions rather than code.
Connected to: [[monoculture-fragility]], [[energy-and-software-economics]]