It's cool feature but is it not the given and default feature of any RAG based LLM to provide citations based on the documents chunking mechanism?

However, it didn't reach the growth trajectory we needed, so a majority of the company will be working on Grapevine + new products instead.

Our sense is that ~70% knowledge companies at large still don't have a custom GPT yet, and that of the people who do, our system can be more performant because we're spending more effort than their internal team is. There's a lot of details we've solved on data ingestion and search algo that improved our accuracy dramatically, and things breadth of data connectors is the kind of thing that is expensive for an internal team but worth it if you're providing the service at large.

Not sure what you mean by "data seems to be stored outside of the customers control," but fortunately I think many SaaS apps that were trying to lock down customer data from themselves are walking that back a little bit.

I can't speculate exactly on the work that other companies have done, but my guess is we were way more focused on the type of questions people actually ask to each other. We know there's still a lot more you can do to continue to improve it, and so it's up to other folks if they do it too.

Lastly, a few ways we want to be distinguished from all the other offerings are: 1) super easy to setup, 2.) very developer friendly

(Additionally, there are a lot of details that do make a big difference in data processing / search algo too, which have taken our own internal accuracy on hard questions from 30% => 80%+)

2020-2022: We built https://gather.town, which during COVID blew up across every use-case possible: conferences, birthday parties, weddings, universities. It was a good business during COVID but eventually started to shrink.

2022-2025: We built Gather for remote workers, which was a long grind into in Audio/Video, performance, and making a game-interface that was good for work but replicated the parts of in-person work people enjoyed. It's a decent business, but didn't match our ambitions with how we wanted to change work for the better.

2025+: We have lots of ideas for how we can make work a lot better with AI. The general theme is, "can we make work as fun as a video game?" Idea being: video games are super similar to work at its core, and AI can both 1.) dramatically change how people need to spend their days, and 2.) help you "game design" someone's work day.

The Grapevine system is the first tablestakes layer people need to have for us to build the products we're excited about. Surprisingly, "company context" was not as good as we thought despite it being such an obvious, big business opportunity. So while I agree it's "basic," it does seem necessary, and is also not the full-scale of what we want to achieve still :)

I get that's a big ask from a startup. If it helps, we are a company that's been around for 4+ years and have built a work tool (https://gather.town) used for 100k+ people for their daily work, Sequoia-backed, are SOC II certified, and go way beyond that for the security considerations for this product.

With the company GPT, we want to tackle things like: 1.) having to answer a repeated question from a colleague, 2.) answering questions to coworkers that are purely informational, and eventually 3.) things like standup updates, written updates to leadership on status, etc.

I think human interaction at work is one of the most valuable experiences if you're lucky enough to have good colleagues and interesting work. But I think they should almost entirely be around creativity, decision-making, debate, etc. rather than sharing information that exists elsewhere.