On the Takedown of "Liblib, What Is Your Dream?"

@Ruirui Wu

An hour ago, the article about Liblib was taken down. 404.

Not surprising. From yesterday morning until now, it had been repeatedly reported for "infringing on corporate goodwill."

Rough tally: the article had 13 formal interview subjects. That doesn't count the peripheral, off-the-cuff remarks. Among them were Liblib's former and current employees; former partners and current executives; early-stage and late-stage investors; skeptical peers and admiring ones.

Without knowing about each other, most of their accounts corroborated one another.

It's true: building an AI application is brutally hard. Models evolve at a breakneck pace, competition is fierce, and some institutions claimed months ago they were halting all application-layer investments.

The article also noted that Liblib managed to raise the most capital, attract the largest user base, and become what it is today despite these dire circumstances — that's already deeply impressive. Whether this is the right approach, whether it can sustain itself — I can't, and perhaps shouldn't, claim strong judgment here.

We champion entrepreneurship and innovation. But that doesn't mean we should altogether avoid examining and discussing questionable phenomena in the industry. And just because a company faces brutal conditions doesn't mean all discussion about it is off-limits.

For those who still want to read the vanished article, it can be found elsewhere.

Constructive rather than destructive. Human-centered rather than social-Darwinist. Balanced rather than partisan. These are the core values of "elsewhere."

Cover image: Jacques-Louis David, Napoleon Crossing the Alps, 1801, Schloss Charlottenburg