i would rather be an optimist and work hard than a pessimist posting about why things won't work.
it's much more difficult and the most likely path is failure, but society fails if people don't try.
no amount of "it will never work" essays will drive society forward.
common failure mode is picking the tech that gives you the fastest early ramp, riding that steep curve, feeling like you're winning, projecting that, you know, steep slope into the future and feeling like the sky is the limit, and then hitting the plateau, and discovering that the technology path that you picked actually flattens out way before the performance that is required by your product.
if you look at it 10 years from now, what are we be the winning company? This is just my personal view. The one that articulate and laser focus on one niche area and also find the right partner and also able to scale the company.
And our harness wasn't very good for like the first like five months of open code. But it was good enough. It was good enough that most people couldn't really tell a difference. And once we won enough share, then we went back and like tried to make our harness like good and smart and optimize and all those things. But uh it was inverted from what everybody else was doing. Everybody else was being like you have to build the smartest harness and that's how you win.
We don't ask the students to write essays because we love reading their amazing essays. We ask them to write essays because they we want them to go through a thought process, which helps them learn something.
I've written sometimes 10,000 word essays in you know, a couple of days and I've written them in you know, 3 months or 6 months. Uh I I feel like I did I I didn't learn very much from the ones that that that only took a couple of days.
The winning system of the next decade will not be the one with the most aesthetically pleasing buttons, nor will it be the one with the fewest screens. It will be the system that best understands the human’s “job to be done,” autonomously selects the right tools on their behalf, clearly shows the user what is about to happen, and gracefully recovers when the user’s context is incomplete or ambiguous.
One of the most common requests I receive is for resources to become a better storyteller. In this book, award-winning novelist Will Storr looks at how the brain responds to stories, and how to captivate your audience and connect with their emotions.
Stevenson is best known as a novelist, but I think I prefer his nonfiction: he had an interesting life and was interested in lots of things, and the sentences are marvelous and daring.
when you learn to play chess you have the grand the long-term goal is winning the game and yet you you can't you um you want to be able to learn from shorter term things like you know taking the your opponent's pieces um and so you do that by having a value function which predicts the long-term outcome
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.