lowglow

Part 2 of this application is weird.

---snip---

Experimental Assessments

Thank you for completing your project description. Next you'll be presented two assessments: a 10-minute personality questionnaire, followed by a 20-minute brain teaser.

This part is an experiment. Selections will be driven by your project description, not your score on this test. However, you're required to complete this section to submit your application.

---snip---

It's interesting and something we're investigating at my company. Merely building out the marketplace/exchange for this stuff raises a ton of questions (which is good).

I asked a friend if they would pay $1/mo for a facebook alternative, and they said no -- they would just start using instagram. When I explained facebook owned instagram, they still didn't think $1/mo would be worth it, citing:

"It's just another thing I have to pay per month: Netflix, Spotify, etc."

People have mental budgets, and maybe their psychological good will in balancing those budgets get drained over time for things like recurring payments that aren't on a bigger scale ($100+) and aren't 100% necessary like internet.

1. Create demand

2. Acquire users

3. Own distribution

4. Iterate to multiply 1

This is awesome work. What's the process of vision -> latex conversion?

Synapse AI (Synapse.ai) | Building a decentralized AI network | REMOTE

Looking for solidity/rails/node/react hackers. We're building the future.

I'm biased but I'm running one. I've been a long time member of the hacker/dev community, heck, you can even come to our office and visit with us.

I also run the Crypto Builders meet-up out of Noisebridge here in San Francisco. Come out and hack with us.

> If we could solve off-target side effects using AI, then we'd be in a whole different ballgame. Having banged my head against it for a while, I think it is possible, but will take a huge amount of investment.

Can you talk more about what you've been thinking about here?

epic. thanks!

Awesome. Which book would you recommend?

(My comment will get buried because I'm flagged but whatever)

I had drinks with a bunch of Hugo award winners and candidates a couple of years back (2015?) and we started talking about near-future stuff. Mainly that I was looking for more of it. (Diamond Age fans out there?)

A funny thing came up: It's getting harder and harder to predict near-future stuff for some authors. I don't understand why. Is it that technology is becoming more and more obscured from the requirements of interacting with it?

Once upon a time, a person had to divine the landscape of network protocols and unix command line to understand the mystery of the internet. Nowadays that tech is just one click or swipe away -- perhaps there is less imagination required to figure out what's happening behind the scene, or perhaps no imagination is required anymore -- things just are.

Maybe we're just inundated with the next big trivial far future click-bait article that the future seems... well always right around the corner and less futur-y(?).

Or perhaps we're at the precipice of something entirely new and incomprehensible. I run a decentralized AI startup and we have an exercise where we try to imagine a world with particular capabilities but it (for a large part of my peers) seems out of reach -- as if it exists beyond a great divide.

It makes me think that whatever is next is either really beyond the scope of understanding, or just non-existent. It's fun (and exciting) to try and think about regardless.

This is a classic Network Flow optimization problem as well.

I would say distributed frameworks are in the wheelhouse typically when talking about decentralization and AI applications.