I'd have to concur... like at a time where I thought the diminishing marginal returns for CPUs on computers had really kicked in (like, there's only so much speed I need for web browsing), the M1s came along and made me go "holy shit", even while still, in fact, web browsing.
Can you say more about why his behavior would make you disinterested in the Isaacson book? I'd imagine the fact that it seems there are parallels between both men would make it an interesting read especially for someone who could compare and contrast it with the Jobs book.
Not your intended audience (have never built a business before), but here's wher I would spend some quality time on in terms of finding product-market fit: Market so unbelievably aggressively to the youtuber creator community.
Mr. Beast, for instance, had realized that so much of the world cannot access his content due to a language barrier, so he has started foreign language channels with dubbed version of his videos, which, unsurprisingly, also get millions and millions of views.
If your product is as robust as it seems like it is, with no effort, you could open the world to every content creator out there. That seems like a significant value add. Sure, you'll have to work out pricing and pin down product specific, but if there's one class of individuals I'd be aggressively trying to sell this to, it'd be folks like that. Heck, even the people with those no-face, listicle or voice-only content channels might be a great fit. Simple, easy videos that should ideally work well with your platform... and you can instantly help grow their audience!
Also, I have a relative who has grown a SASS from nothing to hundreds of millions in ARR. I can assure you that you all are no less competent than him from a business perspective. At many points in his trajectory his story would exactly mirror yours (complete, full, polished product, crickets of paying users), until they found the right market for whom their solution was a game-changer. So, believe in yourselves, too, and dont think that it hasn't happened simply because you don't have the skill: it just may be you haven't quite pounded the pavement for long enough yet. Good luck!
Call me cynical, but I think the Tik Tok banning efforts are an example of such a successful lobbying effort from the part of US-based social media companies. It has yet to be brought to my attention what behaviors/patterns Tik Tok employs which set them apart from their US-based competitors, and I am in awe of how META/Alphabet have some nicely created this wedge based on their nationality to use as a cudgel against one of their biggest competitors. It smells to me a little bit like the LIV/PGA thing, where the Saudi Arabia connection was heavily publicized for the upstart tour as a reason to fight against the potential rival to the PGA. Then, of course, they merged. Interesting to see what the endgame will be for Tik Tok's case.
I'd argue this is essentially evidence that their hiring process worked in this case. I mean, a company that so vehemently believes that your HS story is so fundamental to how you'll perform as an employee manage to successfully put in enough of that in the hiring pipeline to prevent you (sane person) from going through with it and therefore not wasting either of your times!
From a layman's perspective when it comes to cutting edge AI, I can't help but be a bit turned off by some of the copy. It seems it goes out of its way to use purposefully exhuberant language as a way to make the risks seem even more significant, just so as an offshoot it implies that the technology being worked on is so advanced. I'm trying to understand why it rubs me particularly the wrong way here, when, frankly, it is just about the norm anywhere else? (see tesla with FSD, etc.)
I've tried making this point to my father, with little success. He is someone who very clearly struggles with anxiety, and has an incredibly unhealthy news consumption habit -- its news on the radio on the way to work, lots of newspaper reading at work (he runs his own small business), followed by constant cable news in the evening. He can't turn it off. As best I can tell, he struggles to consume longer form (especially written content), and I don't know that he'd be able to tell me the name of the last book he's read. He's an incredibly intelligent man, but I can't help but feel he's doing himself a huge disservice with his habit. But, alas, I am always met with "but I need to be informed" retort, despite my many objections to it. Anyone experience something similar with their parents and have any advice?
The single greatest politically backward thing in America is how the republican party has positioned itself as a pro free market party by, as best as I can tell, often championing precisely the opposite.
These passion projects are so awesome to read about. Kudos to him to not only allow himself to scratch the itch, but use it as a platform to expand his technical know-how, advance his academic career, and bring some joy to folks around the world.
Like, at first glance, upon hearing about this, who doesn't want someone like that on their team?
Do you think there was better ROI to that time spent than now with the smartphone? Like, you "killed" those 5mins by learning something (however esoteric it may have been) versus sucked into a nonsensical Tik Tok vortex?
I'm in the same boat, and I think the lack of commercial aspiration is a bit of a double-edged sword, because then its tough to balance the competing forces between developing features because they'd be fun to develop, developing features because they would be nice in the product, and developing something that people other than me would actually want to use.
Yeah, although the part about it just had someone use it to extend the native monitor.. I'd be curious how deep that integration went... more than a large virtual monitor, to have you able to spawn multiple/infinite windows of any of the mac apps on it, that'd be killer!
I'm one of the weird people who tried out the Google Glass. It was finnicky, 0 actual interaction with the modern world, lasted a good 45 minutes, melted your face, and had terrible audio.
But the thing is, if you could peak THROUGH the shortcomings, it was abundantly clear how an eyesight driven, glass form factor is the destination for computing. Smartphones were even less advanced at the time, but even then, we I tried for a few weeks making more extensive use of it, I would catch many glimpses of how "neat" this technology would be... even doing simple things like effortlessly capturing a picture on the spot, or videoconferencing with my gf (now wife!) showing her stuff in the grocery store and asking her what to get.
The AR capabilities, mixed with the essentially VR potential for movies/games, will totally be a thing and it'll totally live on our face as glasses. There can be details as to when exactly, price points ,etc., but the ubiquity of this sort of computing device will eclipse the iPhone when it comes time, and until then, slowly but surely change the nature of "working on a screen."
We don't until the kids get to high-school. But you'd be hardpressed to notice this: right before they step on campus, or right after dismissal, they all come out. But during the day, they are, in fact, hardly seen.
Anecdotally, yes. We have some students who are very vocal about how they perceived having a more structured early use of social media once they get to nearing the end of high-school. Having said that, I'll caution that this is hardly any sort of statistical evidence, as its that students who suffered because of it (because of not being ostracized, not part of the cool kids who have phone, etc.) didn't feel bothered to come forward in my work.
The one VERY CLEAR correlation that I see, though, is that families who are EXTREMELY intentional about this fare far better. More than the minutiae of what age they did or didn't give phones, which apps to allow or not, etc., the families that I have seen have lots of success are families who have dedicated time for these conversations and have made them a habit in their family. The ones who I have seen struggle have been of the "set it and forget it" mentality, even the ones who try to just "install an app" that will just do the parenting for them.
I frequently recommend the apple watch with cellular to families... it has nice built in support to be set up for a child, the watch form factor is nice for lots of kids (harder to lose), and you are still getting a premium product (important for the families that I work with).
I do a thing where I get a chance to meet with lots of smaller group of kids, and I let them ask anything tech anonymously. it is absolutely eye opening, and it becomes very clear that adolescence for a lot of them is much, much harder to navigate because of these tools they've been given. What I do sometimes is just share with parents some of the questions I get from the kids, and that has been the only slightly effective thing I've seen. To me the biggest issue is that there's a lot of "not my kid" sort of sentiment, and I think letting the kids' voices speak through to the parents sometimes helps hit home to them that they may not have a full grasp of what these tools introduce to their child's life, and that yes, their child could also be one of the ones who struggles with it more accutely.
I don't think it's ignorance as much as "well, that won't be my child." Also, its a much more appealing alternative when it is the path of least resistance. I suspect, too, we don't really have a sophisticated enough conversation on the distributions of the outcomes. From my experience working with teens, I think it is probably the case that the media outcome of having broad access to these is strictly worse than not, but probably of a small magnitude, but that there is a long tail of negative outcomes that no one believes will be their child.
I work at a fancy private school and partially am have hosted numerous events for parents on kids and social media.
We have been banging on this key for easily the past 8 years, with varying levels of emphasis. The response from parents has also been universally consistent: A lot of nodding, and, ultimately, very little action. There has always been a small but consistent group of parents who stand firmly on their decision to delay giving their child broad access to social media until later, and the vast, vast majority who can't be bothered to. I haven't noticed the scale tip in any direction in all these years.
At some point Sam has started give me E. Holmes vibes and I really don't like it. There's a level of odd/ridiculous/hilarious/stupid AI hype that he feels so comfortable leaning into that part of me starts to begin to suspect that the emperor isn't wearing any clothes.
Why is it so hard to hear this perspective? Like, genuinely curious. This is the first I hear of someone cogently putting this thought out there, but it seems rather painfully obvious -- even if perhaps incorrect, but certainly a perspective that is very easy to comprehend and one that merits a lot of discussion. Why is it almost nonexistent? I remember even in the hay day of crypto fever you'd still have A LOT of folks to provide counterarguments/differing perspectives, but with AI these seem to be rather extremely muted.
For a short while I knew I was going to be in bed recovering from a medical procedure and thought it was a good time to use YouTube Premium since I'd be watching so much. I (maybe sadly, maybe not), cannot fathom the idea now of going back to using it without it. Which is something I would have before then totally ridiculed someone for say!
Actually, it funnily enough proved to create some bad habits for the PLANE rather than the driving!
When I started my flight training, my flight instructor's chief complaint was that I was so used to looking INSIDE the cockpit rather than out. Conversely, picking up instrument flying definitely came very easy (I was used to reading plates, ATC phrasing, etc.), but
to me, it's hard to beat iRacing in terms of the quality of the matchmaking and sheer density of available heats. The fact that you constantly find elite level IRL drivers on it I think is a nice endorsement that the overall experience is pretty good. It certainly can leave you wanting in terms of visual niceties and things of the sort, but from a pure racing experience, I think it is hard to beat. Is expensive at first, though :-(
ohh no, I meant, VR can augment the in-person experience... I'd rather play with the virtual cards that shuffle and deal much more rapidly... I'd rather us be able to be in this insanely interesting environment, etc...
I am really hoping for micro-LED devices to reach the market soon. My favorite thing to do with my Vive Pro was night flights in flight simulator... then got an Index, which is far superior in every way, but the lack of deep, deep blacks just really doesn't make those night flights feel how they used to!