正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Jack Dorsey on why building something for yourself can be better than trying to solve a problem When a 29 year old Jack Dorsey joined the podcasting startup Odeo, he soon learned that no one there really cared about podcasting either: “That was one of Odeo’s biggest failures. We... were not building tools for us. We were building tools for other people.” As Odeo struggled, the team began to look for new ideas, and Jack presented his idea for Twitter. Somewhat counterintuitively, the product would not solve a specific problem: “Twitter solves no one’s problem at all. It was something we wanted to use. It was something we wanted to see in the world. It was something we wanted to use on a daily basis, and that’s all that drove us. That’s what got us up every single morning, and that’s what made it meaningful.” It turns out there were more people like Jack and the Odeo team who wanted to use it to. “I think that is one of the biggest lessons I learned—Twitter did not start as a company. Twitter started as a product within another company that was failing. And to me, this really emphasized the fact that entrepreneurship is not necessarily starting a new company. It’s actually just taking significant risk to build what you want to see in the world.” Source: Berkeley Engineering (Oct 2013)show more

Startup Archive

157,782 subscribers

19,860 次观看 • 15 天前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Jack Dorsey’s #1 rule for pitching your startup: “Show them something that works” Jack Dorsey, Jim McKelvey, and another engineer built the initial prototype for Square in a month. As Jack recalls: “I could actually swipe a card, generate an electronic receipt via email, and then send it out to a person. I loved this because I would go around to all these angel investors and VCs and charge them $5-50 to show them my new idea.” This prototype was critical in helping the company raise $10 million in initial funding from Khosla Ventures. And Jack believes it’s a lesson all founders should take to heart: “The thing that really inspires people is a working product. When you’re pitching someone, the best thing you can do is show them something that works.” Jack continues: “We did this with Twitter. We had a great number of users… and we had investors who were coming to us who were already users of the product. Their families were users of the product. So the story became very easy to tell and they could easily see why this was something that was powerful.” Video source: Stanford University (2011)

Jack Dorsey’s #1 rule for pitching your startup: “Show them something that works” Jack Dorsey, Jim McKelvey, and another engineer built the initial prototype for Square in a month. As Jack recalls: “I could actually swipe a card, generate an electronic receipt via email, and then send it out to a person. I loved this because I would go around to all these angel investors and VCs and charge them $5-50 to show them my new idea.” This prototype was critical in helping the company raise $10 million in initial funding from Khosla Ventures. And Jack believes it’s a lesson all founders should take to heart: “The thing that really inspires people is a working product. When you’re pitching someone, the best thing you can do is show them something that works.” Jack continues: “We did this with Twitter. We had a great number of users… and we had investors who were coming to us who were already users of the product. Their families were users of the product. So the story became very easy to tell and they could easily see why this was something that was powerful.” Video source: Stanford University (2011)

Startup Archive

71,757 次观看 • 1 年前

Jack Dorsey’s #1 rule for pitching your startup: “Show them something that works” Jack Dorsey, Jim McKelvey, and another engineer built the initial prototype for Square in a month. As Jack recalls: “I could actually swipe a card, generate an electronic receipt via email, and then send it out to a person. I loved this because I would go around to all these angel investors and VCs and charge them $5-50 to show them my new idea.” This prototype was critical in helping the company raise $10 million in initial funding from Khosla Ventures. And Jack believes it’s a lesson all founders should take to heart: “The thing that really inspires people is a working product. When you’re pitching someone, the best thing you can do is show them something that works.” Jack continues: “We did this with Twitter. We had a great number of users… and we had investors who were coming to us who were already users of the product. Their families were users of the product. So the story became very easy to tell and they could easily see why this was something that was powerful.” Video source: Stanford University (2011)

Jack Dorsey’s #1 rule for pitching your startup: “Show them something that works” Jack Dorsey, Jim McKelvey, and another engineer built the initial prototype for Square in a month. As Jack recalls: “I could actually swipe a card, generate an electronic receipt via email, and then send it out to a person. I loved this because I would go around to all these angel investors and VCs and charge them $5-50 to show them my new idea.” This prototype was critical in helping the company raise $10 million in initial funding from Khosla Ventures. And Jack believes it’s a lesson all founders should take to heart: “The thing that really inspires people is a working product. When you’re pitching someone, the best thing you can do is show them something that works.” Jack continues: “We did this with Twitter. We had a great number of users… and we had investors who were coming to us who were already users of the product. Their families were users of the product. So the story became very easy to tell and they could easily see why this was something that was powerful.” Video source: Stanford University (2011)

Startup Archive

42,174 次观看 • 4 个月前

Jensen Huang explains how he designed NVIDIA from first principles “With respect to building a company, the first thing you have to do—as with all problems—is start from first principles. What is this machine that we’re trying to create? What is its input? What is its output? What are the conditions that it’s in? What is the industry like? Is it a fast moving industry? Is it a bureaucratic industry? Is it a highly regulated industry? And what are you trying to build?” Thinking about it from this perspective, there were several things Jensen wanted to do with the company: “I wanted to create a company that naturally attracts amazing people, and the reason for that is our company’s mission is to solve computing problems that are barely possible.” He also wanted a company that was “as small as possible” and “empowered people.” “If you want an organization that obeys command and control, then you make it a pyramid just like the military—all the way back to the Roman Empire. But If you want to empower people, you want to make it as flat as possible so that information travels quickly.” He continues: “We also don’t have business units. We don’t have divisions. Everybody works as one, and the company is shaped in a way that allows us to build accelerated computing best.” Video source: Sana (2023)

Jensen Huang explains how he designed NVIDIA from first principles “With respect to building a company, the first thing you have to do—as with all problems—is start from first principles. What is this machine that we’re trying to create? What is its input? What is its output? What are the conditions that it’s in? What is the industry like? Is it a fast moving industry? Is it a bureaucratic industry? Is it a highly regulated industry? And what are you trying to build?” Thinking about it from this perspective, there were several things Jensen wanted to do with the company: “I wanted to create a company that naturally attracts amazing people, and the reason for that is our company’s mission is to solve computing problems that are barely possible.” He also wanted a company that was “as small as possible” and “empowered people.” “If you want an organization that obeys command and control, then you make it a pyramid just like the military—all the way back to the Roman Empire. But If you want to empower people, you want to make it as flat as possible so that information travels quickly.” He continues: “We also don’t have business units. We don’t have divisions. Everybody works as one, and the company is shaped in a way that allows us to build accelerated computing best.” Video source: Sana (2023)

Startup Archive

63,921 次观看 • 10 个月前

Jack Dorsey on Twitter’s biggest mistake in the early days “One of the greatest lessons that I learned in starting and running Twitter — and starting and running Square — is how important it is to instrument all usage.” Jack explains why product metrics are so important: “For the first two years of Twitter’s life, we were flying blind. We had no idea what was going on with the network… with how people were using it. We were making guesses and basing everything on intuition, instead of having a good balance between intuition and data.” Twitter’s product was also going down all the time because of it, commonly referred to as the “Fail Whale” incidents. The image, depicting a whale being lifted by birds, became a symbol of Twitter’s repeated service disruptions. Jack didn’t make the same mistake twice when founding Square: “The first thing I wrote for Square was an admin dashboard, and we have a very strong discipline within the company to log everything, measure everything, and test everything. We treat the dashboard, analytics, and data as a product — we call it the Inference Team. Their job is to instrument all usage and infer all action.” Source: Stanford University (Jun 2011)

Jack Dorsey on Twitter’s biggest mistake in the early days “One of the greatest lessons that I learned in starting and running Twitter — and starting and running Square — is how important it is to instrument all usage.” Jack explains why product metrics are so important: “For the first two years of Twitter’s life, we were flying blind. We had no idea what was going on with the network… with how people were using it. We were making guesses and basing everything on intuition, instead of having a good balance between intuition and data.” Twitter’s product was also going down all the time because of it, commonly referred to as the “Fail Whale” incidents. The image, depicting a whale being lifted by birds, became a symbol of Twitter’s repeated service disruptions. Jack didn’t make the same mistake twice when founding Square: “The first thing I wrote for Square was an admin dashboard, and we have a very strong discipline within the company to log everything, measure everything, and test everything. We treat the dashboard, analytics, and data as a product — we call it the Inference Team. Their job is to instrument all usage and infer all action.” Source: Stanford University (Jun 2011)

Startup Archive

25,573 次观看 • 2 个月前

JENSEN HUANG SAID THAT ELON MUSK WAS THERE FOR HIM AS A CUSTOMER AT A TIME WHEN NO ONE ELSE WAS. AND HE CLAIMED THAT ELON MUSK IS THE ORIGINAL FOUNDER OF OPENAI AND CHATGPT. “WHEN I ANNOUNCED THIS PROJECT, NO ONE IN THE WORLD WANTED IT. I DIDN’T HAVE A SINGLE PURCHASE ORDER. NO ONE WANTED TO BUY IT, NO ONE WANTED TO BE PART OF IT, EXCEPT ELON. HE WAS THERE AT THE EVENT, AND WE WERE ENGAGED IN A FIRESIDE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF SELF-DRIVING CARS.”

JENSEN HUANG SAID THAT ELON MUSK WAS THERE FOR HIM AS A CUSTOMER AT A TIME WHEN NO ONE ELSE WAS. AND HE CLAIMED THAT ELON MUSK IS THE ORIGINAL FOUNDER OF OPENAI AND CHATGPT. “WHEN I ANNOUNCED THIS PROJECT, NO ONE IN THE WORLD WANTED IT. I DIDN’T HAVE A SINGLE PURCHASE ORDER. NO ONE WANTED TO BUY IT, NO ONE WANTED TO BE PART OF IT, EXCEPT ELON. HE WAS THERE AT THE EVENT, AND WE WERE ENGAGED IN A FIRESIDE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF SELF-DRIVING CARS.”

Vivek Sen

747,093 次观看 • 2 个月前

🧸 when we first debuted, the company really wanted to push a "prince" image for us. because of that, they wouldn't let me do things like aegyo when we went on variety shows. 🧸 even though i just wanted to give hearts or do a little aegyo for our fans, they intentionally made us avoid those things. 🧸 i couldn't even make heart gestures. the company banned it, so one time i went on a show and i did some aegyo right before the show ended without them knowing 🧸 but i got caught doing that. the company found out and i actually got in trouble for it 🧸 if i tried too hard to be funny or cute, they would just edit all of it out of the broadcast. i really hated to see us getting a reputation as "boring" group right from the start 🧸 because of that, there was this live streaming platform we used at the time. we all just said “hey, this is live, so the company can't stop us" 🧸 and we decided to just do whatever we wanted, and from that point on, it wasn't really that the company changed their minds, it was more like they just gave up on us.

🧸 when we first debuted, the company really wanted to push a "prince" image for us. because of that, they wouldn't let me do things like aegyo when we went on variety shows. 🧸 even though i just wanted to give hearts or do a little aegyo for our fans, they intentionally made us avoid those things. 🧸 i couldn't even make heart gestures. the company banned it, so one time i went on a show and i did some aegyo right before the show ended without them knowing 🧸 but i got caught doing that. the company found out and i actually got in trouble for it 🧸 if i tried too hard to be funny or cute, they would just edit all of it out of the broadcast. i really hated to see us getting a reputation as "boring" group right from the start 🧸 because of that, there was this live streaming platform we used at the time. we all just said “hey, this is live, so the company can't stop us" 🧸 and we decided to just do whatever we wanted, and from that point on, it wasn't really that the company changed their minds, it was more like they just gave up on us.

녱🐱

710,565 次观看 • 3 个月前

Marc Andreessen: Most successful companies started “product first” “There are products that become companies, and then there are companies that come up with a product. One of the interesting things over the years is that many of the most successful technology franchises were products first, way before they ever became companies.” In this talk, Marc gives a few examples: • His team at the University of Illinois worked on the research project that became Netscape for three years before it became a company • Bill Gates and Paul Allen were deep into PCs before there was a software business • Jobs and Wozniak built the first Apple computer as hobbyists • Mark Zuckerberg was running Facebook out of his dorm room before he ever thought of starting a company • Twitter was a side project at the failed podcasting app Odeo Marc believes that this “product becomes a company” template is successful because “it’s a demonstration that the product has to exist. The market needs the product so badly that somebody actually built it and deployed it and you can actually see evidence that people want it before there was an economic motivation to do so.” He contrasts this with the failure cases he often sees when entrepreneurs try to figure out the idea after starting a company. “It’s very easy in that process to fool yourself into believing that there’s a market because you want to find something and you have a very strong motivation to come up with an answer. It’s hard to go through that process for three months and then say, ‘you know what, we can’t come up with any good ideas.’” There are of course there exceptions. Marc gives Hewlett Packard as an example. But that’s more the exception than the rule. As Marc explains: “The moral of the story is it has to be a really good idea. That often will be an idea that is preexisting at the time you decide to start a company. And if it isn’t, be really careful because you’re walking on sharp rocks at that point with a high risk of falling off the cliff into the ocean.” Video source: Stanford eCorner (2010)

Marc Andreessen: Most successful companies started “product first” “There are products that become companies, and then there are companies that come up with a product. One of the interesting things over the years is that many of the most successful technology franchises were products first, way before they ever became companies.” In this talk, Marc gives a few examples: • His team at the University of Illinois worked on the research project that became Netscape for three years before it became a company • Bill Gates and Paul Allen were deep into PCs before there was a software business • Jobs and Wozniak built the first Apple computer as hobbyists • Mark Zuckerberg was running Facebook out of his dorm room before he ever thought of starting a company • Twitter was a side project at the failed podcasting app Odeo Marc believes that this “product becomes a company” template is successful because “it’s a demonstration that the product has to exist. The market needs the product so badly that somebody actually built it and deployed it and you can actually see evidence that people want it before there was an economic motivation to do so.” He contrasts this with the failure cases he often sees when entrepreneurs try to figure out the idea after starting a company. “It’s very easy in that process to fool yourself into believing that there’s a market because you want to find something and you have a very strong motivation to come up with an answer. It’s hard to go through that process for three months and then say, ‘you know what, we can’t come up with any good ideas.’” There are of course there exceptions. Marc gives Hewlett Packard as an example. But that’s more the exception than the rule. As Marc explains: “The moral of the story is it has to be a really good idea. That often will be an idea that is preexisting at the time you decide to start a company. And if it isn’t, be really careful because you’re walking on sharp rocks at that point with a high risk of falling off the cliff into the ocean.” Video source: Stanford eCorner (2010)

Startup Archive

35,823 次观看 • 11 个月前

This was the whole point. They. Were the whole point. Everything we did, we did for them. So, I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who stayed. I know we fight but there’s something extremely fierce and empowering in the way we love Bangtan and the way we love this fandom. This family. People envy us for a reason. We carry what it means to be ARMY like it’s a part of us. Like it’s a force. And that’s because it is. We’re unwavering. Not many fandoms can say that. And it’s definitely something to be proud of. I can’t wait to be in this for more years to come with all of you. Happy Birthday, ARMY 💜

This was the whole point. They. Were the whole point. Everything we did, we did for them. So, I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who stayed. I know we fight but there’s something extremely fierce and empowering in the way we love Bangtan and the way we love this fandom. This family. People envy us for a reason. We carry what it means to be ARMY like it’s a part of us. Like it’s a force. And that’s because it is. We’re unwavering. Not many fandoms can say that. And it’s definitely something to be proud of. I can’t wait to be in this for more years to come with all of you. Happy Birthday, ARMY 💜

Livheartt⁷ met hobi | ㉧㉣㉣ | 🦢🤍

10,216 次观看 • 1 个月前

Doing something meaningful for others, building something that improves lives, creating value that lasts, that’s what’s important. It’s easy to talk, to criticize, to signal. But to actually do something.. To build a rocket, fix a car, write code, create a product, solve a real problem, that’s rare. That’s what matters. The world doesn’t need more opinions. It needs more builders. More people who wake up and ask: How can I help? What can I fix? What can I create that makes life better for someone else? If you want purpose, be useful. If you want meaning, build. Everything else is noise.

Doing something meaningful for others, building something that improves lives, creating value that lasts, that’s what’s important. It’s easy to talk, to criticize, to signal. But to actually do something.. To build a rocket, fix a car, write code, create a product, solve a real problem, that’s rare. That’s what matters. The world doesn’t need more opinions. It needs more builders. More people who wake up and ask: How can I help? What can I fix? What can I create that makes life better for someone else? If you want purpose, be useful. If you want meaning, build. Everything else is noise.

News America Party

51,174 次观看 • 1 年前

#YOUNGJAE recalled how #GOT7 once felt unsure about their musical direction as a team 🌙 among ourselves, we wondered, is it that we were doing too many different things at the time? because usually, when you look at things now, most groups solidify one color and let it settle a bit, and then start doing what they want to do. but for us, our company said, “let’s try this,” “let’s try that,” “let’s try that too.” so at the time, we often said to each other, “why do we feel like we don’t have a color?” that’s something we talked about a lot among ourselves 👤 so that’s what you were thinking… 🌙 yes, it was something we really worried about together. are we doing too much of everything? when it came to GOT7, we felt like there was no musical color that came to mind. like there wasn’t something certain, you couldn’t describe it with just one thing. everyone would always say, “you’re like a rainbow,” “you’re diverse,” “you do many different things well.” but at that time, that actually made us think, “so there really isn’t one thing that sticks in people’s minds about us.” that idea really stuck with us. 👤 i see. i never imagined you all were thinking like that 🌙 yes, we were really serious about it. that we needed to just focus on one thing. but it wasn’t something we could decide entirely on our own, so naturally, we ended up feeling more stressed about it. we wanted to solidify one strong identity and then slowly expand into other areas, but we couldn’t do that, so we were really disappointed among ourselves.

#YOUNGJAE recalled how #GOT7 once felt unsure about their musical direction as a team 🌙 among ourselves, we wondered, is it that we were doing too many different things at the time? because usually, when you look at things now, most groups solidify one color and let it settle a bit, and then start doing what they want to do. but for us, our company said, “let’s try this,” “let’s try that,” “let’s try that too.” so at the time, we often said to each other, “why do we feel like we don’t have a color?” that’s something we talked about a lot among ourselves 👤 so that’s what you were thinking… 🌙 yes, it was something we really worried about together. are we doing too much of everything? when it came to GOT7, we felt like there was no musical color that came to mind. like there wasn’t something certain, you couldn’t describe it with just one thing. everyone would always say, “you’re like a rainbow,” “you’re diverse,” “you do many different things well.” but at that time, that actually made us think, “so there really isn’t one thing that sticks in people’s minds about us.” that idea really stuck with us. 👤 i see. i never imagined you all were thinking like that 🌙 yes, we were really serious about it. that we needed to just focus on one thing. but it wasn’t something we could decide entirely on our own, so naturally, we ended up feeling more stressed about it. we wanted to solidify one strong identity and then slowly expand into other areas, but we couldn’t do that, so we were really disappointed among ourselves.

𝐣𝐨𝐲𝐜𝐞

39,149 次观看 • 1 年前

Kevin Durant says he left OKC because he was just tired of playing the same exact way and wanted to see what real team basketball looked like “Crazy because OKC loved having me there, simple as that. They loved having me around. So me just leaving out of nowhere when we were right there, right at the doorstep of the Finals? Yeah, I knew people were going to be pissed. But I couldn't base my life off what everybody else wanted me to do.” “It wasn't just one thing, either. When you make a move that massive, it's a whole bunch of different shit. But the biggest thing? I just wanted a new experience. I wanted to live in a different city, see what life was like somewhere else. OKC was literally all I knew.” “I wanted to play for a different front office. I wanted to see how another organization ran things. And on top of all that, I wanted to play with guys who actually knew how to play, guys whose skill sets perfectly matched up with mine.” “And you saw the results when we stepped on the court. It wasn't just that the Warriors were bigger, stronger, or faster than you. We actually played real, pure team basketball. We moved the ball, we hit shots, we were hyper-efficient. It worked out perfectly.”

Kevin Durant says he left OKC because he was just tired of playing the same exact way and wanted to see what real team basketball looked like “Crazy because OKC loved having me there, simple as that. They loved having me around. So me just leaving out of nowhere when we were right there, right at the doorstep of the Finals? Yeah, I knew people were going to be pissed. But I couldn't base my life off what everybody else wanted me to do.” “It wasn't just one thing, either. When you make a move that massive, it's a whole bunch of different shit. But the biggest thing? I just wanted a new experience. I wanted to live in a different city, see what life was like somewhere else. OKC was literally all I knew.” “I wanted to play for a different front office. I wanted to see how another organization ran things. And on top of all that, I wanted to play with guys who actually knew how to play, guys whose skill sets perfectly matched up with mine.” “And you saw the results when we stepped on the court. It wasn't just that the Warriors were bigger, stronger, or faster than you. We actually played real, pure team basketball. We moved the ball, we hit shots, we were hyper-efficient. It worked out perfectly.”

KΞRL_✂️

224,692 次观看 • 1 个月前

Marc Andreessen on the 3 things he looks for when investing in a startup The first thing Marc Andreesen looks for is a big market: “Is there a big existing market that you think you can go after and displace incumbents? Or do you believe there will be a new market that will be big?” The second thing he looks for is a 10x better product: “Is there a fundamental technology or economic change that justifies a new company? And the way I always think about that is: Is there a 10x change happening in the technology landscape? Is something 10x faster, 10x cheaper, or 10x better? If it’s not 10x, we as both VCs and entrepreneurs have to ask ourselves if it’s really worth doing because it’s really hard to start new companies . . . Existing companies are usually pretty good at what they do. So for a new company to exist, it has to bring a product to market that’s so much better than what exists that it punches through the status quo.” The third is the team: “Is the team outstanding? . . . You want to have a founding team of complementary skillsets. You want to have at least one super strong technologist — quite possibly more than one. Some of the best startups are actually more than one founding technologist. And then it often helps to have someone who is a marketing or salesperson who has a really good understanding of business.” Marc believes that you need all three of these, but if you’re going to compromise on one of those as an investor, it should be the product: “A great market is a lot easier to make up for with iterative product execution. The problem with a poor or small market is that even if you do a good job on the product, there just aren’t that many customers so it’s hard to ever get big and people get demoralized . . . And then we evaluate the team of a startup by its ability to get into a big market with a good product.”

Marc Andreessen on the 3 things he looks for when investing in a startup The first thing Marc Andreesen looks for is a big market: “Is there a big existing market that you think you can go after and displace incumbents? Or do you believe there will be a new market that will be big?” The second thing he looks for is a 10x better product: “Is there a fundamental technology or economic change that justifies a new company? And the way I always think about that is: Is there a 10x change happening in the technology landscape? Is something 10x faster, 10x cheaper, or 10x better? If it’s not 10x, we as both VCs and entrepreneurs have to ask ourselves if it’s really worth doing because it’s really hard to start new companies . . . Existing companies are usually pretty good at what they do. So for a new company to exist, it has to bring a product to market that’s so much better than what exists that it punches through the status quo.” The third is the team: “Is the team outstanding? . . . You want to have a founding team of complementary skillsets. You want to have at least one super strong technologist — quite possibly more than one. Some of the best startups are actually more than one founding technologist. And then it often helps to have someone who is a marketing or salesperson who has a really good understanding of business.” Marc believes that you need all three of these, but if you’re going to compromise on one of those as an investor, it should be the product: “A great market is a lot easier to make up for with iterative product execution. The problem with a poor or small market is that even if you do a good job on the product, there just aren’t that many customers so it’s hard to ever get big and people get demoralized . . . And then we evaluate the team of a startup by its ability to get into a big market with a good product.”

Startup Archive

17,333 次观看 • 6 个月前

Amandla Stenberg speaks on #TheAcolyte getting canceled “It’s not a huge shock for me [that it was canceled]. Of course, I live in the bubble of my own reality but for those who aren’t aware there has been a rampage of vitriol that we have faced since the show was even announced ... when it was still just a concept and no one had even seen it. That’s when we started experiencing a rampage of hyper-conservative bigotry and vitriol, prejudice, hatred, and hateful language towards us ... this really affected me when I first got the job because it’s just not something, even though I anticipated it happening, it’s not something you can fully understand what it feels like until it’s happening to you.” “It has been an incredible honor and dream for me to be in this universe ... And I just want to let those people know out there who supported us in that way, and supported us vocally in the face of all of the vitriol that we received, and the kind of the targeted attack I would say we received by the alt-right, just that you were deeply loved and appreciated, and it made this job all the worthwhile for me" "And I have to thank Lesyle Headland ... I just fucking love that bitch ... one of the best people in the world ... she's so incredibly talented and unique ... I will love this experience with her forever"

Amandla Stenberg speaks on #TheAcolyte getting canceled “It’s not a huge shock for me [that it was canceled]. Of course, I live in the bubble of my own reality but for those who aren’t aware there has been a rampage of vitriol that we have faced since the show was even announced ... when it was still just a concept and no one had even seen it. That’s when we started experiencing a rampage of hyper-conservative bigotry and vitriol, prejudice, hatred, and hateful language towards us ... this really affected me when I first got the job because it’s just not something, even though I anticipated it happening, it’s not something you can fully understand what it feels like until it’s happening to you.” “It has been an incredible honor and dream for me to be in this universe ... And I just want to let those people know out there who supported us in that way, and supported us vocally in the face of all of the vitriol that we received, and the kind of the targeted attack I would say we received by the alt-right, just that you were deeply loved and appreciated, and it made this job all the worthwhile for me" "And I have to thank Lesyle Headland ... I just fucking love that bitch ... one of the best people in the world ... she's so incredibly talented and unique ... I will love this experience with her forever"

Culture Crave 🍿

4,936,838 次观看 • 1 年前

Terence Tao has an IQ above 200. Youngest gold medalist in Math Olympiad history. Fields Medal winner. The greatest living mathematician by nearly any measure. And he just said something most people aren’t ready for. Tao: “This whole era of AI is teaching us that our idea of what intelligence is, is not really accurate.” We spent centuries building civilization on one assumption. That intelligence was sacred. Irreducible. Uniquely ours. The one thing that made the entire human story make sense. Then AI started solving things we swore only we could. Chess. Language. Vision. Math. And every time, we reached for the same defense. That’s not real intelligence. It’s just tricks. Just pattern matching. Just an algorithm. Tao: “You look at how it’s done and it doesn’t feel like intelligence.” So we moved the line. Again. And again. And again. Because intelligence was supposed to feel like something. Something deep. Something we could point to and say… this is what separates us from everything else. But AI kept solving the problems. And that feeling never arrived. Tao: “We were looking for some elusive, intelligent way of thinking and we don’t see it in the tools that actually solve our goals.” Here’s what makes it worse. Large language models work by predicting the next word. One word at a time. No grand architecture. No deep understanding. Just probability. And it works. Tao: “Maybe that’s actually a lot of what humans do as well.” The greatest living mathematician just told you human thought might run on the same machinery. Not some transcendent spark. Pattern recognition. Prediction. One thought, one decision, one word at a time. We built religion around intelligence. Philosophy around it. An entire species identity around it. And a machine running probability just held up a mirror. We didn’t lose intelligence to AI. We just finally saw what it always was. What haunts us isn’t that machines learned to think. It’s that thinking was never what we needed it to be.

Terence Tao has an IQ above 200. Youngest gold medalist in Math Olympiad history. Fields Medal winner. The greatest living mathematician by nearly any measure. And he just said something most people aren’t ready for. Tao: “This whole era of AI is teaching us that our idea of what intelligence is, is not really accurate.” We spent centuries building civilization on one assumption. That intelligence was sacred. Irreducible. Uniquely ours. The one thing that made the entire human story make sense. Then AI started solving things we swore only we could. Chess. Language. Vision. Math. And every time, we reached for the same defense. That’s not real intelligence. It’s just tricks. Just pattern matching. Just an algorithm. Tao: “You look at how it’s done and it doesn’t feel like intelligence.” So we moved the line. Again. And again. And again. Because intelligence was supposed to feel like something. Something deep. Something we could point to and say… this is what separates us from everything else. But AI kept solving the problems. And that feeling never arrived. Tao: “We were looking for some elusive, intelligent way of thinking and we don’t see it in the tools that actually solve our goals.” Here’s what makes it worse. Large language models work by predicting the next word. One word at a time. No grand architecture. No deep understanding. Just probability. And it works. Tao: “Maybe that’s actually a lot of what humans do as well.” The greatest living mathematician just told you human thought might run on the same machinery. Not some transcendent spark. Pattern recognition. Prediction. One thought, one decision, one word at a time. We built religion around intelligence. Philosophy around it. An entire species identity around it. And a machine running probability just held up a mirror. We didn’t lose intelligence to AI. We just finally saw what it always was. What haunts us isn’t that machines learned to think. It’s that thinking was never what we needed it to be.

Dustin

564,442 次观看 • 3 个月前

Mark Zuckerberg on the importance of engineers if you’re building a technology company “We never thought about ourselves as a website or a social network or anything like that.” Mark believes many companies define themselves too narrowly: “It’s one of the things I observed as soon as I came out to [Silicon] Valley. All these companies that called themselves technology companies were not really set up that way. The CEO wasn’t technical. The board of directors had no one technical on it… And it’s like alright, if that’s your team, then you’re not a technology company.” He believes there’s a balance: “You don’t want everyone to be an engineer because there’s other things that matter too. But if you don’t have a high enough share of the company as engineers, then you’re not a technology company.” This makes sense when you view it in the context of Mark’s strategy for Meta: “I define our strategy as: If we can learn faster than every other company, we’re going to win. We’re going to build a better product than everyone else because we’re going to get it out first, we’re going to have a good feedback loop, and we’re going to learn what people like better than other people.” He concludes: “I think that’s basically the formula. Be a technology company. Build a good foundation. Learn from what other people are focused on in the world. And iterate as quickly as you can.” Video source: Acquired Podcast (2024)

Mark Zuckerberg on the importance of engineers if you’re building a technology company “We never thought about ourselves as a website or a social network or anything like that.” Mark believes many companies define themselves too narrowly: “It’s one of the things I observed as soon as I came out to [Silicon] Valley. All these companies that called themselves technology companies were not really set up that way. The CEO wasn’t technical. The board of directors had no one technical on it… And it’s like alright, if that’s your team, then you’re not a technology company.” He believes there’s a balance: “You don’t want everyone to be an engineer because there’s other things that matter too. But if you don’t have a high enough share of the company as engineers, then you’re not a technology company.” This makes sense when you view it in the context of Mark’s strategy for Meta: “I define our strategy as: If we can learn faster than every other company, we’re going to win. We’re going to build a better product than everyone else because we’re going to get it out first, we’re going to have a good feedback loop, and we’re going to learn what people like better than other people.” He concludes: “I think that’s basically the formula. Be a technology company. Build a good foundation. Learn from what other people are focused on in the world. And iterate as quickly as you can.” Video source: Acquired Podcast (2024)

Startup Archive

44,116 次观看 • 9 个月前

PRX alecks explains why Paper Rex chose LEVIATÁN as their first opponent: "We tried to pick a team that we think we will have the most fun with rather than someone that we wanted to beat" "That's pretty much what me and Ash [Wendler] talked about in the days leading up to this. We were trying to figure out why all the first seeds lose. For me, I'm not sure, but we tried to not overprepare. I think we tried to be as relaxed as we can. We came in and then we tried to pick a team that we think we will have the most fun with rather than someone that we wanted to beat. Sometimes when you feel as though you need to win the game, it gets a little bit more difficult. So everyone was ready and we were happy, and it allowed us to play our game a little bit better." #VALORANTMasters via Adrian of THESPIKE.GG

PRX alecks explains why Paper Rex chose LEVIATÁN as their first opponent: "We tried to pick a team that we think we will have the most fun with rather than someone that we wanted to beat" "That's pretty much what me and Ash [Wendler] talked about in the days leading up to this. We were trying to figure out why all the first seeds lose. For me, I'm not sure, but we tried to not overprepare. I think we tried to be as relaxed as we can. We came in and then we tried to pick a team that we think we will have the most fun with rather than someone that we wanted to beat. Sometimes when you feel as though you need to win the game, it gets a little bit more difficult. So everyone was ready and we were happy, and it allowed us to play our game a little bit better." #VALORANTMasters via Adrian of THESPIKE.GG

VALO2ASIA

230,942 次观看 • 2 个月前

Jensen Huang just told the story of how the AI revolution started with one customer, one box, and a second-floor room nobody thought twice about. Nobody on Earth wanted it. Huang: “When I announced this thing, nobody in the world wanted it. I had no purchase orders. Not one.” Nvidia had spent billions building the DGX-1. The first AI supercomputer purpose-built for deep learning. $300,000 per unit. The entire technology industry looked at it and passed. Every hyperscaler. Every research lab. Every Fortune 500 with a machine learning team. Not one purchase order. Then Elon Musk found Huang at a fireside chat in 2015. Huang: “He goes, ‘You know what? I have a company that could really use this.’” His first customer. His only customer. Then Musk finished the sentence. Huang: “He goes, ‘It’s a non-profit company.’ And all the blood drained out of my face.” Billions in R&D. A $300,000 machine. And the one person on Earth who wanted it could not pay for it. Huang built it anyway. Huang: “I boxed one up. I drove it up to San Francisco and I delivered it to Elon in 2016.” Not shipped. Not handed off to a freight company. The CEO of Nvidia personally boxed the first AI supercomputer and drove it to San Francisco himself. That is not a delivery. That is a bet. Huang: “I walked up to the second floor where they were all kind of in a room. That place turned out to have been OpenAI.” Pieter Abbeel was there. Ilya Sutskever was there. A handful of researchers, one supercomputer, and a room nobody outside that building could have named. No campus. No valuation. No infrastructure. Just raw talent and one machine the rest of the world had already rejected. Huang: “Just a bunch of people in a room.” That room built ChatGPT. That room triggered a $200 billion industry. That room forced every government on Earth to rethink national security. It started because one founder saw what the entire market refused to see, and one CEO drove the weapon there himself. The trillion-dollar AI industry did not begin in a boardroom. It began with a box in the back of a car, a non-profit that could not afford it, and a bet that every serious person in technology thought was insane. The market was unanimous. The market was wrong.

Jensen Huang just told the story of how the AI revolution started with one customer, one box, and a second-floor room nobody thought twice about. Nobody on Earth wanted it. Huang: “When I announced this thing, nobody in the world wanted it. I had no purchase orders. Not one.” Nvidia had spent billions building the DGX-1. The first AI supercomputer purpose-built for deep learning. $300,000 per unit. The entire technology industry looked at it and passed. Every hyperscaler. Every research lab. Every Fortune 500 with a machine learning team. Not one purchase order. Then Elon Musk found Huang at a fireside chat in 2015. Huang: “He goes, ‘You know what? I have a company that could really use this.’” His first customer. His only customer. Then Musk finished the sentence. Huang: “He goes, ‘It’s a non-profit company.’ And all the blood drained out of my face.” Billions in R&D. A $300,000 machine. And the one person on Earth who wanted it could not pay for it. Huang built it anyway. Huang: “I boxed one up. I drove it up to San Francisco and I delivered it to Elon in 2016.” Not shipped. Not handed off to a freight company. The CEO of Nvidia personally boxed the first AI supercomputer and drove it to San Francisco himself. That is not a delivery. That is a bet. Huang: “I walked up to the second floor where they were all kind of in a room. That place turned out to have been OpenAI.” Pieter Abbeel was there. Ilya Sutskever was there. A handful of researchers, one supercomputer, and a room nobody outside that building could have named. No campus. No valuation. No infrastructure. Just raw talent and one machine the rest of the world had already rejected. Huang: “Just a bunch of people in a room.” That room built ChatGPT. That room triggered a $200 billion industry. That room forced every government on Earth to rethink national security. It started because one founder saw what the entire market refused to see, and one CEO drove the weapon there himself. The trillion-dollar AI industry did not begin in a boardroom. It began with a box in the back of a car, a non-profit that could not afford it, and a bet that every serious person in technology thought was insane. The market was unanimous. The market was wrong.

Dustin

25,119 次观看 • 4 个月前

A jaw-on-the-floor moment for the whole team was when we had taught the robot to pick up a baggie and shake a usb-brick out with the left hand. During one rollout, it decided to do it with the right hand—and we all stopped. We were stunned, because no one taught it to do that. This was one of the first models with our pretrained base, and it was the moment we realized there was something here that was very different from what any of us had ever built before. We now know this to be part of the improvisational intelligence that emerges with large-scale pretraining on real manipulation data, and it continues to be one of the things that we believe to be worth pushing forward as capability. Our CTO and cofounder Andy Barry joined Association for Advancing Automation to share more about these moments, and how his time at Boston Dynamics and the Broad Institute drove him to focus on building the 🧠 for robots at Generalist. Full ep 👇

A jaw-on-the-floor moment for the whole team was when we had taught the robot to pick up a baggie and shake a usb-brick out with the left hand. During one rollout, it decided to do it with the right hand—and we all stopped. We were stunned, because no one taught it to do that. This was one of the first models with our pretrained base, and it was the moment we realized there was something here that was very different from what any of us had ever built before. We now know this to be part of the improvisational intelligence that emerges with large-scale pretraining on real manipulation data, and it continues to be one of the things that we believe to be worth pushing forward as capability. Our CTO and cofounder Andy Barry joined Association for Advancing Automation to share more about these moments, and how his time at Boston Dynamics and the Broad Institute drove him to focus on building the 🧠 for robots at Generalist. Full ep 👇

Generalist

11,117 次观看 • 2 个月前

behind of yesterday’s tiktok ⭐️ 🐰 the ‘tree’ challenge that i did yesterday…i did it because i wanted to 🐰 as soon i saw it, i was like “i need to do this” it’s so funny 🐰 that’s actually not what i was going to film that day, it was supposed to be a sexy challenge but i’m not really good at those kind of challenges where you have to be like “look at my sexiness”, even with performances i prefer doing something that’s more light so i told them that there was something else i wanted to do instead of that one and they asked me what i wanted to do so i showed them the ‘tree’ challenge and said that that’s what i wanted to do 🐰 we actually save the ones that we’d like to do and bring it with us so we can show it to them 🐰 when i showed it to them, they loved it and were like the “let’s do this! let’s do it right away!” 🐰 i wasn’t going to film a challenge that day so it was a very sudden filming and i was wearing sandals…something like slippers with nothing covering my heels so they kept coming off my feet when i was doing the step 🐰 i think i filmed it about 5 times, i filmed it many times 🐰 “you should’ve done the sexy one” i mean…i can do it if i have to but i’m not good at it…doing something sexy on stage is fine but being like “wow look at me 😏” is not something i particularly like either 🐰 i like doing light performances and i think that’s what suits me as well 🐰 each person has something that suits them 🐰 yeonjun hyung & beomgyu are excessively coy when they’re on stage and they’re people that suit that kind of thing but i feel like i’m not someone that suits it 🐰 i think i suit light concepts better 🐰 i don’t know about suiting because everyone will have a different opinion but i personally like that better!

behind of yesterday’s tiktok ⭐️ 🐰 the ‘tree’ challenge that i did yesterday…i did it because i wanted to 🐰 as soon i saw it, i was like “i need to do this” it’s so funny 🐰 that’s actually not what i was going to film that day, it was supposed to be a sexy challenge but i’m not really good at those kind of challenges where you have to be like “look at my sexiness”, even with performances i prefer doing something that’s more light so i told them that there was something else i wanted to do instead of that one and they asked me what i wanted to do so i showed them the ‘tree’ challenge and said that that’s what i wanted to do 🐰 we actually save the ones that we’d like to do and bring it with us so we can show it to them 🐰 when i showed it to them, they loved it and were like the “let’s do this! let’s do it right away!” 🐰 i wasn’t going to film a challenge that day so it was a very sudden filming and i was wearing sandals…something like slippers with nothing covering my heels so they kept coming off my feet when i was doing the step 🐰 i think i filmed it about 5 times, i filmed it many times 🐰 “you should’ve done the sexy one” i mean…i can do it if i have to but i’m not good at it…doing something sexy on stage is fine but being like “wow look at me 😏” is not something i particularly like either 🐰 i like doing light performances and i think that’s what suits me as well 🐰 each person has something that suits them 🐰 yeonjun hyung & beomgyu are excessively coy when they’re on stage and they’re people that suit that kind of thing but i feel like i’m not someone that suits it 🐰 i think i suit light concepts better 🐰 i don’t know about suiting because everyone will have a different opinion but i personally like that better!

💬

40,919 次观看 • 6 个月前