|
@michael_nielsen | |||||
|
Hmm, flipping that about: if you want to be a useful funder, maybe you should never fund a project that anyone else in the world would fund.
Which sounds nuts, but has the benefit you're sure any impact was additional.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
David Deutsch
@DavidDeutschOxf
|
30. sij |
|
Yet instead of doing what would be fun, and thereby maybe solving stuff, people do what they're told they 'must', or what they think they 'should'. twitter.com/webdevMason/st…
|
||
|
|
||
|
michael_nielsen
@michael_nielsen
|
30. sij |
|
Was reflecting on a related thought earlier: my income over the years has typically been anti-correlated with the social value of whatever I'm doing. (There are exceptions). I don't think this is unusual at all: the labor market for creative work seems mindbogglingly inefficient
|
||
|
|
||
|
michael_nielsen
@michael_nielsen
|
30. sij |
|
This seems intrinsic: the greatest creative opportunity lies where institutions (inc. the labor market) fears to tread. To some extent they're valuable opportunities _because_ institutions won't operate there.
|
||
|
|
||
|
michael_nielsen
@michael_nielsen
|
30. sij |
|
I call this Groucho's law: you should never work on any project for which can get funding. Tongue-in-cheek, but there's a grain of truth to it: the easier funding is to get, the more likely something like it would have happened anyway.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
|
30. sij |
|
A thing I feel moderately strongly about and hope to experiment with eventually: the first $X for some X which funders broadly consider is not just too low to matter but too low for them to even *contemplate a funding decision* would unblock stupendous amounts of value.
|
||
|
|
||
|
michael_nielsen
@michael_nielsen
|
30. sij |
|
I participated for a year or so in the @awesomefound Toronto (a @timhwang production, among others). 10 people would each throw $100 into a pot each month, and we'd fund a $1k micro-grant. The first month we had, IIRC, 1,300 applicants. I'd guess 200+ were worthwhile.
|
||
|
|
||
|
alice maz
@alicemazzy
|
30. sij |
|
isn't this another way of saying arbitrage opportunities don't exist? capital markets are highly inefficient for a whole host of reasons
|
||
|
|
||
|
alice maz
@alicemazzy
|
30. sij |
|
classic contrarian investment strategy is to get money into things that you believe will be huge before they are legible to anyone else, profit off the time lag. success derisks, others come in at higher price later
|
||
|
|
||
|
Kaden Hazzard
@QuantumHazzard
|
30. sij |
|
Reminds me of Keck foundation - they explicitly ask to see your rejections from other agencies.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Jason Crawford
@jasoncrawford
|
30. sij |
|
Isn't this pretty much @peterthiel's rule already?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Matt Guttman
@RealtimeAI
|
30. sij |
|
|
||
|
J❄️hn Harl❄️w
@dynamicinaction
|
30. sij |
|
Was told in a session w/DARPA they scour the world and fund only ideas they think no one else will deliver in the next decade.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Aharon Brodutch
@ABrodutch
|
30. sij |
|
@FQXi seem to be doing that. Or at least aiming to do it.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Ben Reinhardt
@Ben_Reinhardt
|
31. sij |
|
This is one reason why the VC funding model isn't well-suited for funding quantum technological leaps: Most firms won't do a on their own.
|
||
|
|
||