Daniel Legut - QR/acc'd

@francoisfleuret I'm sorry Dave, but you're absolutely right!

Kubrick's 2001, but with an excessively apologetic LLM.

Name on the door 🏭

@jjohnpotter Something something medium be the message something something or another... I'm busy. Talk to @julianweisser. I'd imagine he can come up with something related to Marshall McLuhan. I'm out sourcing my commenting just for this one.

Handful of people messaged me to reach out after this so it turns out the strategy is to participate in meta discussions about reaching out until people say what’s up

There is a cargo culting going on in what an investment looks like that makes people wave their hands and say it's going to be the next X because of Y. Some characteristic of Y is similar to what X had at the inception so therefore it will be the next X. I think I understand, but correct me if I am not.

people use the "if its the next facebook" justification to pay higher prices, and while this is correct in some ways, it ignores the reality that there is not a permutation of credentials at the inception of a company that makes it more likely to be the "next facebook" vs one that lacks those credentials

i've seen a few rounds now where the founders reject a priced round (i.e. every new investor pays the same entry price) to raise on SAFEs with rapidly ascending valuation caps. they end up securing more capital with less (future) dilution than if they had taken the priced round: > early priced rounds being put on the back burner. more net dilution (sometimes) + more admin headache (sucks for VC markups!) > fundraising is a live auction atm > being an auction, priced round term sheets box in how much a company can raise (and at what cost), limiting how much a company can leverage its "hotness" factor to raise cheap capital feels like something needs to be fixed here: > priced rounds are absurdly archaic (administratively) and much too slow/painful vs SAFEs (I'm always bemused it takes a couple of months to go from signed TS to closed round i.e. wired capital). As a pre-seed investor, I'm also not unhappy about founders raising their seed rounds on SAFEs as it kicks the can down the road on my dilution (i.e. potentially better for DPI) = very little incentive to do priced rounds from both sides > schizophrenic VC behavior that disregards the entry price (i.e. paying 2x vs what the VC before me paid yesterday) under the pretense that "wHaT IF its THe nexT FaCeBoOK" is financially irresponsible and unsustainable as fudiciaries of LP capital

Most people are avoiding the hard thing: actually selling robots to real users. I know more companies that sell to robotics companies than robotics companies that sell to real users. This needs to change for the economics to workout long term

Nvidia GTC 2026:

Experimenting with some conductive resins recently. Continuity testing has never been so satisfying.

The one about VC behavior in that kind of situation, because it seems to be you're probably remembering a certain situation you ran into. From my understanding, most of what VC investment is about is a convex bet. It seems people gave you the justification of it being the next Facebook or other large known tech company. I'd imagine it must be a frequency of that justification, or maybe after an investor has already invested to have their investment do better? I'm just trying to understand what would lead you to describe it in the way you did. It's somewhat in a griping manner. So I just wanted to better understand that complaint because I believe there is more nuance there that would lead you to complain. Just to be clear, I don't expect you to name names but just want to know a more specific situation or recurring situation you run into.

@Dev_Man_Dan what point specifically?

@francoisfleuret It's not magic, it's rigor. However, magic still tricks people who don't know how it's done.

The AI community: Sweats for four decades coding zillions of line of Python, tries all possible models under the sun, gets strong reject and passive agressive comments from reviewer #2. People:

I just want a sopranos-inspired TV series written by @MikeJudge where @pmarca goes to therapy. Is that so much to ask?

Machine Cinema shout out from Rick Champagne, Nvidia’s Director of Global Media & Entertainment Industry Strategy and Marketing at Nvidia GTC!

@William_Blake @pmarca Ryan Holiday would call stoicism a perennial seller. It has for him at-least.

@Dev_Man_Dan @pmarca Hahah who woulda thought we'd still be debating Stoicism ten years later....

And memes:

@eptmpa I don't know what this means, but it looks sick.

I made copper from first principles

@mwseibel How real is this problem? Like, how many people genuinely can't come up with an idea? Is it the idea or the ability to take a risk? Feels like most people could come up with an idea. Also feels like they could blame not having an idea when they are too scared to take a chance.

Fun new Dalton + Michael video

@francoisfleuret well...if you could, then you'd be fairly well off in more ways than one.

I cannot understand how the huge statistical spaghetti mess that is a transformer can be so correct in the formal causal analysis of a huge piece of source code.

I mean, tbh you know something is bad when a piece of paper and a pencil are a tremendous brain extension.

@pmarca I’d imagine the semantics is what trips people up. The use of the term introspection in the original interview.

Well.