This is very cool and makes me smile because I used to use a simplified version of this as a take home project in engineering interviews.
One usecase I find particularly interesting is predictions. People often predict the future like “in 2 years we will have AGI” etc. It would be fun to fact check these predictions on the exact date 2 years later. Pick top tech leaders or politicians and scrape all their predictions and make a leaderboard of who got it right or messed up. could be fun to try.
Thanks for the comment! Our approach has been very much depth-first rather than breadth-first. We’re laser-focused on the private credit industry for now and plan to stick with B2B for the foreseeable future. The biggest takeaway for us while building Arc Intelligence has been that accuracy is everything—and hitting those high accuracy levels really comes down to staying focused.
not sure if I'm understanding what you are comparing with. what is your alternative?
if we are taking authz as a need in your org and also a single point of failure for your entire services (as you said in your comment), are you suggesting you would instead build / host your own Zanzibar like authz service, and that your in-house solution would do better in terms of availability than this external solution?
leaving aside how much you'd lose on productivity, I would guess your in-house solution will break more unless you spend a lot of time making that a highly available service (and you'd depend on other SaaS for that as well, which may also break).
Unlike Plaid, Finicity and Yodlee have direct integrations with some banks. Example: Silicon Valley Bank has direct integration with Finicity. SVB through Plaid breaks quickly (because they require some weird 2fa policy).
Let me know if I'm missing something but if Stripe is A) providing reliable connection to common banks Plaid misses and B) saving it's users from all the headaches of integrating with old school services like Finicity/Yodlee, then charging a premium sounds like fair game.
I hope you find extra motivation from the extreme contraints you forced on yourself in the longer term.
Making yourself live on 24k in NYC is not a good idea. Publicly sharing that is an even worse idea. I’d be surprised if this gave a positive signal to your investors, but it surely won’t to anyone you possibly employ/pay salary for.
If I have to make a guess it’s much more likely that their deep learning algorithms learned nudity is more engaging (without them using that as a feature).
This obviously doesn’t mean the platform isn’t responsible. I agree we need to have regulations that require these companies to ensure their algorithms are “inclusive”.
Unlike what the author thinks linkedin revenue isn't largely fueled by recruiter business. It is driven by where he thinks they are weak: linkedin marketing solutions, or in friendlier words "feed interactions". See the most recent microsoft earnings report:
And unlike what the author thinks linkedin navigated the current climate around social networks pretty well. Not only they've succeeded in keeping the network out of the political environment, and showed strong growth in user base and engagement (see above report), they also ranked as the most trusted social network consistently according to Business Insider Digital Trust study:
You can't generalize but most often that is the case. Having said that I'm surprised nobody brought up maybe the most important factor: sunk investments.
If you have a brand name and credibility at stake, if you have customer liability, if you have built significant the features and infrastructure, if you hired the people that run and maintain those, if your revenue depends on current status of your product... We can keep going on but, you have to take extra actions and caution as you introduce change. That means additional complexity.
However keep in mind big companies can benefit from certain types of barriers to entry such as regulation that provide them efficiency over small companies. For example US immigration policy favors big companies, and IMO GPDR will do so as well.
And in your investor deck you "promised" your VC investors there is a potential for huge monetary return in this. That's what the VCs will look at anyways. Side benefit to community? nice to have but who cares.
Modern wine glasses are designed for drinking experience and you are supposed to hold the glass using your fingers from it's stem. And that's exactly why you don't fill half of your glass and try to carry 250 milliliters of liquid with your fingers.
The term "Web 2.0" is an unfortunate choice and as a consequence it has been rarely used correctly. Funny enough I've been to a Web 2.0 Conference about 10 years ago where almost every speaker used it incorrectly.
Web 2.0 has nothing to do with a technical revision or change in the Web. It was used by Tim O'Reilly back in 2004 (and became popular) and refers to the rapid change in the way the web is used, more specifically the switch from static web to user generated content.
I'm sorry but your forum is all about UGC, and AJAX has nothing to do with Web 2.0.
> Uber, AirBnb, Snapchat, Dropbox, etc will all crumble. None of these companies are anything special.
Lol. Please share some of your wisdom with us. Leaving aside taxi companies like Uber and useless things like Airbnb, can you tell us what companies do anything special these days Master Foo?
In December 2015 I received an e-mail with the following subject line from AWS, around 4 am in the morning:
"Amazon EC2 Instance scheduled for retirement"
When I checked the logs it was clear the hardware failed 30 mins before they scheduled it for retirement. EC2 and root device data was gone. The e-mail also said "you may have already lost data".
So I know that Amazon schedules servers for retirement after they already failed, green check doesn't surprise me.
Perhaps because her name would be indexed by the search engines as this story is shared thousands of times? Would you like the #1 search result for your name to be a sexual harassment story?
Humans transfer knowledge most effectively when they are communicating in person. Of course this does not mean you will achieve the highest productivity in an office by putting 20 people in the same room, but it still says a lot about in office vs complete remote work.
A lot of companies create the type of culture where it's not pleasant to work in the office. However, having half you team work remotely on random days of the week isn't the right solution to this, and I don't think it could be justified by saying "I trust my employees". Just create the right team and the right environment. People will want to spend time together when there is inspiration and motivation involved.
There is a lot more to the implications of strong tacit information transfer that extends to how innovation ecosystems work. For anyone curious I would suggest finding the research around the subject.
One usecase I find particularly interesting is predictions. People often predict the future like “in 2 years we will have AGI” etc. It would be fun to fact check these predictions on the exact date 2 years later. Pick top tech leaders or politicians and scrape all their predictions and make a leaderboard of who got it right or messed up. could be fun to try.