Consequently, VCs have also started avoiding uncertainty in the founders they back. Instead, they look for proxies of certainty like IOI medalists, IMO gold medalists, elite school dropouts, ex-OpenAI, ex-whatever.
Everyone is chasing the same credentials, the same founder archetype, and increasingly the same ideas.
Venture is no longer about backing contrarian founders and ideas. Call it certainty capital.
I’ve been noticing more founders writing “CEO @ Company” instead of “CEO @Company” in their X bios.
That tiny space means the company account is no longer clickable.
Which means anyone curious about the startup has to actually go look it up.
Is this intentional? Some sort of personal branding/distribution strategy I’m missing, or are founders just doing it for aesthetics?
It just doesn’t make any sense to me.
Silicon Valley bros go after women VCs with a level of viciousness they rarely reserve for men.
Jeez, just look at the replies and quote tweets under this post.
A million people could appear in the same “dossier,” say the exact same thing, or hold the exact same opinions, but somehow it’s always the women who get absolutely crucified.
You can disagree with Masha without turning it into a public execution. The double standard is ridiculous.
Lmao, the AI agent infra space is evolving faster than I can keep up.
What do you MEAN agents now get their own cloud VMs, sandboxed runtimes, persistent state, browsers, and full computer-use environments??? 😭
Every other startup I come across is building some variation of “a computer for agents.” When the fuck did this become an entire venture category?
Every time I identify an interesting wedge, I discover 15 well-funded startups already going after it. By the time I’ve refined my thesis, the market has moved again.
I’m genuinely developing founder idea paralysis at this point. Constantly rethinking the wedge, the TAM, the differentiation, the GTM… instead of just shipping. LMAO.
At this rate, I might pivot to consumer AI. Imagine spending your entire career building cloud infrastructure just to end up building a consumer app. 😭
Big Tech really had me living under a rock for years. Fuck.
You want a 7X world champion to lower his tone against a child with 9 wins? Two things will happen:
- Fred Vasseur gets fired at the end of the season
- Bearman pairs Hamilton in 2028
Contrary to what everyone thinks, a Hamilton exit will easily add up to >$250M in payouts. Elkann is a smart guy. It’s the media and the teenage fans of the Monagasque that don’t seem to understand what’s at stake here.
Hamilton has been around for much longer than anyone in such situations. He’s adding fuel to the fire knowing he has the full backing of the ownership group led by Elkann. Everyone else including the mechanics / Fred is just a pawn in Hamilton’s game of ping pong.
A reporter pinged me on Blind wanting to understand what the general feeling is internally at my employer. Luckily for my employer (to be “former”), I am but a loyal servant. No snitches on this side of the aisle. Future co-founders / employers, please take note of this rare quality of mine.
I’d go even further……I don’t think these people have any coherent convictions at all.
They accumulate capital without any underlying principles guiding what to do with it. So instead of allocating capital in pursuit of their values, they allocate it toward whatever happens to be fashionable, socially rewarded, or culturally expedient at the time.
They’ve got the relationship backwards. For most people, money is a means to pursue what they believe in. For these people, money comes first, and the beliefs are adopted afterward.
It’s not ideological conviction driving capital allocation. It’s capital chasing social validation. Perhaps i’m just struggling with articulating my point more succintly. I just can’t seem to find words that describe the sheer hypocrisy of these people.
People should absolutely allocate capital in ways that help shape political opinion. My issue with Silicon Valley isn’t that. It’s how easily its supposedly deeply held convictions shift to align with whatever happens to be fashionable or politically advantageous at the time.
How can people whose values constantly shift be said to gravitate toward anything? That’s not gravitation. It’s opportunism masquerading as conviction.