Synergy Hub

I swear sometimes I don’t know how I am here, is anything real, or if I am even real. Even if I try to do something normal for once, it just gets weird.

I will confirm reorganization of the workday is necessary in the plans.  It is a mistake to believe you will just double productivity in the workforce by adding women, and that something else will not be sacrificed.  We are now seeing a dramatic decrease in the number of young men working.  Women are now the sole or primary providers of 40% of households with dependents.  I emphasize again- sole or primary income providers.  If both genders are to be in the workforce (because I assume men exiting the workforce is not the goal either), the organization of the work day will have to be changed.

Men are also now making headway in the family courts. For many states, the court now begins with 50/50 timesharing of children.  Unless there is an issue, the majority of men I have met in their 20′s have their kids 50% of the time now.  Courts have even rid themselves of the term “custody”.  These are recent changes in the past 5 years, and most of the population this will affect haven’t even had children yet.  About 45% of marriages currently end in divorce, this is also the age group that employment income peaks.  That’s a significant portion of the workforce that can’t move anymore.  People with 50/50 don’t move away from each other because of school districts.

So to recap- significant portion of plans, but we are headed that direction anyway.  Not realistic to have employees pulling 12 hour days anymore between 8 hours office time + networking/company events in evenings + 2 hour commutes.

I don’t know what to do about this female vs VC thing.  Spent all that time increasing female VCs, and they give us a makeup unicorn.  Not that impressive.  Women already have more then enough clothes and makeup.  Just stop that.

There will be time later for the book.

“Queen of Capitalism”, poor unfortunate souls.

VC experiences and perspectives are very tainted.  At one point I was making a VC bio, and then benchmarking how it changed the results of the same experiments.  It changed the results so dramatically, I had to take it off quickly.  Basically my ass was coddled/kissed far too much, and everything I was told was a lie.

A few other things…

• Measuring how information would travel through networks. I planted different documents and stories with the help of different entrepreneurs; then tracked where it went.
• What was most ironic, was we think of Silicon Valley as being a place that everyone else in the world copies.  Perhaps it was once like that.  But at the time I did my research, it was the opposite.  It was just that the resources hadn’t been spread out.
• In other words, Silicon Valley is taking everyone within a geographical location- and making them successful.  Then claiming innovation only happens there because this is where all the smart people live. That is actually a lie, and one of the reasons why everyone there will defend it.  Because there is an underlying knowledge that if we now removed that location factor, many of these same people would probably not be successful.  Definitely not once they are put back up against entrepreneurs outside of SV, who have been facing high levels of adversity.
• I actually found that there was innovation happening everywhere, but there is also a deep knowing that there is no “way out” building that type of company.  So the entrepreneurs are often forced, instead, to work on something smaller.
• Combating how networks evolve into what Silicon Valley now has, was another large area of discovery for me.
• Experimented alot with the social gullibility of investors in the earlier years (these were some of my first tests).  I would go into forums with different personas and sway the outcomes.  The usual. Both positive and negative.
• My personas had different age groups, genders, credentials, etc.

Very very very small portion of what I’ve been doing.

I think the VC brown-nosing from entrepreneurs has reached unsustainable levels. How would a VC ever know if they’re incorrect, because they’re never challenged. Every single blog post and comments are just praise and agreement. Occasionally one will add information to the VCs comment, but never actually challenge it.

Quid’s AI reported that over 50% of venture capital winners will now be outside of Silicon Valley, 20% outside of the US.  It says it also “predicted” a few success 8 years ago here in this article.

From an artificial intelligence perspective, it’s actually not new information.  What it’s really doing is analyzing and inferring a function from labeled training data, in other words…Quid’s AI is not actually a real “prediction”.  It’s something that already exists.

The labeled training data is based off companies that have already raised venture capital.  Which 80% of Venture Capital is injected during the Infrastructure Building Phase (known as Series B; however what it’s called in the press may be different). Most of the VCs already know the outcome of their companies by this stage.

I’m now also the CEO at Engineered Magik, Inc.  I’m interested in their technology.  Will explain more below, but right now here is the highlights:

1. Proprietary, provisional patent filed.
2. Demo is available, beta is taking signups.
3. We currently have 150 customers testing (most of which are under NDAs at attorney’s office).
4. Experienced team, successful exits in this industry.

They are developing a proprietary military grade security technology.  It will be made available for enterprise mobility as a low cost, snap in option.

Mobility is everything that is mobile- laptops, phones, tablets, wearables, devices in your home, the cloud….probably your entire workforce by now, etc.

Technically, I will be taking over the entire ecosystem and economy.  I guess I should make that clear upfront.

Though my plans have taken in millions of various considerations from many opposing roles & I do not discuss those (outside the company) in strategic or technical detail, I am most excited about a few aspects of my vision I would like to share:

• That we will be controlling all business creation regardless of personal networks, location, and financial means of
  the individual starting the business. Globalization will phase out.  But it will be the creation of a new business world, (what I call) “natural” empires (visions), small businesses, entrepreneurs, and so forth.  A component of this was also breaking up Silicon Valley…

• The second most important thing to know: We
  do not achieve these goals through
  mentorship, incubation, the counting of likes or number of employees, ICO’s, networks, benchmarking, consulting, business plans, venture capital funds, or crowd wisdom (which is an amusing oxymoron in itself because crowds aren’t wise).  We are none of the above.  We don’t exist yet.  We are a technology company, but a very different one then you are used to. This is not to say that these resources aren’t necessarily viable in their own merit, or on a smaller scale.  It’s that in the process of discovery they were not deemed to be the most viable path.
• The third (but arguably the biggest): When I put my vision together, we should have the capabilities of accelerating substantially larger visions into a more doable lifetime.  Ideas actually form (in their entirety) over periods of hundreds of years.  Value is lost everytime a transfer of knowledge occurs.  Of course when I use the word “acceleration” I’m referring to something vastly different then the current methods of acceleration (via hyping and half-assing visions in order to create an illusion of speed).  Again, there are millions of business/technical details developed as to how that’s going to work.

I will elaborate vaguely on the detailed “millions of considerations from opposing roles” that was discovery: This included very complex issues: from power dynamics, how do we handle competition between nodes within the global networks (as a third party)….to simple questions like: ‘how do you find the right entrepreneurs’, to translating my own research cases into polynomial equations to be translated into further technology.

Thank you.

---

(I tried to post to Tumblr but it doesn’t work). Anyway, for all my cash flowing friends who are curious. Startups can’t spend money on you because their startup is sucking up resources without producing “fruit”:

Tom and Tara are neighbors in a hot tropical country. Both folks decided that they needed some shade in their backyard. Tom went ahead and bought a big umbrella. It was a bit expensive, but much less cumbersome.

Tara took her friend Tanya went to the nursery and bought a small plant. People thought she was crazy and she really was. She planted it in her backyard and watered it. Unfortunately, it is not easy to grow a plant in that condition and plants often died being unsuited to the place. Other times they grew in random direction.

She kept trying different types of plants, until one of them started growing fast. While the plant was growing it still was not offering any benefit. It was not providing a shade nor a fruit nor any other benefit. It just sucked a lot of water, manure and time.

After years, Tara’s plant grew to become a large tree. It provided shade not just for Tara, but for a large region. It provided fruits and other benefits.

The umbrella that Tom brought stayed the same. It didn’t grow. It didn’t provide any fruit.

A small business is a self-sustaining organization that is designed to generate revenues or even profits from Day 1. It might not require as much investment and is less risky. However, it also doesn’t have a lot of upside.

A startup is akin to a small plant. It doesn’t offer any immediate benefits after planting, but just keeps sucking resources. Most plants you try to grow die before they become a tree. However, if it does survive and grows big, it can provide benefits for a long time to come. It can scale by growing vertically and also generate seeds for new child plants.

Most people in the world don’t get startups. They would keep complaining how people are investing in these ecommerce companies that don’t make profits. Do you know farmers who plant seeds that don’t become food right away? A farmer hopes to see the fruits of his labor much later in time. Same for startup founders and investors.

Tara didn’t succeed in her first attempt. She had to plant multiple things to eventually find the right tree that would grow big. In the same way, startups have to keep trying out. It is not a sure shot thing.

Tara went on a crazy route and had to suffer in the sun, at a time when Tom was under the umbrella. In the same way, many startup founders willingly forgo profits or premature scaling to build a sustainable, scalable company. It is not the suggested route for all people for all time. However, such explosive payoffs require crazy thinking and crazy people.

Some people might attempt to both buy the umbrella and grow a plant. That way, they have a shade until the plant grows. In the same way, some startups build service businesses to build revenues while running the the startup. It works for some. It doesn’t work for others. Living in shade, might take off your hunger to grow your plant. Or your shade might suffocate the plant without enough sunlight. In the same way, you might not be able to spend enough time or effort to grow the startup.

Finally, Tara was possibly after much more than shade – it is possibly a insatiable thirst to see something grow. In the same way, cash is just one small motivation for a startup founder. Seeing a complex life form take life is something highly addictive to watch. Some people cannot take eyes off their young plant.