krrishd

Re: why do we need _so many_, I tend to agree but it's the equivalent of "USD" in the banking system really being a wide range of deposits at different institutions, with different underlying balance sheets (banks fail regularly, and are regularly backstopped by eg. the FDIC!). There is clearing infra being built around this problem (increasing fragmentation of deposits between stablecoins/etc), just like it was a problem for the old world in which clearinghouses emerged

This is one recent paper, but with this and other personnel details (eg. Fed governors attending the last few "A Very Stable Conferences", ex-Fed people working at Circle / doing stablecoin startups) you can infer that the Fed is more pro-stablecoin than you think.

Why? Cross-border payments are hard, CBDCs are unpopular / politically infeasible, and Fedwire takes up a ton of balance sheet capacity (etc).

This is not to say that there can't be liquidity challenges or "black swan" events, but the current iteration of stablecoins are _comparable_ to being "made by banks" and are certainly regulated.

"subjective and deeply irrational" aren't the exception for how humans organize

- Exercise authority / power

- Maintain status within the hierarchy

As in - who wants to work for a leader who is neither powerful nor high-status within their own company? Who consciously chooses a leader who is neither effective in getting people to do the right things, nor effective in commanding a (somewhat faith-based) trust in their long-term vision?

The study feels extremely leading in its idea of what a "good" leader would look like (presumably "hands off," leaves everyone alone such that good outcomes simple "emerge", etc) -- while treating this bent as obvious truth.

I say this as someone who spent the last 6 years straight working remotely (also having been successful in contributing impact).

"I used to struggle w needing to be “creative” or “original” in my work. At some point I had a breakthrough that really helped me: I cannot repeat an idea, no matter how basic or common, without imparting some of my worldview into it.

Even by choosing which basic ideas to amplify, I impart some small amount of myself into each output. It’s literally impossible for a given tweet to be “unoriginal”. Equally impossible to be Truly Original too of course, since you’re always remixing others thoughts.

This POV does put a premium on cultivating and developing one’s worldview, since that is the underlying originality simmering under the surface of each “basic” thought. The best writing is rewriting, including of other people’s words, and the lens is your whole mind."

from: https://x.com/eshear/status/1539393474612498434

We're building payment rails for AI agents; fully-owned rails across traditional banking and stablecoins, and the full set of funds flows that AI agents need to transact in the real world with businesses, consumers, and other agents (wallets, pay, request, credit, billing, and more).

We've raised from some of the most well-known operators in fintech & payments to shape how agents interact with the economy, from scratch.

https://natural.co if you'd like to learn more - email [email protected] if interested!

I enjoyed mine a lot / made a lot with it!

jk, agree with your point

I'm starting to wonder if the thing to address is the anxiety itself rather than the "fuzziness about the code" that creates the anxiety - and more explicitly model myself as an engineering and/or product manager counterpart to these things. I wonder how non-IC EMs/PMs do it - it seems maybe fundamentally anxiety-inducing? – but they _do_ do this already (tolerate the fact that the underlying technical system is not fully within their grasp).