One of the things I love most about London is that being here exposes you to all four seasons. Every year, as we rotate through spring, summer, autumn and winter, each gives the city an entirely different feel; Soho in the winter is completely different to Soho in the summer.
I am the co-founder and Chief Executive of Poli, a platform designed to help skilled, foreign jobseekers find work in the United Kingdom.
I have been a founding team member of three venture-backed start-ups; two died, one exited for eight figures[2]. All three used complex technology for social good.
I'm going to build the public bookmarking tool I've wanted to build for a long time. Every now and again, I get the sense that it'd be worth being able to share the things I felt were worth reading but existing tools don't quite align with the way I'd want to engage, nor the aesthetic I have in mind.
Let's see how quickly I can spin this up using Claude Code.
What they've done at Eleven Music is pretty incredible. I don't mean that in either a good or bad sense; it's as disturbing as it is impressive.
What role will "performing artists" – the Taylor Swifts, Kendrick Lamars, Ariana Grandes, etc. – play in a future wherein anybody can produce vocals that, while artificial and synthetic, are indistinguishable from human voices? Will they fade into irrelevance, or will their "real", human voices command a premium, available to license?
Another related point is that, as far as I know, the vast majority of artists earn very little through the streaming of their music; most of their earnings come from live performances. Live performances seem to bind people together around the experience itself as well as what is represented through the music — the heartbreaks, triumphs, nostalgia, et cetera. For lots of reasons, I think it's unlikely people will choose to abandon this sort of collective experience.
Lots of songs that go on to become the most popular in their category activate the above through distinct vocals and compelling narratives; storytelling based on real-world, human experiences, conveyed through a unique, human voice (even if the performer is not necessarily the writer of the lyrics). This raises a question, though: in a future that disconnects the "vocalist" (does a synthetic voice count as a vocalist?) from the "lived" or "experienced" substance entailed not just in a song's lyrics, but also in the act of giving those words life, exposing them for all to see and hear, how will artists using tools like Suno and ElevenLabs connect their audience to the art?
In any case, the cat seems to be out of the bag as far as the technology is concerned.
There's a lot I could say about the attempted rehabilitation of Lucy Connolly by the right-wing press, but I'll use what's happening as an opportunity to make just one point: you are responsible for what you publish in public.
It's really that simple. If you don't want to be held accountable for, or, God forbid, have to defend, what you've written, don't write it. Nobody is compelling you to share every thought you have with the world.
I became a Private Eye subscriber earlier this year and it is clear that the state's inability to deliver without heavy dependence on private consultants is(/was) not a uniquely Conservative problem.
For a long time, and mostly in passing, I've heard things like "the Civil Service is not fit for purpose" and "cannot attract the people it needs", especially in the context of digital and cyber; if the Eye's reporting is anything to go by, it's no surprise: reliance on expensive external consultants, working at firms that do not have the same social investment or long-term economic interests as the state, appears to have denuded the Civil Service of much of its in-house capacity and expertise.
It's a unique magazine, full of information you almost certainly cannot find elsewhere (with the possible exception of a well-curated Substack feed, or easy access to the diminishing number of local news outlets across the country), and well worth the ~£2 per issue price tag.
Here is yet another reminder that London is not seeing "unprecedented", or even exceptional, levels of crime. In fact, the evidence we have suggests that crime rates are generally down or stable. There is no "surge" – certain people just want you to believe there is.
This whole subject is becoming boring, to be frank.
I don't think working for a start-up is a particularly risky thing to do. While I won't deny there is some risk, the risk largely boils down to whether the company will be able to raise its next round of funding or not, or whether it will ever turn a profit.
Personality type matters. If you have a fairly clear sense of where you want to be in 10 years' time and want to build your career in a linear, predictable fashion, then a job at a start-up probably isn't right for you (unless you want to become a venture capitalist). Most start-ups expect to go from "zero" (i.e., an idea) to IPO within a 10-year period, but many never make it to that point, and, when this inevitably happens to a company you work for, "failing forwards" can present you with unexpected opportunities that may not align with the ideal "next step" you'd considered.
If you want to work for an organisation that feels more anarchic than bureaucractic, where staff ask for forgiveness rather than permission, that empowers every employee with a very real responsibility that can directly impact the company's bottom line, then you should consider working for a start-up. You may not need to compromise on the things you think you do, too.
At risk of stating the obvious, not all start-ups are the same; a pre-seed-stage start-up is markedly different to a Series B-stage start-up. I've only ever worked for pre-seed-stage start-ups,[1, 2] in part because I've been prepared to trade risk for ownership (i.e., equity) in the most extreme way available to non-founders, but there are many very well-paid, exciting opportunities to work for companies with $30+ million in funding and a much clearer path to profitability or, at the very least, the next funding milestone.
I think I'll return to this because it's worth talking about in more detail.
For quite a while I’ve wondered why most baby food sold in England seems to be organic, and why nobody seems to complain about it.
Are parents simply more conscious of what they expose their children to when they’re infants (vs. when they’re older)? Are there any known harms associated with feeding very young children produce that’s been heavily exposed to agrochemicals? Have vested interests just found a way of exploiting people who know no better?
In any case, this is a good thing as far as I’m concerned. I’m a fan of organic food — but only because I found myself working at a company building software for farmers.[1] I’ve lived in London my whole life and, up until the point of actually visiting an arable farm near Cambridge, had never really considered where the food I ate came from; how it actually ended up on the supermarket shelf.
I think most people are aware, at least vaguely, of the idea that organic produce is “better” or “healthier” for us than non-organic produce, but whenever I talk about it with people the number one thing I hear is “it’s so expensive” or “it costs too much”. It does cost more, that’s true, but this premium is the price we pay to consume food that hasn’t been lathered in chemicals designed to kill, and, to return to my initial question, doesn’t seem to be an issue in every context.
It’s something I think about often. There is some evidence of the impact our gut microbiome has on mental health (and ill-health). If, as it turns out, there is a clear connection between these two things, it makes understanding why people are prepared to spend more money on organic food under some circumstances, but not others, a really important line of enquiry in the context of encouraging more people to make healthier choices.
I've started to feel very strongly about titles in text appearing in sentence case(?) rather than title case.
I don't know when this started happening.
The first start-up[1] I worked for was acquired by the ill-fated Greensill Capital and taught me:
- how to write production-ready code;
- what good (and bad) leadership looks like;
- to always ask for more money than what you think is reasonable.
The journey ended prematurely, and we didn't get to fully deliver on our mission, but it was undoubtedly an invaluable learning experience.
This is the first post on this site and I'm testing a new integration. People usually use a "Hello, world" message for this type of thing, but I'll just say this: I've spent the past ~7 years working for technology start-ups almost by accident — more to come.
One of the things I love most about London is that being here exposes you to all four seasons. Every year, as we rotate through spring, summer, autumn and winter, each gives the city an entirely different feel; Soho in the winter is completely different to Soho in the summer.
I'm going to build the public bookmarking tool I've wanted to build for a long time. Every now and again, I get the sense that it'd be worth being able to share the things I felt were worth reading but existing tools don't quite align with the way I'd want to engage, nor the aesthetic I have in mind.
Let's see how quickly I can spin this up using Claude Code.
What they've done at Eleven Music is pretty incredible. I don't mean that in either a good or bad sense; it's as disturbing as it is impressive.
What role will "performing artists" – the Taylor Swifts, Kendrick Lamars, Ariana Grandes, etc. – play in a future wherein anybody can produce vocals that, while artificial and synthetic, are indistinguishable from human voices? Will they fade into irrelevance, or will their "real", human voices command a premium, available to license?
Another related point is that, as far as I know, the vast majority of artists earn very little through the streaming of their music; most of their earnings come from live performances. Live performances seem to bind people together around the experience itself as well as what is represented through the music — the heartbreaks, triumphs, nostalgia, et cetera. For lots of reasons, I think it's unlikely people will choose to abandon this sort of collective experience.
Lots of songs that go on to become the most popular in their category activate the above through distinct vocals and compelling narratives; storytelling based on real-world, human experiences, conveyed through a unique, human voice (even if the performer is not necessarily the writer of the lyrics). This raises a question, though: in a future that disconnects the "vocalist" (does a synthetic voice count as a vocalist?) from the "lived" or "experienced" substance entailed not just in a song's lyrics, but also in the act of giving those words life, exposing them for all to see and hear, how will artists using tools like Suno and ElevenLabs connect their audience to the art?
In any case, the cat seems to be out of the bag as far as the technology is concerned.
There's a lot I could say about the attempted rehabilitation of Lucy Connolly by the right-wing press, but I'll use what's happening as an opportunity to make just one point: you are responsible for what you publish in public.
It's really that simple. If you don't want to be held accountable for, or, God forbid, have to defend, what you've written, don't write it. Nobody is compelling you to share every thought you have with the world.
I became a Private Eye subscriber earlier this year and it is clear that the state's inability to deliver without heavy dependence on private consultants is(/was) not a uniquely Conservative problem.
For a long time, and mostly in passing, I've heard things like "the Civil Service is not fit for purpose" and "cannot attract the people it needs", especially in the context of digital and cyber; if the Eye's reporting is anything to go by, it's no surprise: reliance on expensive external consultants, working at firms that do not have the same social investment or long-term economic interests as the state, appears to have denuded the Civil Service of much of its in-house capacity and expertise.
It's a unique magazine, full of information you almost certainly cannot find elsewhere (with the possible exception of a well-curated Substack feed, or easy access to the diminishing number of local news outlets across the country), and well worth the ~£2 per issue price tag.
Here is yet another reminder that London is not seeing "unprecedented", or even exceptional, levels of crime. In fact, the evidence we have suggests that crime rates are generally down or stable. There is no "surge" – certain people just want you to believe there is.
This whole subject is becoming boring, to be frank.
I don't think working for a start-up is a particularly risky thing to do. While I won't deny there is some risk, the risk largely boils down to whether the company will be able to raise its next round of funding or not, or whether it will ever turn a profit.
Personality type matters. If you have a fairly clear sense of where you want to be in 10 years' time and want to build your career in a linear, predictable fashion, then a job at a start-up probably isn't right for you (unless you want to become a venture capitalist). Most start-ups expect to go from "zero" (i.e., an idea) to IPO within a 10-year period, but many never make it to that point, and, when this inevitably happens to a company you work for, "failing forwards" can present you with unexpected opportunities that may not align with the ideal "next step" you'd considered.
If you want to work for an organisation that feels more anarchic than bureaucractic, where staff ask for forgiveness rather than permission, that empowers every employee with a very real responsibility that can directly impact the company's bottom line, then you should consider working for a start-up. You may not need to compromise on the things you think you do, too.
At risk of stating the obvious, not all start-ups are the same; a pre-seed-stage start-up is markedly different to a Series B-stage start-up. I've only ever worked for pre-seed-stage start-ups,[1, 2] in part because I've been prepared to trade risk for ownership (i.e., equity) in the most extreme way available to non-founders, but there are many very well-paid, exciting opportunities to work for companies with $30+ million in funding and a much clearer path to profitability or, at the very least, the next funding milestone.
I think I'll return to this because it's worth talking about in more detail.
For quite a while I’ve wondered why most baby food sold in England seems to be organic, and why nobody seems to complain about it.
Are parents simply more conscious of what they expose their children to when they’re infants (vs. when they’re older)? Are there any known harms associated with feeding very young children produce that’s been heavily exposed to agrochemicals? Have vested interests just found a way of exploiting people who know no better?
In any case, this is a good thing as far as I’m concerned. I’m a fan of organic food — but only because I found myself working at a company building software for farmers.[1] I’ve lived in London my whole life and, up until the point of actually visiting an arable farm near Cambridge, had never really considered where the food I ate came from; how it actually ended up on the supermarket shelf.
I think most people are aware, at least vaguely, of the idea that organic produce is “better” or “healthier” for us than non-organic produce, but whenever I talk about it with people the number one thing I hear is “it’s so expensive” or “it costs too much”. It does cost more, that’s true, but this premium is the price we pay to consume food that hasn’t been lathered in chemicals designed to kill, and, to return to my initial question, doesn’t seem to be an issue in every context.
It’s something I think about often. There is some evidence of the impact our gut microbiome has on mental health (and ill-health). If, as it turns out, there is a clear connection between these two things, it makes understanding why people are prepared to spend more money on organic food under some circumstances, but not others, a really important line of enquiry in the context of encouraging more people to make healthier choices.
I've started to feel very strongly about titles in text appearing in sentence case(?) rather than title case.
I don't know when this started happening.
The first start-up[1] I worked for was acquired by the ill-fated Greensill Capital and taught me:
- how to write production-ready code;
- what good (and bad) leadership looks like;
- to always ask for more money than what you think is reasonable.
The journey ended prematurely, and we didn't get to fully deliver on our mission, but it was undoubtedly an invaluable learning experience.
This is the first post on this site and I'm testing a new integration. People usually use a "Hello, world" message for this type of thing, but I'll just say this: I've spent the past ~7 years working for technology start-ups almost by accident — more to come.