Agreed, homepage was confusing for me also. I tried to scroll around and see a demo. For a product like this that is so visual, I expected to be able to find a 30s demo clip somewhere but couldn't see one on the homepage or product page (and the scrolling on the product page was annoying for me).
I think this is a great endeavor. I was thinking about a channel that I like watching on YouTube. They travel to exotic places by boat and film themselves, nature documentary style. To make good videos requires going to these places, a ton of filming, AND a ton of editing. They put out a video every 2 weeks or so on their trips. I imagine the editing is the hard part.
This is a long winded way of saying that I think creators need what you're making! People who have hours of awesome footage but have to spend dozens of hours cutting it down need this. Then also people who have awesome footage but aren't good at editing or hiring an editor, same thing. I'd love to see someone solve this so that 90th percentile editing is available to all, and then it can be more about who has the interesting content, rather than who has the interesting content and editing skills.
thanks! Mosaic can already do the rough cuts for you — so you can upload all your footage from your travel, and prompt it to "make a 2 minute highlight reel of your trip to Japan", for instance.
soon, we also plan to incorporate style transfer, so you could even give it a video from the channel you enjoy watching + your raw footage, and have the agent edit your footage in the same style of the reference video.
this seems rather basic. From watching a bit, it just seems to cut/combine the videos? No transitions, no bg music which would fit nicely with the cut timing etc.
I am waiting for a tool that does stuff along those lines for a long time. Apps like dji kinda do it but they have generic music and the cuts do not fit the tune at all, and are rather random. Doing it myself with little effort using davinci or premiere takes ~30 minutes but the results are 5 times better.
Was hoping that this app would do it for me. And even if it would, if it would cost >X$ to create a video like that, then probably I'd still do it myself.
Hey there, this is just the output from the Rough Cut tile. Right now each tile in Mosaic represents a modular and functional edit to the video. So after you've got your Rough Cut, given all your footage, there are other tiles which you can then use to add transitions, motion graphics, background music, etc.
That being said, the coolest part with this Rough Cut was that it decided to stand in the footage of the kite to creatively imply the freefall portion of the skydive (because we aren't able to record while we're jumping out of a plane). This ability for it to creatively decided to imply the jump because of the limited footage is what I wanted to get across here.
I thought startup was supposed to mean "we're still starting up our business", but it sounds like the meaning these days is closer to "we are setting piles of cash on fire".
I first read this piece years ago, I think it's really great advice.
Tl;dr is:
> When a writer asks you for feedback on their writing, what they really want is to know is:
> What’s going on in your head?
> What are you thinking?
> How do you feel?
> When you agree to give feedback on a piece of writing, your job is to notice what’s happening in your head and share it with the author.
> The best way to do this, in my opinion, is simple: leave notes on everything. In other words, try to give the writer your play-by-play reaction to every part of their piece.
Personally I find the reporting of underlying value more useful than the price paid in puts, since it reflects the asset itself rather than an arbitrary price for an option that could be any of many different strikes or expirations. The option price itself is not that meaningful.
Except it's literally what determines how much money is at risk in the trade. If you buy puts the actual underlying asset value doesn't matter as much as the value of the option itself (which is based on several factors such as time, strike price, etc)
The amount of money that is at risk with options is irrelevant because two different option positions with the same overall cost can have completely different risk profiles, which makes the actual value of those options not so interesting. In the absence of all the other details about the options trades, the actual amount paid for them is without much meaning.
It is the most meaningful thing. It's the exact amount of money you are risking. It's the exact amount you lose if it doesn't strike. If I buy a put for $2, the most I can lose is $2. It's meaningful even with no other information.
13F notional value, on the other hand, is meaningless without more info.
I disagree quite a bit, and in fact the notional value is exactly what you want to measure this, without more information about the trades. The amount of money that is at risk with options is irrelevant because two different option positions with the same overall cost can have completely different risk profiles, which makes the actual value of those options not so interesting. In the absence of all the other details about the options trades, the actual amount paid for them is without much meaning.
> Personally I find the reporting of underlying value more useful than the price paid in puts
How so?
If I buy TSLA puts at a $10 strike or a $500 strike they show up the exact same on the 13F as both have to be reported as if they are delta 1 when showing a share count.
One is a very meaningful bet and one is throwing money away.
More likely, it’s just a misunderstanding of what’s being communicated in this thread. Options are quite complicated and these comments here are rather brief so there’s probably a lot getting lost in the discussion.
What do you mean by "potentially means"? I am quiet new to this and the financial jargons don't make sense. I just have a very basic understanding of a few terms.
What do you mean essentially? That if everything goes south and nothing happens like Burry predicted then the maximum amount he loses is just $18,760 ?
And if that's all that he loses then what's with the big fuss around the news as if it's almost apocalypse incoming with his bets?
(These don't really apply to parties, but they do apply to non-party events)
1. Do intro circles: If it's a 5-25 person event with a handful of people that don't know each other, do an intro circle about 15-20 mins after the start time. Turns it from something where people show up and might meet 1-3 random people that they happen to walk up to, vs something where everyone gets 1 point of contact with anyone else. Works well up to about 25 people, haven't tested it beyond that. Go round say name, and then pick a few questions depending on the audience (eg could be something you'd like help with, something you're reading about, etc). For non-parties (eg meetups, work mixers, things that don't have alcohol or aren't late), the easiest way to improve any event is for the host to do a brief intro circle.
2. The best events to host are the ones you wish you could attend but that don't exist
3. Minimize uncertainty for attendees: Clear parking info/photos and a photo of the space is always helpful too.
4. Host more events: Very positive sum. Even can be simple discussion groups. Anything that you enjoy doing where it'd be more fun with a few other people. Playing video games together, reading papers together, discussing how you're using AI coding tools, whatever. Workshops, mixers, talks, parties, peer groups, etc. If you enjoy reading about it on HN or twitter, you'd probably also enjoy discussing it with people directly. The world is undersupplied for events.
I think a middle ground is possible. Have people not talk about themselves, but rather how they'd react in some bizzare hypothetical situation (for example), and have a few limited options for them to pick and justify. Kinda like cards against humanity in some ways. Ofc ask people first in private what kind of questions etc they're comfortable with and what they'd like to talk about.
Almost everyone has something interesting to say or contribute, the hosts' ideal job is to bring that out.
I'm an extrovert, and my assumption has always been, maybe introverts appreciate this kind of thing because otherwise they won't meet anyone?
But, I've never, in my life, met someone that enjoys this kind of thing, other than the person subjecting everyone to it. So, unless I'm way off base here, why has nobody learned that everyone hates these and that they're useless?
