As usual, having access to lots of money is the real hack here.
Also, I'm not your lawyer (or even a lawyer). But when someone says something like this....
> Think about the O1 as a fundraising process—it’s storytelling. You’re pitching the government on why they should invest in you long-term. Rather than “ticking boxes” with criteria, you need to think about how to structure the narrative so it’s compelling to the reader. The criteria and evidence, such as letters, support that overarching narrative.
...my spidey-sense starts tingling and I head for the door. The idea that you should "structure a narrative" when dealing with law enforcement (and immigration in particular) seems like just terrible terrible advice of the sort that could seriously mess up someone's life. I have a decent risk tolerance for some things, but this feels like someone telling you to douse yourself with gasoline and light a match[1].
[1] I mean, what's the worst that could happen? You want to be warm don't you?
The O1 is a visa for models, actors, artists, chefs, etc...
It's, in essence, a storytelling exercise whether you're Brad Pitt or the best pizza chef in Italy. They ask you to show why you're "extraordinary"
It's essential to make the Immigration Officer understand what you're doing. If all you share is true, it's not fraud in any way.
Lawyers aren't trained to understand what is a machine learning engineer and why what you're doing is important. USCIS agents don't know anything about tech and what YC is either. This isn't a visa for founders, it covers every talent category.
So it's on you to help them understand, to share the story.
Always consult a lawyer whatever you do, just help them out.
i had a solaris workstation on my desk from 2000 to 2005 and we had an industrial fridge size IBM pseries running AIX to run big linear programming problems on. You could not run linux or BSD on those machines and you could not get close to the performance of those machines with intel CPUs. We also had an itanium HP box for a while, running Digital UNIX.
Functional logic programming was all the rage when i started my career 30 years or so ago, but besides some obscure use cases it did not have a lot of success - i wonder if this will be the killer app.
I highly recommend "Quantum computing for the very curious"[0] for an introduction to quantum mechanics. I went through it years ago and can still remember the main ideas thanks to the built-in spaced repetition.
It is remarkable how everybody only seems to comment on "spaced repetition" rather than anything involving quantum computing when they discuss that site.
Regardless, memorizing a few facts won't help with reasoning about "is quantum computing even possible".
I agree that many in the financial sector do not know much about quantum computing, but it also does not seem that some in the quantum that do not understand the details of the problems that the financial sector has either.
For instance, those in the capital markets/trading floors in Europe and North America do significant risk calculations with hundreds or a thousand variables on up to 100,000 positions with a certain confidence. Many of these risk calculations need to be reported nightly to regulators. These financial companies are paying many millions per year to AWS, Azure, or Google to do these calculations on classical computers.
However, many parts of these calculations could be done with quantum computers relatively instantly, given enough qubits. I realize that the technology and reliability is not there today, but hopefully it will come soon.
I would not be surprised if by 2035 using quantum computers to do many variable risk calculations would become (almost) mandatory for major European and North American financial companies.
What makes you say this? Which particular quantum algorithm do you think gives an exponential speedup for multi-variate risk predictions? And why do you think there is any chance in hell that a quantum computer would exist by 2035 that could even store an input of the size you're talking about, nevermind have spare qubits to actually process it?
On a semi-related note, bra-kets are just magical. Programmers who deride mathematical notations, and claim we should abolish equations in favor of pseudocode, should try to get a glimpse of their power.
Latour pretty explicitely thinks of himself as a post Marxist - one of his latest work was "la nouvelle classe ecologique" where he was making the point that environmental questions were the new Class Struggle and his work a continuation of Marxism in another context.
Marxist intellectuals have been accusing him and his followers of using marxist tools while giving up on anti-capitalism
