i was considering having kids before but after this month of taking care of a 2yo i dont think i want to. the complete lack of schedule flexibility makes it impossible to work overtime when i need to. its a slow period at work rn and im already worried about falling behind. it really is the amount of time they take. ive read a lot of articles on mothers taking worse jobs with shorter commutes and more flexible hours and i totally understand why they would need that.

my coworkers would always tell me, the youngest, about how much their bodies hurt, how tired they were, how hard it was to make ends meet. they either wanted me to stick around because i made their jobs easier, or wanted me to get my degree and go. ive seen accidents happen, but none terrible. people were always so worried about my safety. i got lucky and was never injured.

i dont know. ive been in my current role for 4 months now. its not bad. i dont dislike it. i cant tell if i miss my old job or if im just lonely in a new place.

i really miss zoning out and working with my hands though. there are moments where you have to lock in, i remember moments where i was working with something dangerous and how acutely aware of the position of my body i was. but there were moments where you did a repetitive task for a while. and i always liked that aspect. the physicality.

i think about going back to it a lot actually. maybe im just nostalgic. should give it a few years to get used to the cubicle life. i really do miss it though. might do what my father did and compulsively renovate his basement to get the high of building something with his hands.

however, when frontier labs become financially insolvent (and they will eventually, the question is when) i think smaller local models will end up taking over. and i think there is a bet to be placed on smaller models here. the demand for ai isnt going away. peoples workflows would be crushed without it. the question actually becomes, who either purchases frontier labs, or what cheaper alternative replaces frontier labs?

that being said, i got a big kick out of feeding my daily notes into my local model. i had some more diary-like entries that i would never share with anyone, but it was extremely funny to have my local model take a 3000 word recap of what i did in a day and summarize it like "writer reflects on their job: they worry about their performance. meals: the writer ate oatmeal, and a sandwich. family: the author contemplates their fathers absence growing up."

ive developed a really large corpus of written work over the years and am hoping to fine tune a model using my diary as the training set. i think this would yield hilarious results. keeping it all local though, i drop my passwords in there at times and i dont want that leaked.

what i mean is less the goal being making money, more the goal being getting money to fund research. theres no way to avoid "selling" in life. (alas.) what i would be selling would be my research topic to venture capitalists, instead of a product to people. (obviously making some mentions of "well um this could be a sellable product one day" and like, a halfassed marketing campaign in order to better sell my idea to vcs.)

company failing isnt incompatible with the goal of doing research. if i can get a few years of funding by at least putting up the illusion of a sellable product it could be worth it. maybe i'd even get lucky and end up with an actual product that makes money. but uh, comfort in failure. the process of learning over the promise of success.

sorry i sound so evil and scammy rn ahhhhh promise im not trying to be on forbes 30 under 30. just considering vc funding as an alternate route to academia with regard to getting funding for research. (i will need to dance for dollars either way. but vc funding is seeming like it has less uh, annoying interpersonal academic hoops to jump through.) but id need a few years working under people and gaining experience before i would try at this lol.

im slowly getting confused on what founding a company even is. i am in grad school right now. a lot of funding and opportunities come from guys who are like "we need you to innovate we need you to act like a startup." its honestly kinda annoying. i just want to do basic research. i dont want to sell anything. i just want to build things. but the way this article frames it- is founding a company just getting funding for a research project? but using different words? could i just pull up with a list of my research interests, convince people its a sellable product, and score funding? obviously id need to deal with financial overhead myself (a pain) but hypothetically. lets say i complete my degree, maybe spend a year or three in industry networking and better understanding the problem space. then pitch myself to vcs with hope of funding whatever topics im interested and have my company function like a research group except instead of publishing papers we build products? like no profit no big deal, i never intended to profit. which, is this not what openai is doing?

unethical to lie about my intents (i want to do research not start a company) but i feel the end goal (more funding for research) could be worth it.

but the phrasing of "who pays for the increased schooling times?" is a good one. i think "debt" can be a decent way to conceptualize the cost and repayment of training someone. feels evil to say, but viewing people as firms you can invest in and expect returns upon. you know not all loans will be repayed, but hopefully they'll average to a profit. (risk management etc.)

student loans are. a decent example. the government/private enterprise gives money to pay for education, then this is repayed, providing a financial incentive for paying for someone else's longer schooling timelines. firms investing in training can be viewed as an extension of student loans. but then ah, there are countless stories of how debtor/creditor relationships can be exploited. indentured servitude etc. there are a lot of complications coming to mind. also "altruistic" people who give without expectation of repayment. or the divide between like, communal vs individualistic cultures. (individualism, i argue, encourages the formalization of debt, as opposed to a more communal culture where the expectation of repayment is informal.) you could do math on how many people pay vs how many people benefit, who is the biggest stakeholder, etc.

but i am on my lunch break and need to get back to my work. good article tho. good topic to bring up.

truly ab initio methods involve figuring out electronic properties from scratch like ionization energy or bandstructure. the real issue is that we dont have exact relations for the exchange and correlation terms. we can know the kinetic energy and charge screening, but we dont know how the electrons are interacting with each other. generally the xc term is treated as a function of electron density or its gradient (see: lda, gga, meta-gga) but there are so many different ways to approximate that. different models are good for different applications also, like transition metals vs organics. and then theres the issue of basis sets (most people use gaussian basis sets that have been tuned over many years but theres also plane waves and finite element methods) which can also change results. and even once u have a decent approximation of density you can try perturbative methods (GW family, delta scf i count also) to try and improve the approximation. i am rambling and typing this on my phone. essentially yes, but often calculations are a little inaccurate. but more accuracy has a higher computational cost, which makes it hard to run larger simulations. tradeoffs of engineering. hope this was coherent.