Category: Education

Emergent Ventures India, 18th cohort

Adithyan Madhu, 14, an independent researcher, received his grant to study early writing systems, applying computational linguistics, pattern analysis, and structural methods to the Indus Valley script.

Aparajeet Shadangi, 17, received his grant to explore conceptual approaches to cosmic expansion and dark energy while continuing his formal academic preparation in cosmology.

Kevin Gibson, a student developer, received his grant for Crsynk OS, a Python-based operating system integrated with an AI assistant and focused on lightweight user interfaces and accessible computing. He is also developing WiseChat AI and an AI Voice Engine.

Vaishnavi Dilip, 13, received her grant to identify fire-resistant plants native to Indian ecosystems and plant them strategically as natural firebreaks in fire-prone areas.

Prince T. Philip, an independent cybersecurity researcher and product architect focused on high-impact, future-facing risks in modern software systems, received his grant to build a security audit tool that surfaces vulnerabilities and design assumptions missed by traditional scanners.

Michaela Cross, a writer and content creator, received her grant for Rose Chasm, a video project on the history of India and its relationship to America and the wider world.

Vivekanand Bhat and Rijesh Panicker received their grant for Pathika, to create immersive, augmented, multilingual onsite guided tours for heritage monuments across India.

Devanarayan, 15, received his grant for Open Horizon Observatory, a small open-access observing setup that produces and freely shares real astronomical data. He is developing low-cost workflows for time-series photometry and open data sharing for students and the public.

Roshan Kumar Gupta, 19, a computer science undergraduate, received his grant for TARS, a deterministic, physics-aware machine-learning pipeline for exoplanet discovery using TESS data. He aims to reduce false positives and identify physically credible habitable-world candidates in noisy observations.

Yajan Adhikari, 19, a materials researcher, received his grant to build an operating system for digitizing and scaling the management of recyclable materials.

Pranet Khetan, 17, received his grant to develop a novel, low-cost architecture for refreshable tactile graphics supporting STEM education for visually impaired students.

Karthik, 18, a space engineer, received his grant to research the use of remote sensing in agricultural insurance.

Alexander Hogeveen Rutter, an energy expert, received his grant for analysis and advocacy of least-cost resource adequacy planning and other market-based measures in India’s power sector.

Akshit Arora, an Engineering Physics student at IIT Delhi, and Bhavey Sehgal, a BITS Pilani student, received their grant for NeuroBridge. It uses eye tracking, computer vision, and AI to predict intent, giving people with ALS fast, confirmation-based speech instead of slow letter-by-letter eye typing, at a fraction of existing device costs.

Cartoonist Sumit Kumar and Vivekananda Roy Ghatak received their grant to advance their animated series Aaapki Poojita and produce short, animated sketches and redesign and relaunch the famous Bakarmax webtoon platform.

Progyan Das, 24, received his grant to develop fault-tolerant systems capable of using consumer devices for large-scale foundation model training.

Yash Chitte, an MBA student, received his grant to build a wall-climbing robot that autonomously cleans glass facades.

Khushi Jain, 23, an aerospace engineer, received her grant for NadirX Space, to build space-grade test infrastructure and hardware-in-the-loop systems that enable reliable testing of advanced space technologies and support future interplanetary missions.

Rishit Kapoor, an AI/ML researcher and engineer, received his grant for Periscopic Labs, which turns systematic reviews into living, AI-native infrastructure that keeps scientific claims traceable, verifiable, and continuously updated.

Koushik Das received his grant to build an explainable clinical decision-support system that helps primary-care doctors interpret complete blood count reports and detect anemia patterns more quickly and safely.

Shashank Sanjay, a medical student, received his grant to develop an affordable coronary stent.

Abrar Shahid, a systems designer using AI to reduce accessibility gaps, received his grant for Project Lumen AI, to build an AI translation layer connecting external eye photographs with retinal fundus scans and make eye-disease diagnosis easier.

Those unfamiliar with Emergent Ventures can learn more here and here. The EV India announcement is here. More about the winners of EV India second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth , sixteenth, and seventeenth cohorts. To apply for EV India, use the EV application, click the “Apply Now” button and select India from the “My Project Will Affect” drop-down menu.

And here is Nabeel’s AI engine for other EV winners. Here are the other EV cohorts.

If you are interested in supporting the India tranche of Emergent Ventures, please write to me or to Shruti at [email protected].

An experiment for our schools

Schools in at least three states will be equipped with drones this year that can zoom through halls, smash windows and pepper-spray active shooters if teachers report a threat.

At least nine schools — three in Florida, five in Georgia and one in Colorado — will have storage boxes that house the plastic, nonlethal aircraft made by Austin-based Mithril Defense. The drones, which can be activated by teachers, are capable of reaching a shooter within 15 seconds.

The aircraft are designed to distract their targets by flashing strobes, blaring sirens, spraying them with pepper gel, or ramming into them at 60 mph.

Here is the full piece.  As I have been saying, be long countries where local crime is a major problem.

Reforms to the PhD?

The Trump administration is pairing top universities with corporate giants in an effort to steer traditional PhD programs toward national scientific priorities.

Today, the White House and National Science Foundation are announcing a $47 million pilot program to fund around 250 four-year doctorates in technical fields, starting this fall. Students in the pilot will be placed at an industry partner, where they will spend at least one year doing “practical research” that can go towards their dissertation. NSF’s investment will fund three years of these PhDs, with 31 universities and 20-plus companies funding the rest.

“About the same amount of basic research is done today in academia as in the private sector,” Michael Kratsios, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, told Pirate Wires. “Over time, while the ecosystem has changed and different players have emerged where important scientific work is being done, the institutions which train our next generation of scientists have not really been updated.”

…The pilot represents a small fraction of the more than 45,000 science and engineering doctorates awarded annually — but the administration says it’s a “scalable model” that can expand to more universities and companies.

Here is the full story, I will pass along more details as I learn them.

The AEA presidential election

AEA is the American Economics Association, and a new president is needed, here is the candidate and likely winner:

PINELOPI (PENNY) KOUJIANOU GOLDBERG, William Nordhaus Professor of Economics and Global Affairs, Yale University.

Statement of Purpose: I am honored to stand for President of the American Economic Association. Economics has long contributed powerful tools to understand human behavior, markets, institutions, and public policy, but the environment in which we conduct research, teach, and engage with society is evolving rapidly. New technologies, especially artificial intelligence, are reshaping research methods, classroom instruction, and the evaluation and dissemination of scholarship. These changes create exciting opportunities, but they also raise difficult questions about the future of peer review in our journals, transparency, incentives, and research and teaching standards more generally. The profession also faces broader challenges: maintaining rigorous, credible, and independent research, supporting young scholars in an increasingly uncertain academic environment, and ensuring that economics remains open to diverse perspectives, methods, and global talent. If elected, I hope to use my research, teaching, policy, and editorial experience to help address these challenges, while promoting the core values of our discipline.

Here is the link.  Hilarious as always that there is only one candidate allowed (which model predicts this as optimal?), but for the first time I have seen a meaningful statement of purpose that I also like.  That said, I would like to see her endorse my core proposal, namely turning over all submissions, referee reports, and revisions (anonymized is fine) to the major AI companies for use as training data.  After all, such an act would further the mission of the AEA, right?

The Confucian fertility paradox

Total fertility rates in East Asia have fallen to levels without historical precedent, even though the region’s Confucian heritage long placed extraordinary emphasis on family continuity and large families. We argue that this “Confucian Fertility Paradox” dissolves once we separate two strands of the tradition and recognize that modernization affected them very differently. The pro-natal strand, built on lineage continuity, ancestor worship, and reliance on sons for old-age support, was gradually switched off as child mortality fell, incomes rose, women entered the labor force, and state pensions replaced the family as the main source of security in old age. What survived was the second strand: the veneration of education and of status won through examination success, rooted in the imperial examination tradition. Under modern conditions this surviving strand reverses sign with respect to its effect on fertility. Where the historical examination system rewarded having many sons so that one might succeed, the modern single-ranking tournament rewards concentrating resources on one or two intensively educated children, and the quantity/quality tradeoff turns a once pro-natal culture into a powerful engine of low fertility. Drawing on recent empirical evidence from China and Korea, we show how education competition becomes the channel through which traditional values now suppress childbearing. We explain why standard pro-natalist policies, such as removing birth restrictions or offering cash subsidies, accomplish little when the underlying problem is a competitive equilibrium in parental investment, and we argue that policies aimed at the source of the distortion, such as structural reform of educational pathways, hold more promise.

Here is the paper by Hanming Fang and Chang Liu.  Usually I am suspicious of such explanations, as the low birth rates typically apply also to families who do not face such education/career considerations.  Thailand?  Indians in Singapore?  Ethnic minorities in China?  But I pass this along nonetheless, due to the importance of the topic.  Via Glenn Mercer.

Emergent Ventures winners, 56th cohort

Audrey London, Los Angeles, to write a book on water in California.

Seyi Oluwasanmi, London, to bring Brits to SF to learn tech.

Thomas Haferlach, Berlin, payments and compute layer for the long tail of AI apps.

Juan Ramón Egea Fernández, Andalusia, tech.

Teo Spiro, Israel, AI and biology.

Amitav Krishna, suburban Ontario, 14, quantum.

Jake Prokopets, 18, Orlando, AI and labor markets.

Wendi Yan, NYC, science and the visual arts.

Luke Peoples, 15, Sydney, to edit the UI directly.

Malwina Lewera, Poland, orbital space debris.

Wilhelm Hedenskog, 18, Gothenburg, Sweden, AI evaluations.

Alex Petropoulos and Max Reddel, Brussels, Preparing Europe for Transformative AI.

Giovanni De Lillo, 17, Naples, multi-agent AI orchestration for regulated enterprise (Hypereum).

My excellent Conversation with Chase Koch

Here is the audio, video, and transcript.  Here is part of the episode summary:

Chase and Tyler discuss if any of his father’s lessons never stuck, the guilt-trip letter his grandfather wrote three months after Charles was born, why Chase started throwing tennis matches, what Rafa’s grit taught him about stoicism, who he admired most from the 1992 Dream Team, whether the Spurs should jettison De’Aaron Fox, the David Gilmour solo that hooked him at eleven, what drew him to jam bands, how he built a boom-box business out of his parents’ garage, why his father interviewed Snoop on a Zoom call during Covid, why his band is named for the second law of thermodynamics, what it’s like working with MrBeast, how Koch Industries has evolved, what he learned from Marc Andreessen, the philosophy behind hiring the “farm team,” why he is teaching himself to code with Claude at his fourteen-year-old’s urging, where he’s traveling next, and much more.

Excerpt:

COWEN: N.W.A., are they good? I like them.

KOCH: I had my phases. My first business, Tyler, was when I was 15 years old and one of my best friends to this day, Askia Ahmad, he was wiring up car stereos and building custom boom boxes and all that. We basically built a business out of my parents’ garage because they had all the tools and materials and everything. Like, “Let’s build a business out of here. My parents hopefully will pay for the machinery, and then we can sell these boom boxes to our friends at high prices and capture a big margin.” Through that, I learned about the whole gangster rap. Your listeners may be surprised, but it started with me, Public Enemy, N.W.A., Eazy-E, of course—

COWEN: It’s so good.

KOCH: Dre.

COWEN: Snoop.

KOCH: Snoop.

COWEN: You know Snoop, right?

KOCH: It’s so good, so good. Yes.

COWEN: What’s Snoop like?

KOCH: Snoop? Okay. This goes back to what I was mentioning on the power of music to unify people. So I’ve been with Stand Together. For the listeners that don’t know, it’ll give context to your question. Stand Together is an organization that has really a community of like-minded leaders that all believe in one thing, in the power of human potential, and that every human has a gift.

We all know that there’s so many barriers in society that are holding people back, whether it’s barriers in education, barriers in regulation, so you can’t start a business, barriers in our criminal justice system, you name it. What Stand Together does is we have basically a comprehensive strategy that addresses everything from education to policy to bottom-up empowerment in communities to drive real social change. I’ve been a part of this for as long as I can remember.

My father’s been working on social change for 60 years. My passion for music, as you can see from your last line of questioning, with Stand Together and that whole community, we never tapped into culture. When I say culture and what the next generation pays attention to—sports, music, YouTube, entertainment, creators, media. During COVID, I had this idea that we’ve never tapped into music to drive social change.

And on one specific point:

Back to your question on energy, 4 percent of the overall capital consumed at Koch is in refining, which is basically where my grandfather started the company. I think that surprises a lot of people because I think a lot of people are still stuck in this, “Well, you’re this energy company.” No, we’re not. We touch the majority of the economy now, and we’re in everything from forest products, consumer products, software, as I described, glass manufacturing, to energy and fertilizers as well.

Interesting throughout.

*Who Thinks Like an Economist?*

That is the title of a recent book by Beatrice Magistro.  Some key results are:

Economic knowledge consistently predicts higher support for welfare-enhancing policies (Eurozone membership, free trade, and EU immigration), independent on whether individuals stand to gain or lose initially from globalization.  This challenges conventional self-interest accounts and instead highlights the role of economic knowledge — and potentially time preferences — in shaping globalization attitudes.

Economic knowledge also predicts a lower discount rate, even after adjusting for years of education.

I would say that over the years I have altered my perspective a bit on these issues.  I used to think these factors were correlated, in large part, through a kind of wisdom.  I now think that more of the effect, however much I may sympathize with it, runs through sociological expectation and perceived obligation, combined with conformity and signaling pressures.

From Prediction Markets to Decision Markets and Beyond!

Arin Dube points to a great illustration of the power of prediction markets. Yesterday due to a new scandal the probability that Graham Platner would drop out of the Maine Democratic primary exploded from 9% to 96% (+87 percentage points). At the same time, the probability that the Democrats would win the election jumped by about 9 percentage points, from 54% to 63%. What does this tell you?
The market is signaling that Platner reduces the Democrats’ chances of victory. We can be more precise. If an 87-point increase in the probability of dropping out gets you 9 points of winning, then a 100% chance of dropping out implies a gain of 9/0.87 ≈ 10.3 percentage points.

Thus the market’s best estimate is that Platner is reducing the Democrats’ chance of winning by about 10 percentage points (compared to an unknown replacement). That’s a pretty big number! Democrats should surely use this information to make better decisions.

Now, I have been a bit loose. We have implicitly assumed that the news mainly moved the probability of Platner dropping out, rather than independently changing the Democrats’ general-election prospects. The issue is we are trying to reverse engineer two conditional prices, P(win|drop) and P(win|stay), from one unconditional price, P(win), and its comovement with P(drop). It works pretty well here as an illustration but Robin Hanson’s idea is that we can do better yet by trading the conditionals instead of inferring them.

Hanson’s decision markets would run contracts of the form “pays $1 if Democrats win, conditional on Platner dropping out — bet refunded if he stays.” Plus the mirror contract conditioned on staying. The refund provision makes the price a conditional probability: a trader pricing the first contract doesn’t need any view on whether Platner drops out, only on how the race goes if he does. With this structure we would get cleaner estimates of the conditional probabilities–in this case whether the Democrats do better with Platner in or out–which is exactly what a decision maker needs.

We were able to plausibly reverse engineer our estimate because the market happened to move 87 points in a single day. But a decision market would have posted the number continuously, no scandal required. In other words, with decision markets in play, not just prediction markets, we could have seen how much Platner was costing the Democrats before the latest scandal hit—which is precisely when the information would have been most useful.

It’s been fun to see prediction markets catch on with the public but the world is still decades behind Hanson’s decision markets—let alone futarchy!

What should I ask Michael Moritz?

Yes I will be doing a Conversation with him, based around his new book Ausländer: One Family’s Story of Escape and Exile.  Mike of course was a pioneering venture capitalist through Sequoia, and before that had a distinguished career as a journalist, which included books on Chrysler, Apple (the first such book I believe?), and soccer coach Alex Ferguson of Manchester United.  Here is his Wikipedia page.

So what should I ask him?

A scientific benefit (and cost) of AI innovation

What changed was that the cost of preliminary exploration collapsed. I could sketch an argument, identify the first serious objections, test whether they were fatal, and reach a provisional verdict in an afternoon rather than a fortnight. This sounds like a simple acceleration, and the more profound effect was on what I was willing to abandon. Dropping a question after an afternoon’s work feels nothing like dropping one after three weeks. When the exploration costs are low, the sunk cost attachment disappears, and you find yourself dropping bad questions earlier and more often, which means the questions you keep are better. I explored far more ideas, and my working portfolio became both larger and better curated. I arrived at this outcome not through any deliberate plan but simply through sustained engagement with a tool that changed what exploration cost.

The skill that improved most, and the one I would never have thought to look for, was something I can only describe as question-identification – the ability to find problems that are both tractable and important. This is the thing an academic career is substantially built on and which nobody, so far as I know, has ever tried to teach directly.

I want to be honest about the costs. My ability to hold together a complex position verbally, under pressure, in a seminar or a conversation, has probably not improved and may have declined somewhat. When preliminary exploration is cheap, you spend less time grinding through arguments from first principles, a grinding that builds fluency that shows up in live exchange. Friends have pressed me on this, and they are right to worry.

That is from Carlo Cordasco, and there is more, via Conor Friedersdorf.

Rent Control: The Ceiling Trap

Rent control is in the news again. Check out my new website, Rent Control: The Ceiling Trap. Here is just one bit:

Norway abolished its rent control in 1982, and the economist Are Oust realized the newspapers had been quietly recording the whole experiment. He collected housing classifieds from Oslo’s Aftenposten from 1970 to 2008 and watched the market turn inside out.

Under rent control, Oslo’s listings pages looked nothing like a housing market. It was tenants who advertised, pleading their qualities to landlords — “housing wanted” ads outnumbered “housing for rent.” Ten to fifteen percent of those ads were placed by the tenant’s employer, vouching for them the way a bank vouches for a borrower. Tenants offered babysitting, gardening, snow-shoveling, and janitorial work on the side to sweeten the deal. Landlords, for their part, could demand a tenant of a particular gender, age, occupation, region of origin — some ads specified “strong Christian beliefs.” Deposits commonly ran to 50 or 60 months’ rent, occasionally 100 or more: tenants effectively lent the landlord the equity of the flat, interest free. And only about 20 percent of “for rent” ads dared print the rent, much of which would have been illegal.

Then the ceiling lifted. Within a few years the page flipped: landlords advertised to tenants, roughly 80 percent of listings printed an asking rent, the mega-deposits vanished, and the demands for snow-shoveling Christians of specified gender dwindled to nothing. The price went back to doing the rationing — so nothing else had to.

Check out the whole thing–it’s fabulous.

Emergent Ventures India, 17th cohort

This is all from Shruti:

Aryamman Bhatia is part of the team building HackerFab IITB, an open-source student-built chip microfabrication lab. He received his grant to build what he hopes will become the world’s cheapest fabrication tools and to inspire bottom-up contributions to India’s Semiconductor Mission.

Yashi Garg, 17, received her grant for Neurosole, a smart shoe designed to detect and prevent diabetic neuropathy. She is also a poet and emerging entrepreneur focused on purposeful innovation.

Fahad Hasin received his grant for the Kerala Growth Series, articles and policy memos to improve economic growth in the state. He thinks of the project as publicly building “the M document” of today.

Shafquat Aman, founder of NexuSelf, received his grant to build an AI wellness platform syncing women’s nutrition, workouts, hydration, and menstrual cycles to drive 2x adherence and lasting health outcomes. The company is a Delaware C-Corp in beta with users across the United States and India.

Kevin Wilson, founder and director of Tala Education, received his grant to scale play-based music pedagogy programs that train teachers and turn early childhood classrooms across India into spaces of creativity, inquiry, and joyful learning.

Yogesh Ostwal and Ayush Ranawade received their grant to build a generative AI model for discovering novel oncolytic viruses.

Priyansh Kumar, from Delhi, received his grant to work on an autonomous aerial defense system.

Gowtham Y is an instrumentation, electronics, and chemical engineer. He received his grant to work on synthetic fuel production, starting with cooking gas, at large scale using solar power.

Yash Mandlik, 18, received his grant to create a decentralized hostel network for solo and budget travelers, empowering every house to host the world.

Khush Mahajan, 22, received his grant to build a hyper-personalized AI storytelling app that helps kids grow curious. He is focused on learning by building consumer AI products and turning those lessons into useful tools.

Suraj Tripathi, 17, received his grant for Xorbital, a space-based solar power system that collects sunlight in orbit and wirelessly transmits clean energy to Earth, aiming to provide 24/7 power for defense, disaster response, and remote regions.

Jenil Gandhi, 22, founder of Avinya Vegan Leather, received his grant to develop 100 percent compostable, plant-based vegan leather made from agricultural waste, reducing crop burning and animal cruelty.

Tanay Lohia received his grant for Mandrake Bioworks, which is building what he hopes will be the world’s smallest and most efficient gene editors for breakthrough cures, crops, and more.

Krishna Kant, 20, received his grant to develop a novel type of quantum dots for applications in science and technology.

Vaibhav Dabas, 20, received his grant to develop a smart ramp for train boarding.

Anindyadeep Sannigrahi, founder of LiteFold, received his grant to build infrastructure for drug discovery. The platform helps researchers iterate on experiments faster and move findings to the wet lab with greater confidence.

Chitra Singh, a visual computing graduate from MPI Germany, received her grant to build an AI copilot that streamlines radiology imaging workflows. She has spent a decade building and scaling imaging AI at deep-tech startups and GE Healthcare.

Shreyansh Diwakar, 18, from Jhansi, received his grant for the 1825 Fund, a micro-grant initiative offering equity-free capital to ambitious young builders and hackers across India.

Aditya Jha, 16, founder of Workithm, received his grant to build an AI-powered system designed to protect attention rather than merely manage tasks. He is focused on the future of human-AI collaboration, especially deep work and cognition.

Jeya Kalis, 18, from Madurai, Tamil Nadu, received his grant to develop AI for scientific discovery by exploring combinatorial possibility space.

Chetan Bhattacharji, a journalist and climate communications consultant, received his grant for Earth Chakra, where he writes and produces videos and a podcast that place science, solutions, and experts on air pollution, climate change, and sustainability center stage.

Nithish Kumar, 26, received his grant to build the computational layer for portable nuclear fission reactors to power the next frontiers of humankind.

Sparsh Agarwal, a tea planter based in Darjeeling, received his grant for Alter Magazine, a Works in Progress-style monthly publication featuring new writing on science, technology, and progress from South Asia.

Those unfamiliar with Emergent Ventures can learn more here and here. The EV India announcement is here. More about the winners of EV India second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth cohorts. To apply for EV India, use the EV application, click the “Apply Now” button and select India from the “My Project Will Affect” drop-down menu.

And here is Nabeel’s AI engine for other EV winners. Here are the other EV cohorts.

If you are interested in supporting the India tranche of Emergent Ventures, please write to me or to Shruti at [email protected].

How to ask for help from a stranger

The next heuristic is to make your request easy to accept. Making something easy to accept largely is about reducing the cost of acceptance. One clear kind of cost is the magnitude. Do ask someone for twenty minutes of their time, but don’t ask them to read your five-hundred-page manuscript in a week. Another is to make it specific: asking for a resource to start with is better than “can I pick your brain?”. When you’ve made your request, make it low friction for them. If you’re asking for an introduction, write a blurb about yourself which they can forward. If you have a question, ask it in writing rather than over a call. And last on cost, make your ask bounded. Don’t ask for recurring obligations like being your mentor for your whole life, but do keep it limited to asking them to read a blog post. If that instance goes well, they’ll gladly read more.

My last heuristic is stranger: make it easy to say no. You might think that the worst outcome is a no, but the worst outcome is a pressured, begrudging yes. Your coercion will have poisoned your relationship with this person while you feel the false glow of a hard-won victory. A person who helps you with gritted teeth is one who will never help you again. And even then, the help will be a half-hearted effort to get rid of the obligation you manufactured. By contrast, help freely given is effortless, the way you’d hold the door open for someone. Help willingly given keeps your conscience clear, free from the burden of having pressured someone. And help, when given from the heart, is the foundation of a relationship where both of you contribute to what you’re building.

Here is more from Pradyumna Prasad.