MARC ANDREESSEN: ELON SOLVES PROBLEMS FASTER THAN OTHER COMPANIES ORGANIZE MEETINGS “Elon has developed an operating method that is very unusual by modern standards. The top line thing is this incredible devotion from the leader of the company to fully, deeply understand what the company does, to be completely knowledgeable about every aspect of it, and to be in the trenches and talking directly to the people who do the work, deeply understanding the issues and being the lead problem-solver in the organization. Basically, Elon shows up every week at each of his companies. He identifies the biggest problem that the company's having that week, and he fixes it. He does that every week for 52 weeks in a row, so each of his companies has solved the 52 biggest problems in that year. Most other large companies are still having the planning meeting for the pre-planning meeting for the board meeting, for the presentation, with the compliance review and the legal review. So it's this level of both an incredible intellectual capability coupled with an incredible force of personality, a moral authority, an execution capability, a focus on fundamentals that is just really amazing to watch.” Interview with Chris Williamson, December 14, 2024, @pmarca

The journal _Science_ (and the _Journal of the American Medical Association_) clued in folks who were paying attention back in early 1988. To wit: here's short article which appeared in the “News and Comment” section of the 1988-04-29 issue of the journal _Science_, which I'll repeat for general interest: {quoting…} “Heterosexual AIDS: Setting the Odds” Norman Hearst and Stephen Hulley of the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies at the University of California in San Francisco recently performed a series of calculations that have probably been repeated less formally in a thousand cocktail lounges and convention halls across the land. In the 22 April issue of the _ _Journal of the American Medical Association_, the two researchers tabulated a heterosexual's chance of getting infected with the AIDS virus during one episode of penile vaginal intercourse. Not surprisingly, for most Americans the risk is extremely low. For instance, the chance of becoming infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) after one sexual encounter with someone who has both tested negative for HIV and who has no history of high-risk behavior is 1 in 500 million. If the same couple uses a condom, the risk plummets to 1 in 5 billion, say epidemiologists. Even having sex with someone whose HIV status is unknown, but who does not belong to any high-risk group, yields a calculated risk of 1 in 5 million or 1 in 50 million per sexual episode, depending on whether or not a condom is used. (Hearst and Hulley define "high-risk groups" as including "anyone who within the last 10 years has engaged in male homosexual activity or intravenous drug use, has resided in Haiti or Central Africa, has a history of multiple transfusions, or is a hemophiliac." They also add anyone who has been a regular sexual partner to any of the above.) On the other hand, having unprotected sex with someone who is HIV-positive exposes a person to a 1 in 500 chance of getting infected after one sexual encounter. After 500 such encounters, two out of three unprotected partners would become infected say the researchers. What Hearst and Hulley conclude seems on the surface to be an observation of the obvious: that one should choose sexual partners with caution and should avoid having sex with people infected with HIV. But the two contend: “This advice is substantially different from the message that the public has so far received regarding AIDS prevention.” The usual advice given by public health officials, say Hearst and Hulley, is to limit your number of partners, use condoms, and avoid anal intercourse. “None of this is as important as choosing a partner very carefully,” says Hearst. For example, a prostitute may have hundreds of sexual partners, may fail to use condoms, and may engage in anal intercourse, but she still may be less likely to be infected on the job than by her boyfriend who is also an intravenous drug user, says Hearst. The two epidemiologists believe that emphasizing their message would lead people to “more gradual courtships, to listen more carefully for clues about a potential partner's past, and to ask directly about any history of high-risk activities.” The problem with the approach advocated by Hearst and Hulley is that it is difficult to know if a potential partner has engaged in risky behavior. “The phrase ‘to know’ implies a certitude beyond reality,” says Harvey Fineberg of the Harvard School of Public Health. “You know if you're using a condom or you're not. You don't know if you're picking the right partner.” Gerald Friedland of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx says that there is a problem with “ophthalmic virology.” Says Friedland: “You can't always look into the eyes of your potential loved one and guess their HIV status.” {Continued on next page: page 2} {1/2}