>Secondly, it's a lot harder to experiment when you're big and have commitments to more people. It's already quite hard for Distill to do weird things now -- a

>Secondly, it's a lot harder to experiment when you're big and have commitments to more people. It's already quite hard for Distill to do weird things now -- a lot of people get annoyed to us, and I feel a visceral pressure to be conservative. I wonder who those people could be, lol. It's interesting to focus on a work that doesn't function at scale, it seems antithetical to a lot of common knowledge that I often see about the state of the world. I guess this sort of cuts at the same debate which happens at a lot of universities, which is how many students to allow to take a class. I am a very firm believer in having hundreds of niche opportunities to engage instead of one monolithic method of teaching/engagement (and I provide undergrads at my uni the opportunity to work with me and my group for similar reasons). But it's difficult when the benefits of something are so strong and can lead to direct financial gains, if I spend 20 hours mentoring one UG, they will have a much better chance of getting a good job and every person who I didn't choose to work with won't have that opportunity. Similarly with a journal, every author that's mentored and published is probably getting a straight plus to their career (academic or industry). I don't have any solutions to this, except maybe the complete dissolution of the current state of society, I just find it a difficult circle to square personally