3 ms·
> but the tech doesn't look that developed It could be that they found something incredible by chance and they’re at the limits of their personal capability to
by appplication 3y ago
> but the tech doesn't look that developed
It could be that they found something incredible by chance and they’re at the limits of their personal capability to further understand and refine. The fact that they’ve known about this for over 20 years suggests maybe. It’s not a bad thing if they are, they’ve already taken one of the biggest leaps. New teams with fresh eyes and varied backgrounds will look at the problem space and undoubtedly see room for refinement.
- neltnerb 3y agoAgreed, that's what makes the omission odd. Normally you'd expect them to list any candidate that they have any possible reason to think might be relevant, especially if they aren't entirely sure what is going on. Is that clearer what I mean? I think the only reason to exclude those things is if they were super confident they weren't a good idea for some reason we don't know. Or they just... forgot? That would just be very surprising.