• Openness is advantageous in the beginning, but maladaptive later on
    • In the beginning, you have no brand to lose
      • OpenPhil, OpenAI are much less open than they used to be
    • In the beginning, you have less stuff to share so it’s easier to share all of it
      • Manifold codebase and Notion are super messy now
      • The ability to navigate an internal mess is a kind of power
      • Search, outlines, summaries, charts are a kind of openness
  • It’s easier to be open about yourself and data that you “control”; harder for data that other people have given you, or data about other people
    • Privacy is a harmful meme; the idea of privacy makes people think “hey, you shouldn’t be able to say that about me”
    • Private pieces of Manifold mostly are “because of other people”
  • Manifold aims for openness on:
    • Our source code
    • Our data
    • The knowledge of our meetings
    • Our financials (including salary, cap table)
  • Paragons of openness:
    • Blogging on the internet (Holden, Jeff & Julia)
    • APIs
    • Our World In Data


  • Selective shared vulnerability might be a cornerstone of a relationship? If you’re as open about your thoughts with everyone as with your partner, what’s special about a partnership?
    • E.g. love letters, naked photos, sexual activity are valuable because they’re extremely exclusive


  • If Manifold is open on our codebase/data/processes, where is its value?
    • Brand — people know about Manifold and trust it to be a good experience and providing useful knowledge
    • Team — both the individuals working on the team, and the relationships between them. The team can make changes on its existing codebase & data much much better than anyone else
    • Money — the team still controls where we spend money, who we hire (aka whose time we rent to further add to the Manifold platform)