The Exchanges

Every argument clarity score on this site is built from rows on this page. Each question and answer was assessed with names hidden, the host's own answers included, on four things from 1 to 5: directness (does it answer the question asked), coherence (do the ideas follow), precision (concrete details and clear references), compression (says a lot per word). The weighted mix (30/30/25/15) is the exchange score. A person's published score averages their exchange scores on raw tape only, at least 8 of them, shrunk toward the cohort mean. Full method →

Ethan Sutin no published score: only 2 usable exchanges on raw tape, and a fair score needs 8+ record → ← everyone

Every exchange below was scored with names hidden, four dimensions each from 1 to 5. An exchange's score is 0.30·directness + 0.30·coherence + 0.25·precision + 0.15·compression. The published score averages the raw tape exchange scores and shrinks small samples toward the cohort mean, so five great answers can't beat twenty good ones. Produced feed rows count only toward coarse estimates, never toward a full score.

clear all ✕
2exchanges match
2on raw tape
0redirected or not addressed
Answered raw tape D 5 · C 4 · P 4 · Cm 3 4.15

Q Yeah. But I guess the question is like, do you want to build all of those use cases? Or do you see B as more like a platform where somebody is going to build like, you know, the sales coach That connects to B, so that you're kind of the data feed into it?

A I don't think this is like a data feed, more like an understanding kind of engine, and like definitely in the future having third parties through the API and building out for all the different use cases is something that we want to do, but the like initial case we're trying to do is like build that layer for all that to work, and um, You know, we're not trying to build all those verticals because no startup could do that well, but I think that it's really been quite fascinating to see, like, you know, I mean, I've done consumer for a long time. Consumer is very hard to predict, like, what's going to be, like, the thing that's the killer feature, and so, I mean, we really believe that it's the future, but we don't know, like, what exactly, like, process it will take to really gain mass adoption.

AI assessment note: “we're not trying to build all those verticals because no startup could do that well”

Answered raw tape D 4 · C 4 · P 3 · Cm 3 3.60

Q Is the B going to interject in real time? Say I'm arguing with somebody, the B is like, hey, look, no, you're wrong. That person actually said.

A The proactivity is something we're very interested, maybe not for like specifically for like selling arguments, but more for like, and I think that a lot of the challenge here is, um, you know, you need really good reasoning to kind of pull that off because you don't want it just constantly interjecting. Cause that would be super annoying and you don't want it to miss things that it should be interjecting. So like, it'd be kind of a hard task even for a human to be like, just come in at the right times when it's appropriate. Like it would take the, And, you know, with the personal context, it's going to be a lot better because like if somebody knows about you, but even still, it requires really good reasoning to like not be too much or too little and just right.

AI assessment note: “The proactivity is something we're very interested”

page 1
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 200 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.