There have been a lot of things going on in the company recently, and I didn't have time to update this week.
Yesterday, during our team dinner, Brother Cong talked about constants and variables in the process of entrepreneurship. He joked that he is basically the constant part, while I am the variable part.
The hill-climbing algorithm can help us find the best solution to a problem. In this process, both constants and variables play important roles.
Constants provide the basic rules and constraints for the algorithm, such as the starting state, target state, and neighborhood rules. Constants are like the maps and compasses we use when climbing mountains; they indicate which places are highlands and which are lowlands. In the hill-climbing algorithm, constants help us define the objective function, i.e., the function we want to maximize or minimize. Variables are used to store and update the current state, as well as to select the next step's movement strategy. By iteratively updating the values of the variables, the algorithm searches for the optimal solution in the solution space. Variables are like our footsteps when climbing mountains; they determine how far we take each step and in which direction we move forward. In the hill-climbing algorithm, the algorithm continuously adjusts the values of the variables to find better solutions.
Cong is wiser and more conservative than me. Without him as a constant, the company might have faced difficulties much earlier; on the other hand, I am more optimistic, full of curiosity about new technologies and business models, and always trying to push the company to break boundaries, explore more possibilities, and do things with higher PE ratios.
Continuously moving towards local optimal solutions requires iterative capabilities. Sometimes, I feel that my iteration speed is not fast enough, or my judgment is insufficient to better identify the essence of problems and optimize them. Of course, the track you are in also matters a lot. Being able to find a better solution than the current local optimum lies in choosing the right track. If the potential is aligned, gathering more resources can accelerate iteration. Conversely, if you choose the wrong track, even the most diligent and intelligent entrepreneurs will find it hard to succeed.
We belong to the "second-tier" entrepreneurs, not top-notch startups, nor in popular fields, but our short-term business is healthy and growing linearly. We are still in the process of pursuing local optimal solutions. However, what I need to think about is whether our local optimal solution is our ultimate goal - are our goals high enough, is our growth rate fast enough? It's a bit like the college entrance exam, knowing that we can't get into Tsinghua or Peking University, but we can still manage to get into an undergraduate program. However, all educational resources are concentrated in top schools, and the Matthew effect is very obvious. In this situation, how can we achieve some non-continuous growth? How can we move from an ordinary undergraduate school to Tsinghua or Peking University?
We are currently exploring the Web3 and AI fields, hoping to see opportunities for exponential breakthroughs that may appear in the future. But this still requires more solid accumulation over a longer period of time, and attracting more outstanding talents, including discovering high-potential teammates within the team and providing everyone with more room for development. The issues that a CEO always faces are direction, path, talent, and management. I feel that I haven't done enough and can still work harder. 💪