I think this is pretty interesting, especially if you could remix courses... like if you had a bread baking playlist and a pizza making playlist. The pizza making course could include or use modules from the bread course as a requirement.
Similar with learning software development, you usually need basic modules like regex or databases before learning more complex skills.
Looks great, but I find the solid line under the navbar that sticks to your mouse a bit annoying... as it covers and crosses out the logo when you want to press it, you could also get rid of the sticky nav because the page isn't too long. The extra bold black line kind of clashes with the otherwise light and airy design you have around the rest of the website (but looks great in the footer) so I would say use it in moderation. Good luck!
In one of the YC videos I think they called that a "solution in search of a problem". A couple years ago everything was blockchain technology searching for a problem, then it was VR technology searching for a problem, and before that it was social apps... but if you start with a problem first it's easier to build the right solution and skip the latest hype cycle.
I think AI is hyped up a lot right now and there's definitely going to be a trough of disillusionment next or another AI winter, especially as all these AI startups fail to find a successful business model.
If you are worried about someone replicating the idea with AI easily then you can spend some time focusing on your business moat, which AI companies are struggling with now, but especially with cloud security or cyber security I would be worried about trusting anything that was vibe coded or had AI integrated because it's a black box.
I have a slight inclination that tells me that deepseek is propped up by Chinese government and like an iceberg there are much deeper things going on. I don't know what though.
If they were dependent on government handouts, they would be hampered by the need to funnel money into corrupt decision-makers' pockets.
That DeepSeek is a spin-off of a hedge fund and as such has more freedom in allocating their capital probably significantly contributed to their success.
Chinese are sad riples in the pond. "IT IS US IT IS US". No... the ripples come from a drop in the pond which is a singular event. It is not your choosing. You have failed.
I spent some time working on a seed swapping startup idea a couple years ago, and it's a fascinating topic. In the UK there is also a law which states you can't sell seeds unless it's registered [1], and out of maybe 4000 tomato varieties the government has approved only a handful.
This is terrible for diversity because as the climate change get worse, some tomato varieties might thrive better than others in heat, or drought, or have different disease resistance... but because they are illegal to sell the seeds it's difficult to keep the different species alive and we could run into trouble in the future when we realise these government approved varieties don't work in warmer or colder climates.
There is some valid reasoning for the law... because you don't want a farmer to purchase 100,000 bad seeds and have his whole yield fail on his farm.
Those laws may not exist in other countries but the patents could stop diversity in the same way, but long term it's important to keep these weird varieties of seeds around for diversity.
>There is some valid reasoning for the law... because you don't want a farmer to purchase 100,000 bad seeds and have his whole yield fail on his farm.
Will the right honorable gentleman next propose that we create a list of twelve permitted stocks, so that an investor will not purchase 100,000 risky shares only for the company to fail?
This is basically want public equity markets are. You have to be an "accredited investor" (the only requirement is having a lot of money) to invest in all the extra risky things.
That's a US thing. In the UK there's a KYC type form you fill out, self-certifying that you know what you're doing. And then you can trade CFDs, which are illegal in the US accredited or not. (Or not approved by regulators I suppose I mean, I assume professional US desks trade them OTC 'in' Europe. But I think probably European brokers even can't market them to or allow trades by US retail customers?)
It is a law, but one for which there is a simple work around, thankfully.
There are several companies that sell 'heritage' seeds, and they exist as a seed swapping 'club'. A penny of your purchase is for club membership. Here is a rather fine example scroll to 'Our Seed Club'. Lovely company to deal with too
That's actually an European directive, and each member state has its own adjacent laws, such as Germany [1]. The German seed protection laws and authority is pretty old, predating the EU - the founding year is 1953 [2].
I was furious when this directive was implemented in UK law. The only plant/seed varieties that could be traded were those on an official list, whose contents would inevitably be dominated by a few huge companies.
I don't know how the directive came about, but it smells like heavy commercial lobbying.
The UK government has been too busy campaigning against itself since Brexit, to reverse the UK implementation. It's high time.
> There is some valid reasoning for the law... because you don't want a farmer to purchase 100,000 bad seeds and have his whole yield fail on his farm
That for sure can't be the reason, insurance exists, and the market exists, next year nobody would buy those seeds. Also since there's so many types and farms it's not like whole country production would go to zero for that year.
Such laws exist for animals, too. They have the fast effect, that within a few reproduction cycles after the introduction of the law, the agriculture of a whole country (or like in the case of the EU a whole super-country) concentrates on the production of species with some defined positive characteristics, predominantly yield.
The negative effects are, that the selected characteristics not necessarily are what is good for humans, i.e. taste and nutritional values.
And it leads to genetic impoverishment.
The positive effects dominate only some decades. We are now in a phase, where the negative effects begin to get dominant. It will cost a lot of effort and money to alter course.
As a layman putting zero effort into looking at this law, is there no validity in the reasoning that letting commercial interests sell any kinds of seeds can lead to crises with invasive species everywhere? I mean more than what already happens.
> is there no validity in the reasoning that letting commercial interests sell any kinds of seeds can lead to crises with invasive species everywhere?
Well that depends on whether there is any evidence at all to support that the current procedures actually help protect against that. Is there any such evidence or are you just baselessly speculating?
Similar with learning software development, you usually need basic modules like regex or databases before learning more complex skills.