I propose a hybrid model - part research institute, part venture studio - that combines the proven ARPA model of focused, milestone-driven research with the agile capital deployment of modern tech companies. Through incubation and retained ownership of spin-outs, this can be self-sustaining. 12/14

IARPA MICrONS showed high-risk multidisciplinary R&D translates into both scientific and economic returns. In 5 years, MICrONS researchers spun out 12 companies that raised $170M and generated $350M in exits (so far). The government's investment more than paid for itself. 11/14

I believe a private institutional approach is best for systematically driving breakthroughs in intelligence science over the next decade. Let's explore why... 10/14

We need to make future advances like the fly connectome seem inevitable rather than miraculous. 6/14 x.com/DavidAMarkow...

No existing funder has the mission, scale, resources, and operating model required to coordinate the study of intelligence at the whole brain scale. Intelligence science needs its own Apollo program. 4/14

Intelligence science and biomedical neuroscience are distinct disciplines that require different research and funding models. 3/14

This was an experiment in the power of framing, and a very revealing one (for me). People *can* get excited about science funding if it plays to their identity politics.

What a joyful day for Princeton and pocket protector wearers everywhere. One graduate mentor's Nobel down, one to go.

This was me, once upon a time. Marriott would always give these pointless upgrades, e.g. I'd arrive in DC at 11 pm for one night in a standard room and they'd say "We upgraded you! Now you can host a dinner party for 8 people!"