# Spectech Feedback * From a couple of people over presidents day weekend: the idea that the organization should have a time limit is appealing. [[Speculative Technologies should have a planned obsolescence after 50 years]] * From [[Illan Gur]] — make sure that the criteria for field strategists doesn’t diverge from program managers. A big difference might be the ability to have hard conversations. * From [[Adam Marblestone]] — need to focus on how awesome program managers are * From [[Mark Johnson conversation 24 Jan 2023]] * Need to be less caveat-y about investment potential * From molecular machines workshop * Need to figure out IP * From [[MacKenzie Moritz conversation 10 Jan 2023]] * Need to have a visualization of the new institution * Need to have a word for the type of research we’re talking about * From [[Sihyun Choi conversation 9 Jan 2023]] * The drug discovery analogy is resonant * NEED more story early in the presentation * Use the quote that went into the NYT * From [[John Cumbers]] * “I just can’t get excited about it” * From [[Mike McCormick]] * Would simplify presentation to 1. PARPA - Building humanity's next moonshots 2. Status quo institutions can't produce the technical breakthroughs humanity desperately needs 3. DARPA: a proven model for driving otherwise unachievable breakthroughs 4. What is the DARPA model 5. Our take -- PARPA 6. Our first focus areas 7. Area 1 8. Area 2 9. Area 3 10. We're raising a fund structured in these ways 11. Team and advisors 12. Closing statement * From [[Kinta presentation 4 May 2022]] * People felt the structure was useful * The lego slide is consistently helpful * From [[Adam Marblestone]] on [[1 May 2022]] I think a lot of people even seeing your essays don’t have any intuition for what a ARPA program is; think, like, lawyers/humanities people and such that work at these various philanthropic foundations A better sell may be to make a slide that illustrates each program as a kind of strategy or flow chart Want desktop chip fab? Here’s PARPA’s flow chart for how to achieve it and FYI we have this person who can own that development. Want APM? PARPA figured out the next step and here’s a flow chart of how we can make it happen. Those 1 slides per program will illustrate why it isn’t just better to “fund labs in that field” etc, and what PARPA would do, without reference to terms like ARPA, program, program manager, etc I’m then imagining you tweeting screenshots of such 1-slide-per-program flow charts in response when someone online says “how do we get to APM” or so on And it makes it topic by topic and incremental — like this flow chart can absorb any amount of $ Rather than saying you are starting and org that needs to be huge and complex It is like “good systematic research strategy with a roadmap — as a service” kind of feel for each program [Web URL for this note](http://notes.benjaminreinhardt.com/Spectech+Feedback) [Comment on this note](http://via.hypothes.is/http://notes.benjaminreinhardt.com/Spectech+Feedback)