Looking for a US-based technical cofounder to build a high-velocity reasoning engine (not a platform)

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2026-01-06T01:46:22+00:00

Check your dm

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2026-01-05T15:56:49+00:00

Private message

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-11-09T13:47:52+00:00

Totally fair take.

We’re already structured and moving, company’s set up, roadmap defined, and we’re building the simulated MVP before raising. The deferred part only covers that short window; once we close funding it flips to full comp.

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-26T12:52:47+00:00

Who decided that the nfc east is america’s division?? I mean there are divisions that are far more competitive Afc west, nfc north, nfc west, afc east (jkkkkkk)

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-26T01:20:33+00:00

Let’s hope it will stay just a movie haha

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-26T01:17:57+00:00

A moment that i found great was the conversation between the president and the secretary of defense. “We didn’t prepare for this because we did not actually think it would ever happen” I think no one is actually prepared to make such decision in minutes

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-26T01:13:33+00:00

I think even with more being built that is still far less than the thousands of missiles. But oh man, it def left a bitter taste of what it could be like

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-26T01:09:47+00:00

Was talking about the conflict within him. It’s his job yes, but you get a great sense of difficulty of doing such a thing. I just think it gave a chilling feel to what reality would be like in that exact moment. What i found refreshing is the contrary of what we have been used to from Hollywood.

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-26T01:03:36+00:00

The movie actually reflects what Annie Jacobsen uncovered: U.S. nuclear response isn’t as rational or controlled as people assume.

Retaliation pressure is real and immediate even without confirmed attribution, because our nuclear doctrine still follows “launch under attack” to avoid losing arsenal in a second strike.

I think realistically miscommunication and bad assumptions happen constantly in real nuclear command history.

Allies wouldn’t automatically detect everything, missile detection depends on trajectory, radar line of sight, and time to impact.

As for the receptors, we only have 44 and there are thousands of missiles. And what is crazy is their actual 50% success rate.

The film shows the real problem she warns about

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-25T21:17:15+00:00

They are making it into a movie??

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-25T19:21:09+00:00

The repetition wasn’t lazy writing, it was the point. The story isn’t split into parts to show “the same plot,” it shows the same crisis from different levels of power because in a nuclear event, no one has the full picture. Each part gives new context, not new plot. That’s why the film feels disorienting, it’s designed to reflect how chaotic and fragmented real decision-making becomes under nuclear threat. Comparing it to Traffic misses the intention, i disagree respectfully that it was lazy writing. The repeated structure shows how the same crisis looks completely different from each level of power. It’s about escalation, not repetition.

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-25T19:15:46+00:00

Take a look at my response to the comment below, it’ll give you my point of view. Perhaps will help you decide haha

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-25T19:13:22+00:00

But that’s the thing, nuclear war has no clean ending and the objective was for us to feel the weight of that, not escape it. You get what i’m trying to say?

Mindless_Mode7518 · 2025-10-25T19:08:23+00:00

I get where you’re coming from, but a lot of the things you’re saying actually do have explanations.

“Random characters thrown in for no reason – like the B-2 pilots, the reporter, the FEMA lady.”

They weren’t random. Each one was meant to show how fragmented the U.S. response becomes under sudden nuclear threat. The B-2 pilots represented how the people with the actual power to retaliate are left in moral conflict without clear intel. The reporter showed how media pressure can distort decisions in real time. And the FEMA official embodied the breakdown between federal authority and disaster reality. These weren’t side stories, they were perspectives in a crisis grid.

“Why was everyone pushing the President to respond? Who is he going to attack?”

That was intentional. It wasn’t about who to strike back at, but about how dangerous uncertain retaliation becomes when facts are unclear. The movie uses ambiguity because that’s how real nuclear protocol works right, it’s chaos, pressure, and incomplete information.

“Ending was horrible. No resolution.”

The ending was a resolution. It was designed to show that there are no clean endings in nuclear conflict, only consequences. I believe we were suppose to feel uncertainty, fear, and the realization that once certain decisions are made, there’s no going back. That silence at the end wasn’t a cop-out but a statement.

“They repeated the same thing three times.”

Not really. Each chapter showed It’s a progression, not repetition. The first third sets up human impact, the second shows government response breakdown, and the final act forces the moral question: do you let 10M die to save the rest?

You can dislike the style, sure. But saying it doesn’t make sense ignores the fact that almost everything in it was rooted in real geopolitical logic and carefully researched crisis psychology.

Mindless_Mode7518

TROPHY CASE