Month: August 2026

Posted on

Knife Shopping

knife, santoku, chef

A friend of mine was in the market for a new chef knife. The first one his wife wanted to cherish and asked me for thoughts, which gave me my little stage time to nerd out. And I thought… hell, might as well share my thoughts here as well.

So, a couple things to consider when you’re choosing a knife. For now, I’m going to exclude most of my commentary on how to take care of knives (i.e. wash, knife cloth, sharpening on whetstones, etc.).

  • How do you cut? Up/down or rolling motions?
  • What will you cut most of the time?
  • How often will you use the knife? Daily? Or for special occasions?
  • How important is knife control to you? Do you like letting gravity “do the work”?

Given your answers to the above questions, it’s easier to then figure out if German or Japanese steel is better for you, the heat treatment/HRC, full tang or hidden tang, and so on.

So let’s take this one by one.

If you cut up and down, Eastern/Japanese knife shapes may serve you better as they have straighter edges. Western/German knives have more curvature along the knife’s edge, which is useful if you cut in a rowing motion.

In general, full tang (meaning the metal of the blade extends all the way to the back of the handle) means you’re controlling the knife more. Whereas hidden tang (the metal of the blade extends partway through the handle) is more front-weighted, and more popular among chefs who “let the knife do the work.”

If you’re cutting veggies and fruits or in general softer material, knives with higher HRC (Rockwell Hardness C-scale) where higher means the metal is cooled faster, are better. And in general, allows for thinner knives and more precise cuts. Think sushi knives. Personally, I think an HRC of 58 is good enough for regular use. But some prefer 59+. The upside is that they retain their edge longer. The downside is they chip more easily then lower HRC numbers (cooled more slowly when making the knife). Lower HRC knives are better for cutting bones and hard material. They tend to dent (softer metal) rather than chip. Think meat cleavers.

If you’re using a knife regularly, say at least 3-4 times per week, I’d recommend going stainless steel (which is what most people prefer anyway) instead of carbon steel. The latter rusts easily (or patinas easily, the layer of rust that develops on the outside of low alloy high carbon knives). Also easier to upkeep with repeated washes. Do dry with a cloth instead of letting them air dry though. Knife oil helps, but is not mandatory on stainless steel knives. For presentation or special occasion purposes, aka to show off, a lot of people prefer the looks of high carbon steel knives.

In general, you can get a great starter knife for $80-200. Up to $500 if you want to splurge. But anything north of that is really the premium you’re willing to pay for each artisan.

Photo by Takafumi Yamashita on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

On spinouts

When British voters voted for Brexit in 2016, comedian James Acaster gave a hilarious and apt analogy.

When you make tea, “if you leave the [tea] bag in, and over time, the cup of tea itself as a whole gets stronger. And it might appear like the bag is getting weaker but it’s now part of a stronger cup of tea. Whereas if you take the bag out, the tea is now quite weak, and the bag itself goes directly in the bin.”

I think that’s the case with a lot of spinouts. Not all. But a lot.

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

What is your play style?

video game, switch, play style

On a quarterly alchemy session with my buddy Matt (yes, we have a quarterly-ish ideation/philosophical debate session), he asked me, “If you were a video game character, with both pre-set stats as well as the stat points you’ve accumulated through experience to date, what’s your play style? How would you best utilize your stats and skill trees towards your goals?” Furthermore, how might someone else with the exact same stats play your character differently?

First off, I like video games. I had a gamer in me in my past. Probably still, if I were given the chance to restart. But alas, a dangerous trade for me. So do note the bias in the intellectual resonance I had with the question.

Secondly, the underlying assumption in this line of questioning is that while the distribution of stat points vary per person, there exist others who would have the same set of stats as you do and the same skill trees. The same builds. But just because you have the same builds does not mean you have to have the same play style.

Thirdly, that last question is probably most interesting. How might someone else with the exact same stats play your character differently? How might someone else reach a different conclusion to “min-max” your play style? Or potentially more critically, how are you not leveraging certain skill trees to maximize your odds of “beating the game”? Skill trees that are underutilized or have been set aside to collect dust so far. Skills you earned as a child. Or in college. Or in your first job that you failed to keep putting the pedal to the metal.

To take the gaming analogy further, every time there’s a new update, your character build has to evolve with the associated nerfs and buffs to certain skill trees. In other words, with each new world order, are your past skills more or less relevant? As such, you need to change your build every world “update.” Be it the internet to the cloud/SaaS era to the AGI era and so on. Given the pace of technology and culture, there will be several “updates” to the world within your lifetime. And no one wants to play a character with an obsolete build.

I can’t take credit for this since I haven’t read the book yet, but when I was telling another friend about the above, she used the phrase “the leash of your past” inspired by a chapter in Björn Natthiko Lindeblad’s I May Be Wrong. Which I think is quite apt to this analogy.

After all, your past self won’t thank you for staying the same, but your future self would wish you changed sooner.

Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Posted on

“Be strong enough to be gentle”

Three conversations happened recently.

One, an LP told me that he pit two fund managers against each other by asking their shared portfolio founder, “If you could only choose one, who would you keep as an LP?” Then went on to relay that answer back to both of the respective managers.

The manager who lost the vote shrugged and didn’t feel the need to really engage in the ragebait. The one who won the vote ended up making some remarks along the lines of “I don’t see why anyone would ever want to work with [insert other GP’s name].”

Two, similarly, I met a GP for the first time last week who pitched me a strategy he thought was unique. To which I responded with, “What are your thoughts on [insert VC firms with similar theses]?” He replied with a whole list of reasons of “why X, Y, and Z should never be in business in the first place.”

Three, I caught up with another Fund I GP earlier this week. Second conversation, who pitched me a strategy he thought no one else was doing. I asked the same question, listing some competitors with the same strategy, stage, and focus. He said he’d never heard of them, then asked me to repeat those names. He Googled each. Scrolled through their portfolio and website and LinkedIns. Then started his response with, “I guess I’m not as unique as I thought I was. Here’s what I think they’re doing right…”

All three conversations carry notes of similarity. Each either directly or indirectly ending with one of two paths. In the first one with the LP, do I agree with his method of execution? Not really. But nevertheless, he received the answer he was seeking.

Yet in all three, I can’t help but be reminded of something Peter Cullen (who’s best known for being the voice of Optimus Prime from Transformers) said.

It’s not immediately apparent on the relevance. But he says, as the inspiration for how he voiced Optimus Prime, “Be strong enough to be gentle.”

True strength and mastery has no need for infighting. No need to demean others. No need to push others down only so that they will look better by comparison. Most Midas investors I know are not bragging about the fact they’re on the Midas List, at least I haven’t heard Vinod or Marc brag about it. They’re on the Midas List because they can pick great companies. It’s not that being on the Midas List allows them to pick great companies.

Those that are the best of their craft, across industries, and that I’ve been lucky enough to be in their presence are both gentle and generous with their learnings. What’s proprietary is the execution not the idea. And by being generous and gentle, you end up commanding a lot more respect and admiration. If you’re truly stronger than others, you know how to control your strength. And only use it, when necessary. Most situations do not demand the necessity.

You need not prove your strength to a flower. Neither a butterfly. You need not prove your strength to a baby. To a feather. The inability to control one’s strength for the situation required can only exist in the absence of maturity. And the absence of mastery.

Photo by Reign Abarintos on Unsplash

Stay up to date with the weekly cup of cognitive adventures inside venture capital and startups, as well as cataloging the history of tomorrow through the bookmarks of yesterday!

The views expressed on this blogpost are for informational purposes only. None of the views expressed herein constitute legal, investment, business, or tax advice. Any allusions or references to funds or companies are for illustrative purposes only, and should not be relied upon as investment recommendations. Consult a professional investment advisor prior to making any investment decisions.

Proudly powered by WordPress