
Co-founder @ Love & fury. Previously Sundial (acq. @Meta)
San Francisco, CA
Joined September 2015
- Tweets2.6K
- Following3.3K
- Followers4.4K
- Likes23.6K
even if it worked, it's only nice for "buy more socks"
shopping is supposed to be FUN
it's like having an agent that eats ur dinner for u
Sundial was home. The only full-time job I’ve ever had.
Julie and Chandra turned my life 180°. They taught me not just product and design, but how to lead life with love.
Mom told me her death will was for me to graduate college. I’m glad I dropped out.
Forever grateful.
Today, we're announcing that Sundial has been acquired by @Meta!
Chandra Narayanan and I are joining along with some other incredible members of our team.
Nearly six years ago, Chandra and I started Sundial with two core beliefs: 1) better decisions come from using data well, and 2) great things come from working on hard problems with people you like.
Sundial automated away many of the obstacles involved in getting to meaningful analysis (Cleaning data! Creating semantic layers! Writing SQL! Storytelling!), and we were proud to support some of the fastest-growing AI companies from OpenAI to Gamma.
We started before the AI wave and rebuilt ourselves to be AI-native. We raised our first round when interest rates were near zero, and our Series A when they were the highest in two decades. We watched customers hyperscale and then close shop, new grads grow into leaders, and software development change completely.
Entrepreneurship has been my dream since college, when I first took a class on start-ups (shoutout Mayfield Fellows!). I wish I'd been brave enough sooner because there’s no better way to learn how the world works and who you really are than betting on yourself to launch a business.
Meta is my former home and where I learned product and design. It's also one of the most analytically rigorous places on the planet. So many of Sundial's values came from there: questioning assumptions, diagnosing with data, owning the user’s experience. I'm thrilled to bring what we've learned to the place where it all started and continue our mission of improving the quality and velocity of business decisions with people we like.
To Team Sundial past and present, THANK YOU thank you thank you. You created that special feeling within our team, and I bask in the memories of having walked those lush miles and eaten those breakfast dosas with you.
To our investors and supporters especially @dpatil, David Fischer + the whole 01A advisors team, @mvernal, @sequoia: how did we get so lucky to have your counsel and support? And to my beloved @mikesego and kiddos: I could not have made it without you.
These have been some of the hardest, most humbling, and most alive years of my life. I hope I'm wiser for it and will have many chances to pay it forward!
axios.com/2026/10/23/meta-ai…
14 years later, one click closer.
Today we announced the Claude-led discovery of a molecular machine that we suspect could represent a new gene editing mechanism. Its precise function, biotechnological utility (if any), or level of significance is not yet clear, but at minimum it is work I would have been proud to do as a PhD student. The work was done mostly, though not entirely, by Claude: our life sciences team suggested a broad area of research, Claude read through the literature and a bunch of genome data and discovered something interesting, then Claude proposed experiments to verify the discovery and our team carried them out.
It’s easy to dismiss this as a one-off or curiosity, but we’ve repeatedly seen a pattern where AI performance in new intellectual domains goes from weak to superhuman in a matter of a few years. In 2023 models struggled to do math at the level of an average high-school student. In 2024 they started to do well on math competitions for the best high-schoolers in the country, in 2025 they started to solve minor open problems, in early 2026 more significant open problems, and in late 2026 they are beginning to solve the top few open problems in all of mathematics. We believe AI for biology is on a similar exponential trend.
The main difference between biology and mathematics, of course, is that math can be done purely theoretically, while biology requires experimentation. Some have used this to draw the conclusion that AI’s utility in biology will be limited. We think this is wrong. As we’ve demonstrated today, humans can collaborate with AI to perform the experiments, validate key results in a few weeks and, if necessary, work with the AI to iterate on what they find. Eventually it may even be possible for Claude itself to safely perform the experiments by autonomously controlling lab equipment, with appropriate safeguards in place, but we aren’t doing that today (our lab is also a BSL1/BSL2 facility that doesn't handle materials dangerous to humans).
More broadly, biomedical advancement has many stages — from fundamental biology discoveries, to translational research, to drug discovery, clinical trials, and finally the actual delivery of medicines and health care to patients. We are also interested in these later stages, but even simply accelerating the first stage of fundamental biological discoveries has the potential to speed up and broaden the entire pipeline. Improving our understanding of biology and sharpening biologists’ tools can drive forward all of the later stages, for example by identifying new drug targets, finding new therapeutic modalities, allowing for more precise measurement, and speeding up the experimental loop which itself further accelerates our understanding of biology. This will not in itself speed up clinical trial times, but if it succeeds it could greatly increase the number of promising candidates that go into the pipeline — an increase in throughput even though latency remains.
In Machines of Loving Grace, I wrote about AI’s potential to “cure most diseases in 5-10 years” — a goal that sounds impossible, but one I believe is just barely possible if AI is applied to every stage of the pipeline. The first step is showing that AI can first help with, and then drive, biological discoveries.
Claude’s discovery is the latest in a line of related prior work that goes back decades, beginning with systems like CRISPR, and continuing with discoveries like the bridge recombinase and VIPR in the past few years. Recently, there has been heightened interest in systems based on reverse transcriptase (RT) enzymes, the enzyme underlying the system Claude identified. And most recently, a Stanford team working independently described a novel RT system with an associated non-coding array that is in some ways similar to the one Claude found, though they are distinct systems that evolved independently from each other. I believe that we’re at the very beginning of finding such systems and developing them into powerful tools for biotechnology.
I’m proud of the resources Anthropic has invested in accelerating the public benefits of AI through the life sciences, and we’re aiming both to grow our life sciences team and to work with other scientists to extend this approach to a broad range of problems. If you have a proposal for a research collaboration or are interested in joining our life sciences team, please reach out.
jaymo retweeted
Replying to @Teslarati
The rate of improvement from original GPT to GPT-3 is impressive. If this rate of improvement continues, GPT-5 or 6 could be indistinguishable from the smartest humans. Just my opinion, not an endorsement. I left OpenAI 2 to 3 years ago. Am a neutral outsider at this point.
jaymo retweeted
ai writes: "the cat sat on the mat"
human says: "actually it was a dog on the mat"
human expects: "the dog sat on the mat"
ai corrects to: "we are not claiming that it was a cat that sat on the mat. on the contrary, it was a dog that sat on the mat"
someone please fix this
jaymo retweeted
Somebody has to be the richest person on the planet.
The fact that it’s the guy who popularized electric cars, made rockets reusable, and is working on curing blindness and paraplegia as a side quest seems fair to me.
jaymo retweeted
if fable 5 agrees to do your work instead of downgrading you to opus, you’re in the permanent underclass
1. visual first
2. directly manipulatable
3. easy to compare
@bchesky thoughts?
"I do not think a chatbot is the right interface for travel or e-commerce." - @bchesky
"I think the future is not apps. The future is agents, but I don't think they're going to be text-forward. I think they're going to be really rich user interfaces."
"Imagine using iMessage to do everything, when in fact every other app has a unique interface."
"With e-commerce, you want a very rich user interface. It would be agentic. You can have a conversation with it, but the point is that it has to be more visual."
jaymo retweeted
Grateful to have met @jayhxmo and @taehoonai this past week. If you’re building in this space, you should definitely connect with them.






















