<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[e squared]]></title><description><![CDATA[e squared]]></description><link>https://www.e2jdj.com/blog</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 23:02:49 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.e2jdj.com/blog-feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title><![CDATA[The Line We Invest Around: Execution, Judgment, and the Outcome Economy]]></title><description><![CDATA[Venture capital used to have two unbreakable rules: never invest in hardware, and never invest in services. We've made exceptions for the first (physical AI), but the second rule hasn't just bent; it has been entirely rewritten by the Outcome Economy. The old objection to services businesses was structural: they didn't scale, margins were capped by headcount, and you were really just buying a very good consulting practice with venture-style expectations attached. That objection was never...]]></description><link>https://www.e2jdj.com/the-line-we-invest-around</link><guid isPermaLink="false">6a8e248f28d0cf71ca03cf82</guid><pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2026 23:28:43 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Corey Jones</dc:creator></item><item><title><![CDATA[Fund Thesis]]></title><description><![CDATA[We think about venture the same way we think about any market: the first movers who get the attention aren't usually the ones who capture the value. Whoever solves the hardest, most visible problem first gets the headlines. But the lasting businesses tend to get built by whoever figures out how to make that breakthrough actually usable, inside real organizations with real constraints. That gap between what's technically possible and what's actually adopted is where we spend our time. AI is...]]></description><link>https://www.e2jdj.com/fund-thesis</link><guid isPermaLink="false">6a87be00023ad9e6d7fe409c</guid><pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2026 02:58:35 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Corey Jones</dc:creator></item><item><title><![CDATA[Founder-Market Fit Has a Blind Spot]]></title><description><![CDATA[The venture industry has a well-worn vocabulary for founder-market fit: find the person who has spent twenty years living inside the industry they're now building for. It's an easy story to tell, and it isn't wrong so much as incomplete. Deep tenure inside a system does teach you its rules, but it can also teach you to treat those rules as physics rather than choices. The insider's curse is that familiarity quietly becomes acceptance, and the result is often incremental workflow improvement...]]></description><link>https://www.e2jdj.com/founder-market-fit-blind-spot</link><guid isPermaLink="false">6a84f0c66f644c8dfb498f6e</guid><pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2026 23:56:36 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Corey Jones</dc:creator></item><item><title><![CDATA[Market maps and AI models regress to the mean, by design]]></title><description><![CDATA[Regression to the mean is not a metaphor here, it's the literal mechanism. An LLM predicts the next token by statistical likelihood across a training corpus. It is architecturally built to output the average of what's already been written. A market map does the same job with a different medium: it takes last cycle's winners, sorts them into categories, and calls the result a picture of the space. Both tools compress the past into a consensus view. Neither has any mechanism for surfacing what...]]></description><link>https://www.e2jdj.com/market-maps-ai-models-regress-to-the-mean</link><guid isPermaLink="false">6a84f0e36f644c8dfb498fb6</guid><pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2026 23:56:36 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Corey Jones</dc:creator></item></channel></rss>