I use many of the same subscriptions, but also monica (refferal link), only for it's ui basically: when highlighting the text on a webpage you can press "explain" among other options, and it elaborates on a term/phrase/sentence, I didn't feel like I understood enough. As with perplexity you can customize which model to use under the hood

Thank you for the helpful webinar, Emma and Steve! Would you mind to share the recording?

I find tax codes in the US (and basically every other country) very frustrating, not because the tax is big, but for all the bureaucratic burden 

I thought I could circumvent the whole problem by putting most of my hard-to-deal-with assets into a charitable fund, and then not worry about taxes there at all. However, DAFs don't quite solve the issue since they are very limited in where I can invest. There are also options such as "Charitable Trusts" and "Private Foundations," but they seem to create lots of overhead.

 Is there an option that I'm missing? In an ideal case, I would like to have fully functioning brokerage and crypto exchange accounts where I can make any transactions tax-free, given that all of the money I earn must be donated in the end.

How did the first run go? Are you planning to do more groups?

I meant real projects, so that potential donors could fund them directly. Both Manifund and Nonlinear Network gathered applications, but evaluating them remains a challenging task. Having a project publicly endorsed by LTFF, would have been a strong signal to potential funders in my opinion

I'd love to see a database of waitlisted grant applications publicly posted and endorsed by LTFF, ideally with the score that LTFF evaluators have assigned. Would you consider doing it? 

By waitlisted, I mean those that LTFF would have funded if it wasn't funding constrained.

sismo.io has a working opensource implementation that allows proving your inclusion into groups of choice without revealing anything else. (I'm not associated with them to be clear) User knows exactly what he proves and can easily determine the list of people who could prove the same statement. (this is my dilettante understanding) 

Probably it can be implemented with a more efficient algorithm, but I'm not sure whether this optimization is worth the time to implement. 

Do you know about groups who would be interested?

sismo.io has an opensource implementation based on zero knowledge proofs and ethereum wallets. I think ethereum wallets are a more convenient asymmetric cryptography implementation then e.g. pgp, hence it would probably be easier to get people to use them.

I have an interested-user-level knowledge of internals, but I'd be very keen to dive deep in case it could be useful. 

Do you know of a group that is actively interested in such a system? I doubt it's possible to convince people to do it otherwise, since key management remains painful if done safely.

Zero Knowledge Proofs allow proving that you are a part of a certain group without revealing who exactly. This can allow credible whistleblowing. For example, if some ML company issues a list of it's employees linked to ethereum wallets (or any other cryptographic key pair of choice),  then any of it's employees would have an option to whistleblow on unsafe practices, while being 100% sure it's impossible to know who made this post. 

This seem awesome to me and I wonder if anyone else shares my fascination and think this could be useful

Glad to hear that you are increasing capacity! In regards to understanding donor concerns and pitching them: seems like it should be relatively easy to hire someone for this role (unlike hiring a grant evaluator)