Frank Dale

@WatcherontheWeb Can we talk about the tagline on poster? "You have to be there to see it." I would love to have heard that conversation that led to that one.

Youtube just put a free with ad's movie in my reccomended tab I've never even heard of called "Ice Pirates" I started watching the first 5 min.... This might be the most glorious 80's bad scifi schlock I've ever seen in my life.... anybody ever heard of this beautiful mess? I think the pitch must have been "Knights In Space!!!"

No one cares, and that’s amazing. “Nobody is coming to save you also implies that nobody is coming to stop you.”

Everyone who learned things the hard way in the past is still learning new things the hard way today. Learning the hard way isn’t a form of learning. It’s a form of personality.

Never again is now. We owe it to ourselves and the generations before us like my grandfathers that fought Nazis in WW2 to prevent the Nazis of today from winning. Respect to you Bill Maher.

Saturday morning and it’s a good time to think a bit about how our functional systems are being torn down by a mind virus by two philosophers: Foucault and Derrida Foucault: His framework tells you that every institution claiming to know something is really just exercising power. Medicine, engineering, law, science. Apply that at civilizational scale and you get exactly what Dan Wang warns about: a society that lost the will to build. Process knowledge — the tacit know-how that only exists in the hands of people who actually make things — dies when a culture decides that all knowledge claims are suspect. America went from building the Interstate Highway System and the Apollo rockets to being unable to build a train from LA to SF. That didn't happen because we forgot the engineering. It happened because we built an entire intellectual class whose job is to interrogate every system rather than improve one. Derrida: His move is that every commitment contains its own contradiction, so you can never land on firm meaning. Run that as societal firmware and you get the bureaucratic paralysis we now live in. Infrastructure projects stuck in 15 years of environmental review because every statement of purpose deconstructs under the next round of stakeholder input. Institutions that can't say what they're for because every draft mission statement gets wordsmithed into mush by people trained to find the hidden hierarchy in any clear sentence. Derrida is the OS behind a civilization that can write a 4,000 page environmental impact report but can't pour concrete. The real damage is these ideas escaped the lab. Every institution that adopted this operating system stopped trying to discover truth and started managing narrative. DEI bureaucracies, academic hiring committees, media editorial standards. All running on Foucault and Derrida whether they know it or not. The antidote is building. The physical bridge across a river holds or it doesn’t. The code compiles or it doesn't. Reality keeps score and it doesn't grade on a curve. Foucault and Derrida gave a generation a sophisticated excuse to never build anything. Their followers inherited the sophistication and the impotence. It’s time to build again.

The longer I live, the clearer it becomes to me that people will have a religion, or something that plays the role in their lives played by religion in the lives of people of faith. The only question is what religion (or pseudo-religion) they will have, and whether it will be a good one or a bad one--one that upholds human dignity and teaches genuine virtue, or one that does not.

I will not be psyopped by a transparent Chinese influence campaign to oppose data centers and allow a foreign enemy to dominate AI development Crazy how all the third worldist slop accounts pivoted from saying it’s great China builds things to being anti-data center in the US

One of the challenges we have in this country is confusing competence with credentials. It is possible to have both. But having credentials does not automatically mean the holder of those credentials is competent. Some of the most successful people I know are highly competent and do not have credentials in their chosen field.

People say "the world is getting worse." The data says the opposite. Longer lives. Less poverty. More literacy. Cheaper energy. Better medicine. The gap between perception and reality has never been wider, but the crisis news media will tell you otherwise!

This may be theory of constraints as the underlying principle. If the $90k part bottlenecks the entire system, the cost per hour at the bottleneck is far higher than the $90k expense to unblock throughput. The $2k part if it isn't a bottleneck doesn't have the same urgency to address it immediately.

How @elonmusk thinks about the relationship between time and money: "Elon would always be at work on Sunday, and we had some chats where he laid out his philosophy. He would say that everything we did was a function of our burn rate and that we were burning through a hundred thousand dollars per day. It was this very entrepreneurial, Silicon Valley way of thinking that none of the aerospace engineers in Los Angeles were dialed into. Sometimes he wouldn't let you buy a part for $2,000 because he expected you to find it cheaper or invent something cheaper. Other times, he wouldn't flinch at renting a plane for $90,000 to get something to Kwaj because it saved an entire workday, so it was worth it. He would place this urgency that he expected the revenue in ten years to be ten million dollars a day and that every day we were slower to achieve our goals was a day of missing out on that money."

Capitalism has raised literally billions of people out of poverty It has done more to alleviate suffering and improve life than any of its critics can possibly imagine This is incontrovertible

Intelligence is the speed at which you can update without needing the update to flatter you.

In this Backyard, it’s “win or go home,” and this crew hasn’t left since the 90's. Where there’s a pitch, there’s a legend. #YouGotThis

Reminder: If you avoid even the potential for embarrassment, mistakes, failure, humiliation, or ridicule, you are really avoiding the potential for success.

@aaron_renn This is a better direction than prior efforts tied to this name.

Indianapolis: Speed City. New from the Indy Chamber.

Hello Julia, sans aucune ironie, c'est top que tu prennes le temps de te renseigner. Mais le problème quand on lit Marx aujourd'hui, c'est qu'on prend pour acquis sa prémisse de départ, alors qu'elle a été démontée scientifiquement il y a plus de 150 ans. Toute la pensée de Marx repose sur la théorie de la valeur-travail. L'idée que la valeur d'un bien vient de la quantité de travail nécessaire pour le produire. Si tu acceptes cette prémisse, alors oui, tout son raisonnement tient. Le capitaliste "vole" la plus-value du travailleur, l'exploitation est mathématique, la révolution est inévitable. Sauf qu'en 1871, trois économistes (Menger en Autriche, Jevons en Angleterre, Walras en Suisse) découvrent indépendamment la même chose : la valeur n'est pas objective, elle est subjective et marginale. Un verre d'eau dans le désert vaut une fortune. Le même verre à côté d'une rivière ne vaut rien. Le travail incorporé est identique. Donc le travail ne détermine pas la valeur. C'est le consommateur qui valorise un bien selon son utilité marginale dans un contexte donné. Exemple concret : tu peux passer 1000 heures à tricoter un pull moche que personne ne veut. Selon Marx, ce pull a énormément de valeur (beaucoup de travail incorporé). Selon la réalité, il ne vaut rien. Parce que personne n'en veut. À l'inverse, Bernard Arnault crée des milliards de valeur non pas parce qu'il "exploite" mais parce qu'il a su anticiper et organiser des désirs humains à grande échelle. La valeur est créée par la coordination, pas extraite par le vol. Cette découverte (la révolution marginaliste) a invalidé tout l'édifice marxiste. Pas pour des raisons idéologiques, pour des raisons scientifiques. C'est pour ça que plus aucun département d'économie sérieux au monde n'enseigne Marx comme un cadre d'analyse valide. On l'enseigne en histoire de la pensée. Maintenant, le truc important. Si ton intention en lisant Marx c'est d'aider les pauvres (c'est une intention noble), alors tu vas être surprise par ce qui suit. Regarde les chiffres de la Banque mondiale. En 1820, 90% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Cette chute historique ne s'est PAS produite dans les pays qui ont appliqué Marx. Elle s'est produite dans les pays qui ont libéralisé leur économie. Chine post-1978, Vietnam post-1986, Inde post-1991, Pologne post-1989. À chaque fois qu'un pays libéralise, des centaines de millions de gens sortent de la pauvreté en une génération. À chaque fois qu'un pays applique Marx (URSS, Cambodge, Corée du Nord, Venezuela), c'est la famine et les goulags. Ce n'est pas une opinion, c'est l'expérience la plus massive jamais menée en sciences sociales. Plusieurs milliards de cobayes humains, sur un siècle. Donc paradoxalement, si tu aimes vraiment les pauvres, la position la plus cohérente n'est pas d'être marxiste. C'est d'être pour la liberté économique. Parce que c'est empiriquement la seule chose qui a jamais sorti massivement les gens de la misère. Pour creuser, je te recommande trois lectures qui vont changer ta vision : "La Loi" de Frédéric Bastiat (court, lumineux, gratuit en ligne) "La Route de la Servitude" de Hayek "Économie en une leçon" de Henry Hazlitt Bonne lecture, et vraiment chapeau de chercher à comprendre plutôt que de rester dans tes certitudes. C'est rare.

If you or your company’s ambition is to only do the things you are doing right now then… sure, more efficiency means you can potentially reduce jobs. But if you are ambitious and new tools make people more productive than ever, hire more people and go much much further

@buccocapital @JayaGup10 This is the right take. If you are curious and humble, experience is a tremendous asset right now.

I agree with this entire essay if you switch seniority for experience. Experience still an asset Experience x humility x curiosity x AI = jet fuel But no humility or curiosity and experience is a 0 and getting run the fuck over in the AI era

The idea of "one shotting" an app using AI is a fugazi. If you had to describe my app and all the edge cases I have solved over the years, it would be a prompt the size of a small book, and my app isn't even that complicated. The people promoting creating a business overnight with AI are just selling a get rich quick pipedream. Those grifters are present in every cycle. AI has completely transformed how I work, but you can't push a button and make money. Doesn't work like that.