Turbonaus

@targetplayer Or another tournament in USA where people don’t love to travel to at the moment. Flesh and Blood events are doing similar too.

we're making @blocks smaller today. here's my note to the company. #### today we're making one of the hardest decisions in the history of our company: we're reducing our organization by nearly half, from over 10,000 people to just under 6,000. that means over 4,000 of you are being asked to leave or entering into consultation. i'll be straight about what's happening, why, and what it means for everyone. first off, if you're one of the people affected, you'll receive your salary for 20 weeks + 1 week per year of tenure, equity vested through the end of may, 6 months of health care, your corporate devices, and $5,000 to put toward whatever you need to help you in this transition (if you’re outside the U.S. you’ll receive similar support but exact details are going to vary based on local requirements). i want you to know that before anything else. everyone will be notified today, whether you're being asked to leave, entering consultation, or asked to stay. we're not making this decision because we're in trouble. our business is strong. gross profit continues to grow, we continue to serve more and more customers, and profitability is improving. but something has changed. we're already seeing that the intelligence tools we’re creating and using, paired with smaller and flatter teams, are enabling a new way of working which fundamentally changes what it means to build and run a company. and that's accelerating rapidly. i had two options: cut gradually over months or years as this shift plays out, or be honest about where we are and act on it now. i chose the latter. repeated rounds of cuts are destructive to morale, to focus, and to the trust that customers and shareholders place in our ability to lead. i'd rather take a hard, clear action now and build from a position we believe in than manage a slow reduction of people toward the same outcome. a smaller company also gives us the space to grow our business the right way, on our own terms, instead of constantly reacting to market pressures. a decision at this scale carries risk. but so does standing still. we've done a full review to determine the roles and people we require to reliably grow the business from here, and we've pressure-tested those decisions from multiple angles. i accept that we may have gotten some of them wrong, and we've built in flexibility to account for that, and do the right thing for our customers. we're not going to just disappear people from slack and email and pretend they were never here. communication channels will stay open through thursday evening (pacific) so everyone can say goodbye properly, and share whatever you wish. i'll also be hosting a live video session to thank everyone at 3:35pm pacific. i know doing it this way might feel awkward. i'd rather it feel awkward and human than efficient and cold. to those of you leaving…i’m grateful for you, and i’m sorry to put you through this. you built what this company is today. that's a fact that i'll honor forever. this decision is not a reflection of what you contributed. you will be a great contributor to any organization going forward. to those staying…i made this decision, and i'll own it. what i'm asking of you is to build with me. we're going to build this company with intelligence at the core of everything we do. how we work, how we create, how we serve our customers. our customers will feel this shift too, and we're going to help them navigate it: towards a future where they can build their own features directly, composed of our capabilities and served through our interfaces. that's what i'm focused on now. expect a note from me tomorrow. jack

Even more California wineries shut down or will soon as industry crushed by major drinking habit changes trib.al/n4DcN2g

This WaPo article is unreal: they unironically mock China for not being imperialist and failing to use force to defend its interests, arguing that they're losing out to the U.S. (in Venezuela, Panama, etc.) which does precisely that. In essence the article can be summarized as: "You Chinese losers thought you could gain influence by actually building things? The only thing that actually works is bombing people." I'm not even exaggerating. The author literally writes that "China can spend all the money on infrastructure it wants... But in a crunch, it is only military force that counts." He argues that China's approach was "a colossal waste of money" because "control of infrastructure can be changed" with a US-led "change of regime" and "ownership of any asset can be overturned." His article's conclusion? "You can’t buy an empire, nor can you purchase global influence. It is only hard power that counts for anything." As cynical and brutish as the article is, it's also refreshingly honest. It is factual that China's strategy was to win over the Global South by investing in their infrastructure and development, while the U.S. maintains its influence through regime change, various forms of coercion, and the threat (or use) of force. The conclusion that it is China that should feel embarrassed by this as opposed to the U.S. is, however, completely insane. Every sane person on earth should hope that it is China's approach that ultimately prevails, for the sake of our collective future as humanity. China is ultimately trying to prove that one can prevail geopolitically without violence, by building instead of destroying: don't be like this idiot WaPo writer and root for the answer to be "no". Src for the article: washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/…

@siziyman @ChefGreginald @barelyRebecca he did directly and explicitly incite it. think of it like this in this situation, i have a lot more social power/capital in the online mtg space than cliff does so if i made a tweet saying "it seems like cliff cheated at this recent tournament? I'm just shocked to see it"