daniel debow

17.4K posts

daniel debow banner
daniel debow

daniel debow

@ddebow

CEO, Debow Musical Instruments ❤️🇨🇦 4x co-founder. Company producer. @Build_Canada

Toronto, Ontario Katılım Şubat 2008
1K Takip Edilen13.4K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
daniel debow
daniel debow@ddebow·
Your odds of being great at anything are directly proportional to your willingness to suck at it for a long time.
English
26
99
624
0
daniel debow retweetledi
Toronto Tech Week
Toronto Tech Week@TOtechweek·
Toronto Tech Week is here. For the next five days, founders, investors, operators, creators, students, and builders are taking over the city for hundreds of community-led events. One week. Hundreds of events. Endless possibilities. Built by Toronto, for the world.
English
3
13
46
2.3K
daniel debow retweetledi
Satish Kanwar
Satish Kanwar@skanwar·
Welcome (back) to Toronto for @TOtechweek! We're now at 600+ events happening for you across the greatest city in the world. Do not underestimate us. Do not underestimate yourself. Let's go.
English
13
10
135
5.4K
daniel debow retweetledi
Farhan Thawar
Farhan Thawar@fnthawar·
Excellent clip from @somseif on overcoming the fear of failure in 🇨🇦 More of this please
English
3
8
41
3.5K
LaurieWired
LaurieWired@lauriewired·
How many technologies are stuck in a local optima? Big loudspeakers basically peaked in the 1970s. Obviously we’ve gotten somewhat better, but it’s a lot closer to: “a couple % more accurate” than “the average person immediately notices the +50-year technological progress” Miniaturization has improved a lot, so has digital signal processing, amplification. But take a high end setup from 50 years ago, sit in the sweet spot at the same volume…it won’t feel radically different. I’m trying to think of other fields where the underlying principles were so mature that half a century of progress in materials/software/electronics is underwhelming. Camera Lenses seem like a good candidate. Non-electronic instruments is another; it’s not like cellos have gotten that much better in the last ~300 years.
LaurieWired tweet mediaLaurieWired tweet media
English
467
230
3.5K
292.1K
daniel debow
daniel debow@ddebow·
@fnthawar there was something vaguely familiar with this description.
English
0
0
2
3.2K
Farhan Thawar
Farhan Thawar@fnthawar·
I have no idea what you are taking about and this does not resonate with me at all 🙃
Startup Archive@StartupArchive_

Brian Armstrong on what he learned about management from Balaji Srinivasan “Balaji is a brilliant guy. He’s probably one of the top couple smartest people I’ve ever met in my life,” Brian begins. “He was briefly the Chief Technology Officer of Coinbase. He came in through an acquisition and did some amazing work. And he taught me how to manage a totally different type of person.” Brian continues: “Balaji is kind of unmanageable. He’s what some people might call a ‘free radical’ within an organization. He kind of bounces around, absorbing vast amounts of information — even things that aren’t his responsibility — and occasionally he would come back to me with these incredible insights.” Brian gives one funny example: “At one point he came back to me and said, ‘These are all the salespeople that are making more revenue than their salary, and these are all the people that are not.’ And the first thought I had was, ‘You’re not supposed to have access to anybody’s salary. How did you get that?’” Balaji replied, “Don’t worry about it. I found it in some database that I wasn’t supposed to have access to.” The next question Brian asked was, “How did you connect that all up?” The previous week Brian asked the data team to connect Salesforce to Coinbase’s salary data so they could start running some reports to have more accountability. But it was supposed to be a three-week project. Balaji responded, “Oh well I couldn’t sleep this weekend, and I just knew something felt off. So I had to code it up and put it all together.” When the data team completed their analysis three weeks later, they confirmed that Balaji was 100% right. “He was continually doing things like that,” Brian explains. “And he’s incredibly high in disagreeableness, which I learned from him as well. He would go into a team and ask, ‘Why isn’t this functioning well?’ And he would suffer no fools. He would not be afraid to go in there and turn half the people on a team — whether he had the permission to fire them or not… He was a very contrarian figure. I’d say about once a week someone would come into my office and say, ‘I can’t work with Balaji. He’s causing so much collateral damage.’ And I’d say, ‘Yes, but he’s also generating an enormous amount of value and I need you to learn how to work with him.’” Brian knew Balaji wasn’t going to last forever at Coinbase because it was incredibly disruptive, but ultimately he taught Brian how to be a “turnaround CEO” when needed: “In the past I was opting a little more toward trying to be liked instead of being clear about what we’re doing, where we’re going, and what the bar is. He helped me become a better CEO and have a little more disagreeableness.” Source: @stripe (Aug 2025)

English
4
2
112
127.3K
daniel debow
daniel debow@ddebow·
@bdeeter understood SaaS before anyone. Good idea to listen to him. “This is the largest greenfield money-making opportunity in history. Not just in software. Not just in technology. In all of business.”
Byron Deeter@bdeeter

The hyperscalers are making the biggest bet in corporate history. By 2031, the big 5 (Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Meta, Oracle) will have put $8T into AI capex. That's roughly parallel to the entire U.S. defense budget over the same period. The question is what has to be true on the demand side for that bet to pay off. @silicon_samuel and I did the math. Value is rotating up the stack. A >$36T unlock is happening ...and it's going to be a wild ride. bvp.com/atlas/inside-t…

English
0
1
6
2.1K
daniel debow retweetledi
daniel debow retweetledi
Build Canada
Build Canada@build_canada·
Every few decades, a new technology emerges that reshapes human productivity. Today, AI is that technology. An AI literacy dividend will help 🇨🇦 individuals & businesses to learn, innovate, & compete using AI. From @shaneparrish & @fnthawar: buildcanada.com/memos/the-ai-l…
Build Canada tweet media
English
0
6
36
15.9K
daniel debow retweetledi
Lucy Hargreaves
Lucy Hargreaves@lucyhargreaves4·
we're hiring film students this summer for creative storytelling work at Build Canada stories about what's working, what's not, and how we build a better future. told the way you'd share with your friends, not a corporate brand manager DM me if you're in
English
7
13
82
7.6K
daniel debow retweetledi
Jason Kenney 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇮🇱
This is nonsensical and counterproductive. Canada is finally getting serious about investing in national defence. This should be welcomed and encouraged by our allies, not attacked. For the first time since the Cold War, we have achieved the longstanding 2% GDP target, and are credibly moving to the new 3.5% core defence target. The Blame Canada crowd here is claiming that’s all the result of creative accounting. Nonsense. - We have adopted the same framework for scoring defence spending as most of our NATO allies - The federal budget and estimates show real, material budgeted increases to meet the targets - We are spending $55 billion to build 15 cutting edge destroyers, part of the larger naval ship building strategy launched by the Harper government - The RCN is about to launch the procurement of 12 new submarines - The RCAF is finally about to take possession of our first tranche of F35s as part of the new fighter jet fleet - Canada is spending tens of $ billions to modernize and expand Arctic military capacity - The decline in total Canadian Armed Forces personnel has finally turned around, and force size is expanding. Anyone who works in or close to the Canadian defence sector knows that this is real. Exciting things are happening in defence tech innovation, procurement, industry partnerships, etc. Canada’s underinvestment in national defence goes back decades under different governments. It was allowed to get to a shameful state, and for too long we have preened about our moral authority while living rent free under the American security umbrella. It will take time to achieve the ambitious goals of Canada’s defence rebuild. But Prime Minister Carney’s commendable defence reset began just a year ago. The Permanent Joint Board on Defence has been a key platform for cooperation on North American defence since the Second World War. It has operated in good times and bad: during our joint operations in the Korean and Afghan Wars; during much lower levels of Canadian defence spending; and even when a US President threatened to annex Canada. Our two countries have shed blood together in the defence of freedom. Geography dictates that we will always need each other to defend North America. So our alliance must be able to stand above occasional tensions in the bilateral relationship.
Under Secretary of War Elbridge Colby@USWPColby

A strong Canada that prioritizes hard power over rhetoric benefits us all. Unfortunately, Canada has failed to make credible progress on its defense commitments. DoW is pausing the Permanent Joint Board on Defense to reassess how this forum benefits shared North American defense. 1/3

English
820
217
1.3K
189.9K
daniel debow retweetledi
Farhan Thawar
Farhan Thawar@fnthawar·
I learned that very often the most intolerant and narrow-minded people are the ones who congratulate themselves on their tolerance and open-mindedness — Christopher Hitchens
English
2
5
33
2.5K
daniel debow
daniel debow@ddebow·
“An entire generation has learned to deconstruct and never learned to build.”
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael

Aujourd'hui je déconstruis la déconstruction. La déconstruction est le virus mental le plus efficace jamais conçu contre une civilisation. Il a été fabriqué en France entre 1966 et 1980 par trois hommes : Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze. Il a été exporté aux États-Unis, hybridé avec le puritanisme racial américain, et il est revenu trente ans plus tard sous le nom de wokisme paralyser l'Occident entier. Voici comment il fonctionne, et pourquoi il faut le détruire. La thèse est simple. Toute vérité n'est qu'un rapport de pouvoir déguisé. Tout texte sacré, toute loi, toute science, toute norme, toute hiérarchie, toute identité, toute institution cache en réalité une domination. Déconstruire, c'est montrer le rapport de force sous le vernis du vrai. C'est arracher le masque. C'est "démasquer". Formulé comme ça, ça paraît inoffensif. Voire utile. Qui n'aime pas un peu d'esprit critique ? Le piège est là. La déconstruction se présente comme une méthode. Elle est en réalité une ontologie. Elle ne dit pas seulement "interrogeons les normes", elle dit "il n'y a *que* des rapports de pouvoir". La différence est civilisationnelle. Une société qui interroge ses normes reste debout. Une société qui croit que ses normes ne sont *rien d'autre* que de la domination s'effondre. Parce qu'elle ne peut plus rien défendre. Plus une frontière, plus une loi, plus une science, plus une langue, plus une histoire, plus une biologie, plus une famille. Tout devient suspect. Tout devient négociable. Tout devient "construit donc déconstructible". C'est la première raison pour laquelle c'est un virus. Il s'auto-réplique. Une fois inoculé, il transforme tout ce qu'il touche en cible. La science est patriarcale, donc déconstruisons-la. Le langage est colonial, donc réinventons-le. La méritocratie est raciste, donc abolissons-la. Le sexe est une construction, donc choisissons-le. Il n'y a plus de roc. Tout est sable. Deuxième raison. Le virus est *non-falsifiable*. Si vous défendez une norme, c'est que vous êtes l'oppresseur. Si vous niez être oppresseur, c'est la preuve de votre privilège inconscient. Si vous citez des faits, vos faits sont contaminés par le pouvoir qui les a produits. Si vous citez la raison, la raison elle-même est blanche, masculine, occidentale. Il n'y a aucune sortie possible. Le système est conçu pour rendre toute objection irrecevable par définition. C'est exactement la structure d'une secte. Et c'est exactement ce qui s'est installé dans les universités, les RH, les médias, les administrations, les conseils d'administration depuis vingt ans. Troisième raison. Le virus s'auto-réfute mais ne s'auto-détruit pas. Si toute vérité est pouvoir, alors la phrase "toute vérité est pouvoir" est elle-même du pouvoir, donc sans valeur. Logiquement, la déconstruction se mord la queue dès la première phrase. Mais elle s'en moque. Parce qu'elle n'a jamais cherché la cohérence. Elle cherche l'efficacité politique. Et son efficacité politique est immense. Elle désarme ses ennemis et arme ses militants. Elle paralyse le défenseur et libère l'attaquant. C'est une arme asymétrique parfaite. Quatrième raison. Le virus produit des humains diminués. Une génération entière a appris à déconstruire et n'a jamais appris à construire. Elle sait soupçonner, jamais admirer. Elle voit le pouvoir partout et la beauté nulle part. Elle peut produire mille pages sur le caractère opprimant de Shakespeare et zéro ligne qui vaille la peine d'être lue dans cent ans. Elle a confondu l'intelligence critique avec la pose critique. Elle est stérile par construction. Un esprit nourri à la déconstruction est un esprit qui ne sait plus rien édifier. Cinquième raison, la plus grave. Une civilisation se tient debout sur trois piliers. La croyance qu'une vérité est accessible à la raison. La croyance qu'un bien se distingue d'un mal. La croyance qu'un héritage mérite d'être transmis. La déconstruction a méthodiquement dynamité les trois. Pas par méchanceté. Par jeu intellectuel, par fascination du soupçon, par haine de la bourgeoisie qui avait nourri ses prophètes. Mais le résultat est là. Une civilisation qui ne croit plus en sa vérité, ni en son bien, ni en son héritage ne se défend pas. Elle s'excuse en attendant la fin. Voilà ce qu'on a fait. Voilà ce qu'il faut nommer. La bonne nouvelle, c'est qu'un virus mental ne survit que tant qu'on lui cède l'autorité du discours. Il meurt dès qu'on cesse de jouer son jeu. Dès qu'on réaffirme tranquillement qu'il existe une vérité, un beau, un bien, un héritage. Dès qu'on cesse de demander la permission aux déconstructeurs pour bâtir. Dès qu'on refait. Dès qu'on transmet. Dès qu'on crée. Les bâtisseurs ont toujours le dernier mot sur les commentateurs. Toujours. Parce qu'à la fin il reste ce qui est construit, et rien de ce qui a été déconstruit. Alors aujourd'hui je déconstruis la déconstruction. Et demain je construis.

English
6
19
78
8K
daniel debow retweetledi