Mike Rigby

@aroundliv You are so utterly stupid that it's hard to tell you how stupid you are in terms that you'd understand.

One of the followers sent this video in of him giving it to the Commi’s in Bootle. There is a known theory that the reason we have all this is because of Russia/Qatar/Iran are spending billions on bot accounts pushing all this on the internet. They also fund activists to push this on our streets and university campuses. Knowing the divide and damage it causes to society. They also push Palestine protests which is why everyone is up in arms about Palestine but no other genocides happening right now. Not a peep out of them. The people who stand at hotels with refugees welcome signs. Most of them are paid to do so. They are literally carrying out the dirty work for countries that want to bring us down. And they have the cheek to call normal everyday people who just want to live in peace the “divisive” ones. We will never live in a peaceful society while these people exist. Even if we do free Palestine. They will just move onto something else to divide our society. For them the revolution never ends.

@voxtechbit @DJ_CURFEW Naturally, he didn't "write" it, as such.

@DJ_CURFEW 10X! 100X! That means what your engineer did before in 1 month, they'll now do almost 1 YEAR worth of work (10x). At 100X they're doing 10 YEARS OF WORK IN ONE MONTH! The insane part? He writes another 1000 words after this. LinkedIn CEO with AI Psychosis.

Today we reduced headcount by 22%. The business is the strongest it's ever been. So I think it's important to be direct about what I'm seeing and why. First, I made this decision and I own it. I did it because the way to operate at the highest level of productivity is changing, and to win the future, ClickUp needs to change with it. Second, this wasn't about cutting costs. Most savings from this change will flow directly back into the people who stay. We'll be introducing million-dollar salary bands. If you create outsized impact using AI, you'll be paid outside of traditional bands. Most importantly, I have the deepest gratitude for those affected. We're doing this from a position of strength specifically so we can take care of people properly. Everyone affected receives a package aimed at honoring their contributions and easing the transition. I only see two options: wait for this to play out gradually in the market or be honest about what I'm seeing and act proactively. THE 100X ORGANIZATION The primary change is that we're restructuring around what I call 100x org. The goal is 100x output. The roles required to build at the highest level are fundamentally different than they were a year ago. Incremental improvements to existing systems won't get us there. We need new ones. That means creating enough disruption to rebuild rather than iterate on what's already broken. The common narrative is that AI makes everyone more productive. It doesn't. Many of the workflows of today, if left unchanged, create bottlenecks in AI systems. These roles will evolve. But waiting for that to happen naturally means falling behind now. The 100x org is actually heavily dependent on people - infinitely more than today. This is only possible with 10x people that have embraced and adopted new ways of working. THE BUILDERS, AGENT MANAGERS, AND FRONT-LINERS — THE BUILDERS: 10X ENGINEERS I don't think most companies have internalized what's actually happening with AI in engineering. The common narrative is that AI makes all engineers more productive. That may be true in isolation, but at an organization level - that is the farthest thing from reality. Here's what we've validated recently at ClickUp: the great engineers, the ones who can orchestrate, architect, and review, are becoming 100x engineers. They're not writing code. They're directing agents that write code. The skill is judgment. AI makes the best engineers wildly more productive, and everyone else using AI slows these engineers down. Think about it - the bottlenecks are (1) orchestration - telling AI what to do, and (2) reviewing - what AI did. Everything is leapfrogged and no longer needed. So who do you want orchestrating and reviewing code? And how do you want your best engineers to spend their time? If your best engineers are spending time reviewing other people's code, then this is inherently an inefficient bottleneck. These engineers can review their agent's code much faster than reviewing human code. The new world is about enabling your 10x engineers to become 100x. The wrong strategy is to push every engineer to use infinite tokens. Companies doing this are celebrating 500% more pull requests. But customer outcomes don't match the volume of code being generated. I call this the great reckoning of AI coding, and every company will face this soon if not already. More code is just another bottleneck to the best engineers, and ultimately to your company's impact as well. — THE BUILDERS: 10X PRODUCT MANAGERS Product management and design roles are merging. Designers that have customer focus, become more like product managers. And product managers that have intuition for UX become more like designers. The bottleneck of user research is gone. It takes us just one mention of an agent to kickoff research and analyze results. The bottleneck of product <> design iteration is also gone. The product builder iterates on their own, along with agents and skills that ensure alignment with quality and strategy. Also controversial today - I believe that the wrong strategy is to have your PMs shipping code - that just introduces another bottleneck that the best engineers will waste their time on. To be clear, PMs should be coding but they should do this in a playground to iterate, validate, and scope. That code should not go to production. Everything outside of managing systems, orchestrating AI, and reviewing output becomes a bottleneck. That's why the other roles that are critical along with these are the systems managers (to reduce bottlenecks) along with a bottleneck you can't replace - customer meeting time. — THE SYSTEM MANAGERS Ironically, the people that automate their jobs with AI will always have a job. They become owners of the AI systems - agent managers. We have many examples of these people at ClickUp. The underlying systems in which we operate are absolutely critical to get right. I think most companies are delusional to think they can iterate on existing systems and compete in this new world. You must create enough disruption so that old systems are deprecated entirely. If there's any definition for 'AI native' that's what it is. — THE FRONT-LINERS In a world that will become saturated with AI communication, the human touch will matter more than anything to customers. This is a bottleneck that you shouldn't replace - even when agents are high enough quality to do video meetings. One-on-one meeting time with customers is something that shouldn't be automated. The systems around the meetings should be - so that front-liners spend nearly 100% of their time with customers. REWARDING 100X IMPACT In a world where companies are able to do so much more with less, where does that excess money go? In our case, much of the savings in this new operating model will flow directly back to those that enabled it. We must reward people that create productivity accordingly. This aligns incentives on both sides. Plus, in a world where your best people create 100x impact, you can't afford to lose them. You should aim to retain these employees for decades. The context they have and their ability to efficiently orchestrate and review will be nearly impossible to replace. Compensation bands of today should be thrown out the door. We're introducing $1 million cash/year salary bands with a path available to nearly everyone in the company if they produce 100x impact by creating or managing AI systems. THE FUTURE Nearly every company will make changes like these. The ones that do it proactively will define what comes next. The future is not fewer people. It's different work, new roles, and better rewards for those who embrace it. We're already seeing entirely new roles emerge, like Agent Managers, that didn't exist a year ago. ClickUp is positioning to lead this shift, not just internally, but for our customers too. I've never been more certain about where we're headed.

@HarryMaguire93 *have

I was confident I could of played a major part this summer for my country after the season I’ve had. I’ve been left shocked and gutted by the decision. I’ve loved nothing more than putting that shirt on and representing my country over the years. I wish the players, all the best this summer 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

@alexboge This reads exactly like AI. Learn to write better ?

@mtrigby I don’t use AI - learn to read better

More than 2,300 years ago, the ancient Greeks already knew Earth was a globe. And learned its size. Aristotle laid out several basic observations that anyone could understand: ships disappear hull-first over the horizon and appear mast-first when approaching; during a lunar eclipse, Earth casts a round shadow on the Moon; and as you travel north or south, the visible stars change, with some constellations rising into view and others disappearing below the horizon. This was not guesswork. It was geometry, observation, and reason. There was no agenda. They were not defending NASA, protecting a government narrative, or trying to preserve some system of control. They were seeking the truth. They wanted to understand the world they lived on. There was no power to gain or lose from the answer. No religion needed to be defended. No institution needed to be protected. It was just logic. It was curiosity. It was the desire to learn, using the tools available to them: their eyes and their minds. Flat-earthers possess only the eyes, and still they cannot see. About a century later, armed with that knowledge, another Greek named Eratosthenes did something logically derived from simple geometry for a sphere: he calculated the circumference of Earth. At Syene, on a certain date, the Sun was directly overhead at noon, shining straight down into a well. At the same time in Alexandria, a vertical stick cast a shadow. Eratosthenes measured the shadow angle: about 7.2 degrees. A full circle is 360 degrees. 360 divided by 7.2 equals 50. That meant the distance from Alexandria to Syene represented 1/50 of Earth’s circumference. So all he had to do was multiply the distance between the two cities by 50 - and he got remarkably close to the real circumference of Earth. No satellites. No rockets. No NASA. No “trust the government.” Just sunlight, a stick, a well, distance, and geometry. And here’s the part flat-earthers hate: this experiment cannot succeed on a flat Earth. Sure, you can invent a small local Sun and place it in one very precise imaginary position to make one measurement appear to work. But the moment you move the stick to another location, the numbers fail. The angles no longer agree. The distances no longer scale. The model stops producing one consistent answer. On a globe, the measurements converge. On a flat Earth, they conflict. That is why Eratosthenes’ experiment is so devastating. It does not merely show that one shadow angle can be explained. It shows that distance, angle, and curvature all fit together into a single coherent geometry which only works on a globe. The ancient Greeks figured this out over two thousand years ago. Using observations, basic geometry, and a desire for truth. Modern flat-earthers still haven’t caught up. Even more sadly, Flerfs refuse to even try.

@Nick___Collins @HeylittleJude

Just found out from a friend of mine at the club - Slot is gone! He’s not been sacked but it’s mutual from both parties for a clean break. It will be announced next week, they’re trying to get Iraola as a replacement. Take it with a pinch of salt but personally believe it 🥳

@giveashitnature @ClimateBen AI:DR Unfollowing.

Farmers have figured out that the cheapest pesticide is a strip of flowers. When you plant wildflowers through a crop field, not just around the edge but in strips running through the middle, you get ladybugs, lacewings, hoverflies, and parasitic wasps living in the field instead of visiting it. They eat the aphids, the caterpillars, and the mites for free, all summer long. In controlled trials, fields with tailored flower strips had leaf-beetle numbers 40 to 50% lower and crop damage cut by around 60%, enough to drop below the threshold where spraying was even considered worth it. The flowers attract a standing army to our fields. We spent decades engineering chemicals to kill the insects eating the crop, when the insects that eat those insects would have worked for the price of seed.

I know I'm going to get a lot of hate for this, but let's take this one step further. You can't be an environmentalist and eat meat and dairy. I don't understand how climate scientists, ecologists, and anyone with a brain who cares about our planet can not be #vegan.

@abasima_essien @nabeelqu @GrantaMag Even that's AI. How sad.

@nabeelqu @GrantaMag Here's what the writer of the story seems to think about AI-aided writing, from their LinkedIn profile, if this is even an original thought in itself.

Well, this is a first: a ChatGPT-generated story won a prestigious literary prize (The Commonwealth Prize). "Not X, not Y, but Z" sentences everywhere, the "hums" trope, and plenty of other obvious markers of AI writing. A major milestone for AI, at any rate... @GrantaMag

@SouthamptonFC That it was potentially a "£200M game" is more of a reason why you shouldn't have done what you did.

A statement from Phil Parsons, Chief Executive, Southampton Football Club.

@aakashgupta AI:DR

Kit Harington just confirmed that the most expensive character in TV history is now narratively worthless. And nobody's connecting the math. Jon Snow generated an estimated $501 million in HBO subscription revenue based on screen time alone across eight seasons. He appeared in all 73 episodes. He was the emotional center of a franchise that produced $3.1 billion in subscription revenue and $6 billion in profit for Warner between 2015 and 2018. HBO came to Harington and said: build a show around this character. They spent two years trying. Two years of scripts and development on the single most bankable name in prestige television. And the guy who played him for a decade walked away and said "nothing excited us enough." Think about what that means. HBO could not find one story worth telling about the character who carried the most profitable drama in cable history. The reason is sitting right there in the Season 8 finale. Benioff and Weiss wrote Jon into exile beyond the Wall with no political ties, no conflict, no relationships, no unresolved tension, and no source material to pull from. They gave him the narrative equivalent of a closed bank account. Every possible sequel has to start from: man stands in snow with no motivation, no antagonist, and no connection to the world that made people care about him. Now look at what's actually working. House of the Dragon: set 200 years before the finale. A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms: 100 years before. The Aegon the Conqueror series: even further back. Sea Snake, 10,000 Ships, same direction. Every single surviving Westeros project runs away from Season 8's ending. The one attempt to go forward died in development. 1.7 million people signed a petition to remake that finale. HBO lost over half its 18-49 audience within a year of the show ending. And Benioff and Weiss rushed those final six episodes reportedly because they had a Star Wars deal waiting. They lost the Star Wars deal too. Kit said he looked at photos from Season 8 and saw himself exhausted. He was. Everyone was. The show that averaged 43 million viewers per episode in its final season was running on fumes creatively while setting viewership records, which is the most dangerous combination in entertainment. Record audience, collapsing craft. The gap between those two lines is where franchise value goes to die. HBO made the right call killing SNOW. But the reason they had to kill it is the actual story. Season 8 didn't just end Game of Thrones. It locked the entire franchise in reverse gear. The only safe direction for Westeros is backward, because two showrunners turned the forward timeline radioactive on their way out the door.

@lorrainesright Lorraine, it's an engagement-farming fake account.

"The protein argument is so overused and easily debunked." But not by any of this, which is total nonsense. People are retconning themselves into believing whatever they think might be true without ever investigating to find out if it is.

@thisdudelikesAI AI:DR

A Oxford PhD student got flagged for submitting AI-generated work. His advisor called it the most sophisticated research process he had seen in 20 years. The student had not used AI to write a single word. Here is the workflow that got him reported. He starts every essay with a diagnostic he calls brutal. He dumps his rough argument into Claude and asks one question: what are the three weakest logical jumps in this reasoning, and where would a hostile examiner attack first? The AI does not write his essay. It destroys his draft, and then he rebuilds from whatever survives. Most students using AI are doing the opposite. They hand Claude a topic and ask it to write. He hands Claude his thinking and asks it to find every place where that thinking falls apart. The difference between those two approaches is the difference between outsourcing your brain and sharpening it. The second step is the one that made his advisor go quiet. He uploads the five most important papers in his field alongside his draft and asks Claude what claims in his argument contradict or oversimplify what these authors actually found. Most PhD students cite papers they have skimmed once. He cites papers he has been forced to genuinely reckon with, because Claude keeps catching the places where he got them wrong. The final move is almost unfair. Before he submits anything, he pastes his conclusion and runs one more prompt. He asks what a philosopher of science would say is missing from this argument and what assumptions he is making that he has not defended. His essays come back from reviewers with phrases like unusually rigorous and demonstrates rare critical depth, and his committee has no idea that the depth came from a machine asking him harder questions than any human in his department was willing to ask. The academic integrity hearing lasted three hours. The panel asked him to rebuild his methodology from scratch in the room. He opened his laptop and showed them exactly how the workflow ran, prompt by prompt. They did not just clear him. They gave him the highest grade in the department's history and asked him to present the process to faculty. Here is what that story actually means. What took most PhD candidates six months of back-and-forth with advisors, he was compressing into a single session because he had figured out something almost nobody else has. AI does not make your thinking better by replacing it. It makes your thinking better by attacking it faster than any human critic ever would. He was not using AI to write. He was using it to think harder than he could alone. The tool is the same one everyone has. The workflow is the part nobody is teaching.

@aakashgupta AI:DR

What you're watching is a 24-year-old whose brain was hemorrhaging while his body kept boxing. Simiso Buthelezi was winning this fight. Dominated all 10 rounds. His trainer said he barely took a clean shot. In the final round, he knocked his opponent through the ropes. When the ref separated them, Buthelezi turned around and started throwing full combinations at an empty corner. Back to his opponent. Punching air. The neuroscience of what's happening here is the part that stays with you. Boxing drills combinations into procedural memory, stored in the basal ganglia and cerebellum. Those motor circuits can fire without conscious input. When a brain bleed compresses the prefrontal cortex, spatial awareness goes first. Decision-making goes next. But the motor strip, located in the posterior frontal cortex, is often the last region to lose blood supply. So the body keeps executing the only pattern it knows. He wasn't confused. He was already gone. The body just hadn't received the message yet. Buthelezi was placed in a medically induced coma and died two days later. Record was 4-0. Never lost a professional fight. He was 24. The part that makes this the darkest moment in the sport: the brain bleed wasn't caused by a visible punch from his opponent. His trainer confirmed nothing unusual happened in the fight. No heavy blows. Perfect health going in. The brain can hemorrhage from cumulative subclinical impacts across hundreds of rounds of sparring, or a vascular malformation that ruptures under the adrenaline and exertion of competition. The punch that killed Simiso Buthelezi might not have been one he took. It might have been one he threw.

@Microinteracti1 AI:DR

The West Has Already Lost the Drone War. It Just Hasn’t Noticed Yet. Here is something that should ruin your Monday. A Ukrainian AI drone engineer has gone on record to explain, calmly and with considerable evidence, that Western military planning is not behind the times. It is not lagging. It is not in need of reform. It is dead. Obsolete. A relic propped up by expensive acronyms and men in uniforms who still think the tank is the apex predator of land warfare. Yaroslav Azhnyuk, founder of AI drone company The Fourth Law, has done the maths. FPV drones now account for somewhere between 70 and 80 percent of frontline casualties in Ukraine. Not artillery. Not missiles. Not the armoured columns that NATO has spent forty years and several fortunes preparing to counter. Small, cheap, autonomous flying machines that cost about as much as a decent restaurant dinner and kill with the precision of a surgeon. But here is where it gets genuinely terrifying. China can produce four billion FPV drones per year. Ukraine, a country that has been at war for three years and is building faster than anyone in the West, manages four million. That is the kind of number that makes you want to lie down on the floor and stare at the ceiling for a while. The West is not losing the AI arms race because it lacks the technology. It is losing because it is still arguing about procurement frameworks while the future arrives, uninvited, at four hundred kilometres per hour with a shaped charge attached. Latest 👇 gandalv.substack.com/p/ukraine-the-…

@LAE1983m @thebbvegan This interjection is a non-sequitor.

@thebbvegan You didn't pay attention in history class did you?

What we’re doing to animals, is EXACTLY what we did to humans decades ago. We enslaved humans to use them for our own personal benefit. Tortured them, abused them, and this was seen as normal back then. What’s the difference between that and what we do to animals now? We enslave animals just to end up torturing them and killing them for food. Let’s end speciesism, once and for all. 🌱

@TMGFlorida @thebbvegan There are no lies. You're having something pointed out that you're encouraged to ignore and deny. You don't like this because it reveals the lies you've been told all your life.

@thebbvegan There are two lies in that post. One, use of animals is NOT equivalent to human slavery; we are fundamentally different. Two, there is NO SUCH THING as "speciesism."

@JanetMeeham @thebbvegan The confusion is all you.

@thebbvegan "Decades ago"? The human slave trade still continues, and has continued for 1000's of years. We don't have to enslave or torture animals to eat meat. In fact many farms do the exact opposite. And who is "we" exactly? You seem pretty confused. #veganlogic

@GuyCreditcard @SMohyeddin *have

@SMohyeddin Should of stuck to Kpop, he puts bacon on himself so others don’t notice his lady like chicken legs

I went searching to find out who this idiot savant is who played this awful trance cello music at the Tommy Robinson UK rally. It turns out that this is all part of his anti-Muslim shtick; to put bacon on himself. Imagine being this stupid.