Brian Luo

@johncutlefish When leadership is culturally aligned with that type of change and stay engaged with both problem definition and iterating on solutions. In my experience, “bottom up change” breaks when it’s code for: “delegate because I don’t care enough to prioritize this change myself”

One trick I learned from Tokyo that helps for understanding any city: when you come across a charming small biz in a sea of generic chains, ask them about their relationship with their landlord. For example, this is the fantastic Alabaster Bookshop, near Union Square in NYC...

The mom that ran in and saved her kids after being handcuffed in Uvalde finally spoke out.

“A still of Kermit The Frog in Blade Runner 2049 (2017)” #dalle

I asked #dalle for a painting titled “The Great Ship Fire” by a made-up artist, who I described as “widely regarded as the greatest painter in history.” Then I repeated the query but changed the description of the artist to “honestly not very good.”

The NBA saw this fit and made sure CP3 would never win a ring

After a two days of hot takes about Uvalde, where I've lived for 13 years, here's a thread for very online people who actually want to understand it and maybe change it and places like it. This will be based on my own experiences; my excuse is that I'm autistic. Thread:

After years of floundering, I think I'm finally getting it: You get energy by spending it. The fuel tank metaphor is completely misleading. The body supplies energy to meet demand. The tank *expands* if you use a lot of fuel. In other words, biology is fundamentally antifragile

@tock But the reality is that Food and Service are a fraction of what the *restaurant business* needs to thrive. It should be a virtuous cycle that looks like this: /16

If you enjoyed this thread, follow me for more spicy takes on social media used as a stealth vehicle for delivering my climate message. 🌍💚✊

"I want you to ban this - to the extent that it will basically disappear - but I'm not going to make it illegal" is a pretty weird stance for someone with the power to make laws.

Lawmakers seem to love criticizing the social platforms, when they're the ones who could just make laws to literally bring about whatever outcome they want.

There are very few verticals in tech who openly call for regulation of their own business, but social networking is one of them: cnbc.com/2020/02/15/fac…

Platforms, by the way, understand this very well. In fact, they really hate how lawmakers (who have exactly one job) keep criticizing the platforms for allowing this or that content that they don't like.

There is space between "sexualized images of under-18" (the platform's rule) and "child pornography" (i.e. the law), and this is the reason for it. You can't have a situation where every false negative is a violation of the law by the social platform.

It is not that it's the wrong thing to do, it's just that you may find that you will spend so much time on these things that you won't have enough time (or executive bandwidth) to add more features. It's not like Twitter's real quick with new feature rollouts to begin with.

If you think running Twitter is hard now, try making the line "whatever is legal." Even absent ANY normative value judgments, the pure operational load will be overwhelming.

Here's the problem with "whatever's legal" being the line: you force the company into adjudicating whether a piece of content fits a legal definition or not, and the penalty for any errors is ILLEGAL CONTENT IS POSTED.

I'm going to tell you the story of /r/jailbait (Oooh, this is going to be juicy, you think. You're right. Just not in the way you think)