This article is trying way too hard to dunk on Zuckerberg for… doing normal CEO things.
The whole premise seems to be that writing down your thoughts, asking questions, or being transparent in internal emails is somehow a huge self-own. But that’s just how people work—especially when you’re running a massive company and making fast, complex decisions. You write things down, explore ideas, get feedback. Acting like that’s a confession is lazy analysis.
The real problem here is that the author treats normal business strategy—like acquiring a rising competitor—as some kind of criminal mastermind move. Whether or not that should be legal is one debate. But pretending it’s shocking that a company would consider eliminating competitive risk? Come on. That’s what businesses do. If you want to critique the system, critique the system—not the fact that someone used it.
Also, the smug “ha ha, he wrote it down!” attitude is incredibly counterproductive. All it does is teach executives to stop documenting anything real. It punishes transparency and rewards corporate vagueness and CYA behavior. If that’s what we want more of, congrats—we’re on track.
The piece doesn’t offer any actual insight into how companies operate or how antitrust should evolve—it just ridicules someone for not being lawyerly enough in private. That’s not analysis, it’s court fan fiction.
I think the ethics of private enterprise is far from sorted long, long before getting to market-manipulation. Particularly in the US, where you're essentially obligated to take peoples' money at any cost.
Thrilled to share a white paper on the Relational Compression Format (RCF) codec, driven by the Unified Conceptual Framework / Grand Unified Tensor Theory (UCF/GUTT), tested on the Kodak dataset. RCF delivers compression ratios >85% (files <15% of PNG size), PSNR >30 dB, and SSIM >0.9, outperforming JPEG, PNG, WebP, and JPEG 2000 in efficiency and quality.
UCF/GUTT, introduced in The Relational Way: An Introduction (Amazon), the first book in a series, models reality as relational webs. RCF uses tensor-based math to encode image relationships, not pixels, achieving near-lossless results (e.g., SSIM 0.9430 on kodim07). It’s a novel approach for cloud storage, web delivery, AI vision, and eco-friendly tech.
Thrilled to share a white paper on the Relational Compression Format (RCF) codec, driven by the Unified Conceptual Framework / Grand Unified Tensor Theory (UCF/GUTT), tested on the Kodak dataset. RCF delivers compression ratios >85% (files <15% of PNG size), PSNR >30 dB, and SSIM >0.9, outperforming JPEG, PNG, WebP, and JPEG 2000 in efficiency and quality.
UCF/GUTT, introduced in The Relational Way: An Introduction (Amazon), the first book in a series, models reality as relational webs. RCF uses tensor-based math to encode image relationships, not pixels, achieving near-lossless results (e.g., SSIM 0.9430 on kodim07). It’s a novel approach for cloud storage, web delivery, AI vision, and eco-friendly tech.
The paper details Kodak results and UCF/GUTT’s relational roots: https://relationalexistence.com/comparison. How does RCF compare to deep learning codecs? Any thoughts on relational compression for sustainable tech? Feedback welcome!
for those doubting this claim, the secret mailing list "GameJournoPros" used by journalists to collude is not even mentioned once, and is akin to scrubbing the holocaust article of the word "jew"
I disagree with the take on UBI. With UBI more people can then pursue a career that is fulfilling for them. Rather than choices of shit jobs to make ends meet.
Your step 2 is wrong :-)
> Step 2: We convert them into a high-quality physical coloring book with OpenAI’s brand-new Sora model, then send it out for printing.
You don't convert it into a physical book /before/ sending it for printing.
By the way, reading maps is easy. Reading a map and memorising all the landmarks and turns so you can then drive without looking at the map is the hard bit. IMO.
Author here. Noticed a lot of traffic from this post - so thanks. Thanks especially for all these thoughtful comments. Just dropping in to say I appreciate the attention - and am grateful that most posters here don't seem to mind that I'm unable to draw hard conclusions in my original article. I also like the posts here that point towards the fact that atomisation maybe has had something to do with things (as well as the hardening of inequalities and etc.) Interesting! Perhaps it was more possible to share jokes in 2003 than it is now? (The concept that jokes either punch up or punch down seems an indication of that... Feels quite recent to me. And What if the intention isn't to hit anyone, really, just to make each other laugh?)
Anyway, to respond to a couple of other things on here. I'm not really a comedian. Sorry! I do work in the publishing industry, so while I can't prove my ideas about publishers being nervous, I would hope I have a reasonable insight and instinct.
I view these things as a way to make up for not paying adequate tax rates by paying for the things they felt best about in what tax should have paid for.
Flaws with this setup aside, I wouldn't feel good about building a Trump compatible school.. And of course the expectation that they continue is just precedent/norms which means less than nothing in show power by arbitrary disruption land.
I keep coming back to the idea of curating my own reading through RSS.
I missed the first wave: mostly stuck to aggregators and blogs, but eventually set up a Feedly account. Like others here, I found maintaining a meaningful list takes real energy. It's easy to over-subscribe and end up with a second inbox.
Still, I think the effort is worth it. The best systems I've worked on always rewarded small, regular maintenance over trying to automate everything away. Feels like curating information works the same way.
Kind of explains a lot in the balancing act in Trumps rise to power while trying to look like a marionette for various interests this term. They should remember Hitler's rebellion from his masters.
This is very impressive for a hobby project. I was wondering if you were planning to release the source code. Being able to create client-hosted, low-requirement neural networks for world generation could be really useful for game dev or artistic projects.
It is possible in theory to speed up existing configure scripts by switching interpreter from /bin/sh to something that scans file, splits it to independent blocks and runs them in parallel.
This is a good question..it just occurred to me that perhaps its because its so much easier for the people who would be the target of the joke to answer back now?
Social media gives the possibility of instant reply, whereas if you publish a book in 2003 called 'crap towns' how can the so-called chavs answer back? Publish their own book? Write to the local paper?
So its a side effect of how we can all hear each other better now (for better or for worse)
I recently launched Encryptor, a simple but powerful app that lets you encrypt any text with a password, making it safe to paste into WhatsApp, Telegram, emails, documents, or anywhere else.
It's not about encrypting the communication channel — it's about protecting the content itself. Write or paste your message, choose a password, and encrypt it with one tap. Only those with the password can decrypt and read it.
Works completely offline
Data never leaves your device
No accounts or sign-ups
Compatible with any app (email, chat, docs, social media)
Available for iOS and Android.
If you're curious, you can learn more here: Landing page
Would love to hear your feedback or ideas to improve it!
I'm launching MAXUP, an open-source project that combines sport, learning, and tech through wearable equipment (smart helmet + smart suit) connected to a personal AI coach.
The goal: to help young people (and everyone!) improve physical fitness, learning skills, confidence, and resilience — using optimized routines, gamification, and minimal costs.
Uncomfortable yes, but you need to pay attention to details that big tinfoil fashion can't be bothered with. For example, you can't use Reynolds wrap because it was modified with preforations for the government. They say that was to keep your Jonny Wurster's from smoking crack, but obviously sub-nanometer waves..
The whole premise seems to be that writing down your thoughts, asking questions, or being transparent in internal emails is somehow a huge self-own. But that’s just how people work—especially when you’re running a massive company and making fast, complex decisions. You write things down, explore ideas, get feedback. Acting like that’s a confession is lazy analysis.
The real problem here is that the author treats normal business strategy—like acquiring a rising competitor—as some kind of criminal mastermind move. Whether or not that should be legal is one debate. But pretending it’s shocking that a company would consider eliminating competitive risk? Come on. That’s what businesses do. If you want to critique the system, critique the system—not the fact that someone used it.
Also, the smug “ha ha, he wrote it down!” attitude is incredibly counterproductive. All it does is teach executives to stop documenting anything real. It punishes transparency and rewards corporate vagueness and CYA behavior. If that’s what we want more of, congrats—we’re on track.
The piece doesn’t offer any actual insight into how companies operate or how antitrust should evolve—it just ridicules someone for not being lawyerly enough in private. That’s not analysis, it’s court fan fiction.