subj
Unsavory food, but for nourishing thought
While much of the world is arguing over whether to be happy or sad about Charlie Kirk’s death, here’s what you should really know:
- At least 72% of the world’s population (about 5.7 billion people) live under authoritarian rule.
- In Australia, just four companies control 84% of the newspaper/media market share.
- Globally, Google, Meta, and Amazon dominate the digital information landscape.
In other words, you’re not nearly as free as you think you are. The conversations we have, the information we see, and even the outrage we feel are shaped by corporations who profit from your attention.
Why would you interrogate the structural drivers of harm, like the way the economy is organised (and benefits only a few), the way power consolidates etc, when it’s so much easier to yell at strangers in the comments section of an Instagram post about Charlie Kirk?
As Noam Chomsky says, “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”
Here are some conversations we COULD be having, instead of getting stuck in the same endless arguments that keep dividing us and amplifying the conflict:
- Why must economies grow forever?
- Why do a handful of private actors own things like oceans, water rights and minerals?
- Why is "a job" the default way to justify existence?
- Why is the work of care, community, and ecosystems invisible in economics?
- Why do we think of housing as an “asset class"?
- Why is democracy framed as voting every few years - reduced to periodic elections?
- Why has society normalised the fact that millions die every year from causes we have the resources to stop?
- Why do we spend more on militaries than the world’s best defence system (nature)?
Sources:
University of Sydney University of Gothenburg
- At least 72% of the world’s population (about 5.7 billion people) live under authoritarian rule.
- In Australia, just four companies control 84% of the newspaper/media market share.
- Globally, Google, Meta, and Amazon dominate the digital information landscape.
In other words, you’re not nearly as free as you think you are. The conversations we have, the information we see, and even the outrage we feel are shaped by corporations who profit from your attention.
Why would you interrogate the structural drivers of harm, like the way the economy is organised (and benefits only a few), the way power consolidates etc, when it’s so much easier to yell at strangers in the comments section of an Instagram post about Charlie Kirk?
As Noam Chomsky says, “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”
Here are some conversations we COULD be having, instead of getting stuck in the same endless arguments that keep dividing us and amplifying the conflict:
- Why must economies grow forever?
- Why do a handful of private actors own things like oceans, water rights and minerals?
- Why is "a job" the default way to justify existence?
- Why is the work of care, community, and ecosystems invisible in economics?
- Why do we think of housing as an “asset class"?
- Why is democracy framed as voting every few years - reduced to periodic elections?
- Why has society normalised the fact that millions die every year from causes we have the resources to stop?
- Why do we spend more on militaries than the world’s best defence system (nature)?
Sources:
University of Sydney University of Gothenburg
subj
My parents guilty of this!
haha hard to believe
subj
How Money Works
How money works:
1. OpenAI signs $300B GPU deal with Oracle
2. Larry gains $100B (no GPUs shipped)
3. Larry invests in OpenAI’s $1T round
4. Sam uses $300B to pay Oracle
5. Oracle stock pumps again
6. Larry makes another $100B
7. Larry invests in OpenAI
Flywheel go brrr.
1. OpenAI signs $300B GPU deal with Oracle
2. Larry gains $100B (no GPUs shipped)
3. Larry invests in OpenAI’s $1T round
4. Sam uses $300B to pay Oracle
5. Oracle stock pumps again
6. Larry makes another $100B
7. Larry invests in OpenAI
Flywheel go brrr.
subj
Reality of vibe coding at a FAANG
Here’s the reality:
• It all starts with a technical design document, almost like a PRD.
• That doc gets torn apart and rewritten multiple times by senior engineers.
• Once it’s solid, the build is broken into sprints so devs and AI assistants don’t get overwhelmed.
• Only then does coding begin... but with a twist. They write the tests first.
• AI generates the code. If it doesn’t pass the tests, it doesn’t ship.
• Everything still goes through manual code review and staging before production.
The result? About 30% faster shipping speed.
Not 90%. But here’s the thing: 30% saved at FAANG scale is enormous. And even more importantly — it prevents the classic trap of shipping spaghetti code 90% faster, only to debug it 90% slower.
• It all starts with a technical design document, almost like a PRD.
• That doc gets torn apart and rewritten multiple times by senior engineers.
• Once it’s solid, the build is broken into sprints so devs and AI assistants don’t get overwhelmed.
• Only then does coding begin... but with a twist. They write the tests first.
• AI generates the code. If it doesn’t pass the tests, it doesn’t ship.
• Everything still goes through manual code review and staging before production.
The result? About 30% faster shipping speed.
Not 90%. But here’s the thing: 30% saved at FAANG scale is enormous. And even more importantly — it prevents the classic trap of shipping spaghetti code 90% faster, only to debug it 90% slower.
subj
Jensen spittin' wisdom again
Jensen Huang flipped the script on career advice: he says it's easier to fall in love with what you do than to find what you love 😳
“I loved it when I was a dishwasher. I loved it when I was a busboy. I loved it when I was waiting tables. And I’ve loved every single day at NVIDIA” - Jensen Huang
His point is simple:
It’s nearly impossible to stumble on a perfect “dream job.”
But it’s entirely possible to fall in love with whatever’s in front of you - by doing it well.
That mindset turned a dishwasher into the CEO of a $4 trillion AI giant.
Sure, he’s biased, and he’s a billionaire now.
But the lesson still hits:
Passion isn’t a prerequisite for great work. Great work creates passion.
So forget chasing the “right job.”
Keep showing up, taking pride, and letting mastery fuel meaning, and great things will happen.
“I loved it when I was a dishwasher. I loved it when I was a busboy. I loved it when I was waiting tables. And I’ve loved every single day at NVIDIA” - Jensen Huang
His point is simple:
It’s nearly impossible to stumble on a perfect “dream job.”
But it’s entirely possible to fall in love with whatever’s in front of you - by doing it well.
That mindset turned a dishwasher into the CEO of a $4 trillion AI giant.
Sure, he’s biased, and he’s a billionaire now.
But the lesson still hits:
Passion isn’t a prerequisite for great work. Great work creates passion.
So forget chasing the “right job.”
Keep showing up, taking pride, and letting mastery fuel meaning, and great things will happen.
express, not stress