So here's the problem. Most (but admittedly not all) of the R reps & sens are signing up for this charade *because they know it will fail*. Their calculus is this gives them a media / primary advantage for doing it, but can safely discount the logical conclusion of their argument

stacks are eating the world

business used to be easiest to comprehend via a) market-based logic of horizontal vs. vertical STRUCTURE, b) professionalization/specialization based FUNCTION c) core competencies based BEHAVIORS

this has pretty much collapsed in the last decade

Structure = sclerosis
Functional specialization = bureaucracy
competencies = inertial habits

"Stack" thinking instead lets technology structure (rather than market structure) drive business org logic

Companies seem to do well when they identify an entire stack of technologies they are good at (not just point bits) and organize to conform to its logic. There is a "full-stack" dimension of technical specialization that is the spine of the org

It feels buzzwordy, but it really is getting to be that way. AI stack, decarbonization stack, mobility stack, electrification stack... some end-to-end pathway of turning physics into economics via layers of tech artistically baked together like a cake

The Creative Process in 43 Hayao Miyazaki Screengrabs

(Context: https://t.co/nqjmAtLAND)

Horseshoe theory sets off my bs detector & the divisions on the left leave me at a loss for an explanation- Venn diagram? Another shape? What's going on?
Enter @bastardspod! They really break this down & sort it out in a way that helped me out a lot.

Three of their points I found particularly useful in explaining why the horseshoe looks correct to some or why/how some ppl that look left-ish are really extreme right or take that turn (ally with boogaloo or proud boys, for instance?). 2/10

📍as you go farther left, some are more attracted to authoritarianism or violence like those on the right. BUT this is NOT a horseshoe bc the ideals of left & right are starkly different. That's important - this isn't a horseshoe. 3/10

Their examples are Kessler (of Unite the Right) who started in Occupy Wall St NY & Mussolini who started out against imperialism. Seemingly left-ish ppl turned fascist - why? I agree with the hosts when they said if you're anti-authoritarian, you won't end up a fascist. 4/10

📍(surprise!) toxic masculinity (they don't use those words) or wounded masculine pride is a factor. The pod says~getting the shit kicked out of you can push men in a violent authoritarian direction. Feeling disenfranchised like MRAs and white nationalists seems related too. 5/10

LEEDS LEADS CLIMATE BREAKDOWN

8 hours and 1000 flawed arguments and biased procedures later, Leeds City Plans Panel voted 9-5 for airport expansion and the false promises of economic growth.
For “what Leeds needs is a premier-league football club and a premier-league airport”
🧵

1/ There was a lot of "I do care about climate change, BUT" – followed by a lot of blah blah. Blah blah economic growth. Blah blah connectivity. Blah blah competitiveness. Blah blah Manchester. Blah blah Westminster. Blah blah offsetting. Blah blah electric planes. Blah blah blah

2/ Also a lot of "I do have sympathy for residents suffering from planes flying over their roofs at night, BUT” - followed by more blah blah.
One councillor kindly offered his advice: “the way to less noise is more planes”. Right, Sherlock. Want to try that in your backyard?🤦‍♂️

3/ The true sympathies were revealed at the end. The Panel's priority was not the well-being of those living under the flight path, nor the lives and livelihoods of threatened by climate breakdown. Their priority was a bigger, noisier airport, with a terminal in bronze-champagne.

4/ First declaring your sympathy for people’s suffering and then supporting a development that directly aggravates their suffering, is a proper kick in the face for those suffering the consequences. Like first declaring a climate emergency and then aggravating climate breakdown.