Conversation

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
I think it’s a minus. Breeding cluelessness through structural enabling is a kind of elite overproduction. Even if it’s of otherwise underrepresented minorities. This is why I have little patience for standard diversity initiatives. They adversely select for cluelessness.
1
6
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
I think a stiff dose of sociopath Darwinist assholery is actually necessary for building good businesses. The optimal amount is not zero. Pure idealist-run businesses are horrible and if they survive at all, take a darker turn than ones that embrace a bit of dark side upfront.
1
2
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
There is. It’s not a way but being more invested in the the thing itself rather than how it is done or who does it. The Augean stables are cleansed by the power of a sufficiently impersonal larger goal. Like moonshot large.
1
1
Replying to and
It’s brain dead obvious that NASA is a place to be only if you care about space. The money isn’t worth it, neither is the political power or minor celebrity 15 minutes of fame.
2
3
Replying to and
Same logic applies anywhere. Make it so if you’re in it for any reason other than the missionary one it’s simply not worth it. And oppressor types will seek better games. You only need clueless mission statements covering snake pits if there’s no actual mission.
1
Replying to and
This has actually turned into a litmus test for accepting clients for me in the last few years. If there isn’t a worthwhile shares prize, people play stupid games to win stupid prizes. With extreme sociopath skill and viciousness.
1