social media use really calls for something closer to a driver's license than terms of service... most apparent bad behavior here is more incompetence than malice, like not knowing how to change lanes or take turns at a 4-way stop..

Reading my own old writing from 10+ years ago is rarely pleasant. It’s not that the ideas and techniques are worse/embarrassing by current tastes (though they often are), but that they have a brash energy I can’t vibe with anymore even where I can still stand by the content.

Most of that energy is not mine from a younger mindset personally (though there’s some of that) but a function of the era. 2010 generally had more of a brash energy going. An energy born of a widespread sense of the world making more sense and humans being more agenty within it.

2007-13: Brash energy. The GFC bloodied our noses but we still felt in control of the plot collectively.

2014-20: Angry-anxious energy. Everybody lost the plot. Winners and losers alike. Great Weirding.

2021 - : Mellow sadder-and-wiser energy on macro, brrr energy on micro.

Opening mood for 2021 feels like how a figure skater spins faster by pulling in tighter. Narrower horizons, more concentrated energy, easy to mistake conservation of momentum effects for an absolute increase in system energy. Shows up in everything from stocks to writing.

Its tempting to retreat to narrow horizons with primarily happy domestic cozy energy (these are really good times for anything that taps into domestic-scale psyche energy). But even the happiest broader thoughts are alloyed with that mellow sadder-wiser plotlessness.

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

following a discussion at @yak_collective this morning, I came up with this chart to capture a hypothesis I have that the difficulty of creating communities scales exponentially with the the "depth" of what you're trying to do

thanks @grigorimilov for leading the discussion that sparked this.

The way to read the graph is: each line is a time history of difficulty. It starts dotted, goes through a criticality inflection point, and then crests in difficulty before coming down to a stable plateau.

The inflection points have different names depending on context, but are all topologically similar. They are the make or break moment when a network-effect either kicks in, or fails to. "Product-market fit" in the case of market is the best known such point.

Level 1 is a basic social community, such as a FB group, meetup etc. There are millions of successful ones, and 100s of millions of failures. The "fit point" is what I call a meme-mind fit, when some social object catalyzes a sustainable long-term conversation of growing richness

Almost everything I've helped instigate is Level 1. My contributions to the social-object soup have been things like the vocabulary around sociopaths/clueless/losers, legibility, 2x2s etc.

1. I'm the CEO of a platform for females & know I have a unique insight into the single sex space debate. I see it play out in real time.

During our 1st MVP test phase, 1000s of TW onboarded & created "KILL TERF" profiles.

Are we supposed to take these seriously or not?

2. I fought to include TW on Giggle but the reality is I fought not knowing the hostility of the situation. I was shocked & devastated by the KILL TERF & other obscene profiles, but...

Is "KILL TERFS", "RAPE TERFS" & "LOOK AT MY GIRL DICK" what we can except in the real world?

3. Is it "just" something said to women online or is it something that would be done in "analogue" female spaces?

It's a really important questions to ask, because not only do women not want to read stuff like this... we don't want to physically experience it either.

4. It's important to remember, without this abhorrent behavior we'd all be having a very different debate.

This behavior has *added* to womens fear.

You can dismiss it if it doesn't suit your agenda. But if you do, no solution to ensure the safety of *everyone* will be found.

5. When I read something like this, what stands out to me is the line "a lot of the time I'll get side eye or even outright harassment." Lucky you!

Imagine getting a rape threat.

When that statement is put into the context of the admission prior to it, it's scary for women.

An annoying feature in an "influencer" career is that it seems like you'll be much better off if you're "nice" to everyone.

You can always collaborate or "swap." You don't like their work, or maybe even them as a person, but gosh can you pass up this opportunity?

This might be an illusion. You're probably better off ignoring everyone and focusing on your own work.

Then again, it might not be an illusion. It's something I've noticed with successful Hollywood people. They're so damn nice. Either they are extremely agreeable people, or they have to fake it.

However, it's a much more people-oriented business than publishing.