Have you met your Inner Child?
You might see them as yourself in your early years.
You might seem them as a patchwork of childhood.
You may even just see dreams of youthful play.
An awareness of your Inner Child can you bring balance to your life.
#innerchildwork #csa #healing
More from Life
Like company moats, your personal moat should be a competitive advantage that is not only durable—it should also compound over time.
Characteristics of a personal moat below:
I'm increasingly interested in the idea of "personal moats" in the context of careers.
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) November 22, 2018
Moats should be:
- Hard to learn and hard to do (but perhaps easier for you)
- Skills that are rare and valuable
- Legible
- Compounding over time
- Unique to your own talents & interests https://t.co/bB3k1YcH5b
2/ Like a company moat, you want to build career capital while you sleep.
As Andrew Chen noted:
People talk about \u201cpassive income\u201d a lot but not about \u201cpassive social capital\u201d or \u201cpassive networking\u201d or \u201cpassive knowledge gaining\u201d but that\u2019s what you can architect if you have a thing and it grows over time without intensive constant effort to sustain it
— Andrew Chen (@andrewchen) November 22, 2018
3/ You don’t want to build a competitive advantage that is fleeting or that will get commoditized
Things that might get commoditized over time (some longer than
Things that look like moats but likely aren\u2019t or may fade:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) November 22, 2018
- Proprietary networks
- Being something other than one of the best at any tournament style-game
- Many "awards"
- Twitter followers or general reach without "respect"
- Anything that depends on information asymmetry https://t.co/abjxesVIh9
4/ Before the arrival of recorded music, what used to be scarce was the actual music itself — required an in-person artist.
After recorded music, the music itself became abundant and what became scarce was curation, distribution, and self space.
5/ Similarly, in careers, what used to be (more) scarce were things like ideas, money, and exclusive relationships.
In the internet economy, what has become scarce are things like specific knowledge, rare & valuable skills, and great reputations.
The NNOX news flow been exceptionally good. I tweet about Fear Uncertainty Doubt and how short sellers leverage friction in news flow to mine some of your gains. NNOX published Form F-1/A to remove friction. Investors have answers.
Form F-1/A Link:
Form F-1 is over 200 detailed pages. Very concentrated. Everything you need for rest of this month in the document. A few notes for you. NNOX FDA approval uses a third party review organization in 510k process. This is abbreviated to 3P510k.
I covered the 3P510K in thread here: https://t.co/w7zE882CVk
Reference to Eagle eyes: https://t.co/gT779MFX82
We discover in F-1 that 3P510K recommended clearance of Nanox Source. This triggers a 30 day timeline to approval by FDA. However ...
Eagle-eyes \U0001f985 https://t.co/w1wF3Ysmt1
— Harvey \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8 (@realharveymark) February 12, 2021
Look at you favorite broker news for NNOX. I look at 3 different broker none of them comment NNOX from 60 to 80 on news that 3P510k recommended FDA approve NNOX device. NNOX get a letter and slide 10% we get headline. But no headline for big pop 🤷♂️ that’s the friction.
You May Also Like
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?