Michael Moritz on the Time profile that ended his relationship with Steve Jobs, and whether he was ever in awe of him. "Steve was convinced that he was going to be named Man of the Year, even though nobody had told him that. But worst of all, the profile, which he hated for very good reason, and I was appalled by for different reasons, severed my relationship with Steve. Back then at Time, these things went through an editorial combine harvester. So what came out in the bale at the end probably didn't resemble very much of the straw that got fed in. And so the whole tone of the piece was mali…
In Machiavellian terms, Trump is no longer feared, and he's definitely no longer liked. Instead, he is hated - which is the one thing Machiavelli stressed should be avoided at all costs.
We're now doing it in a much heavier way because we find that these like kind of bory enterprisey uh patterns end up being pretty useful because you have a bunch of idiots on your team now. The coding agents are a bunch of idiots and they are going to work 24/7 and they're going to like ship a lot of stuff. So you need way more guardrails than you used to.
The link between venture capital and evangelical Christianity was closer than I thought. They're not just analogous; they deliberately cross-pollinate.
So the reason there has been no diversity I believe is because of pre-training. All the pre-trained models are the same pretty much because the pre-train on the same data.
Decades of direct erosion of the very concept of leadership means that the people running companies have been selected not based on their actual efficacy — especially as the position became defined by its lack of actual production — but on whether they resemble what a manager or executive is meant to look like based on the work that somebody else did.
There have been many novels written in historical modes this year, and I've hated all of them except Fellowship Point by Alice Elliott Dark precisely because that novel feels vibrant and lively and full of characters and it reminds me of early 20th century literature.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.