This so called "public town square" promotes anything but positivity. Fate loves irony but hates hypocrisy, and the irony is now lost on Twitter. Even Grok reasonably estimates 80% of the posts there have negative sentiments (vile threats, hate speech, racism, tyranny and lies). Free speech is going so well!
Watching this, I can’t help but feel this profoundly personal with deep, quiet anticipation. It’s like those small moments before everything changes—nothing huge, just little acts of preparation that suddenly feel so significant. The calmness, the weight of it all, the way the world seems to slow down. I’m about to become a father, and this—this is exactly how it feels. The mix of excitement, fear, and responsibility. It’s like I’m already in that space, getting ready to protect, to care for something I haven’t even met yet, but already love so deeply. Everything’s about to change.
I never thought a car commercial would move me this much, but here I am, feeling both vulnerable and hopeful. Damn Hoyte van Hoytema...
Just pre-ordered Oppo Find N5 đź‘€ What am I to do with my Find N3 now?
His emphasis on intuition and non-linear thinking felt almost... unscientific. Yet, the examples Rory Sutherland discussed in Rick Rubin's Tetragrammaton podcast–from the Intercity 125 train design to the success of seemingly irrational advertising campaigns–began to chip away at my skepticism. What resonated deeply is the idea that good advise isn't always good career advice, because creative behaviours aren't always rewarded.
The argument about the asymmetry of ideas was compelling. Why is it that creative ideas need twenty times more evidence than spreadsheets to get approved? This resonated with my own experiences, the constant struggle to justify creative leaps of faith in a world obsessed with quantifiable results. The discussion about perception and framing was quite a revelation–how easily our value judgments are influenced by simple changes in presentation.
Sutherland's emphasis on curiosity and "beginner's mind" made sense. The anecdote about the British train designer questioning the need for buffers–a deeply ingrained assumption–was a perfect illustration of how easily we get stuck in our own mental ruts. The "maximally advanced yet acceptable" concept though, was slightly harder to swallow. How can we find that sweet spot of innovation without alienating users?
"The opposite of a good idea is another good idea."
The discussion about data and quantification was a turning point. I've always been a data-driven person. But the podcast's critique of big data's inherent bias and limitations was thought-provoking. The emphasis on anecdotes and outliers as important data points made me realize I've been too quick to dismiss "anecdotal evidence" in the past.
The core theme of Sutherland's argument: that creativity often lies in challenging conventional wisdom and exploring seemingly contradictory approaches. The emphasis of simple, linear logic often fails to produce optimal solutions, and that embracing seemingly irrational or counterintuitive ideas can lead to breakthroughs–the best solutions aren't always obvious or easily quantifiable.
"Vibe coding" isn’t a formally defined term in programming, but it’s a casual phrase that’s popped up in developer communities, especially on platforms like X and Reddit. It generally refers to a laid-back, intuitive, or mood-driven approach to writing code. Instead of following strict planning, rigid methodologies, or over-optimizing early on, vibe coding is about going with the flow—letting the creative energy or "vibe" guide the process. It’s often tied to: Exploratory coding: Hacking something together to see what works, like prototyping or jamming on a side project. Aesthetic focus: Writing code that feels good to you, whether it’s clean, quirky, or just fun—like crafting a personal style. Low-pressure mindset: Prioritizing enjoyment or momentum over perfection, often fueled by music, late-night sessions, or a chill atmosphere.
It’s less about the end product and more about the experience of creating it.
I guess this is "vibe coding".
Surviving a rough workplace can often feel like navigating a minefield, especially when people don’t recognize they're part of the problem. We often spot negativity in others—gossip, blame-shifting, or cliques—but rarely pause to see how we might be part of the problem. Self-awareness seems like the first casualty in these environments, and that blind spot keeps the cycle spinning.
I think staying grounded helps. Set boundaries—say no when you have to, and don’t let guilt drag you into overexplaining. Focus on what you can handle: your reactions, your work, your energy. I would do my best to avoid feeding the drama; gossip, taking sides and petty fights just pull you in deeper into the trap. Venting might feel good at first, but that could eventually backfire.
I wonder if empathy could shift things here–your quiet weapon in the midst of chaos. Perhaps people aren't always out to ruin your day—some might just be burned out or insecure. Try seeing their behavior as a symptom, not a personal attack. It's not about being soft; it’s about not letting the tension win. Maybe a little kindness could go a long way–enough for them to ease up.
I'm hopeful teamwork is not a lost cause. I guess we can all do our part–give credit, listen, show up. Small wins build trust–a nudge toward connection. Work around conflict, pulling others along quietly with consistency and calm.
Fate loves irony. Stress can turn you into that snarky person you swore you’d never be, quietly resenting someone’s success. Perhaps owning it keeps you from becoming the very thing that you hate. I don't think we'll fix the whole culture, but we can carve out a sane corner. Funny how little effort can outshine the chaos without even trying.
Recently started watching Industry, and what I think about the show is how brutally effective it is at dissecting modern capitalism’s soul-crushing machinery. Harper’s reckless ambition, Yasmin’s hollow privilege, and Hari’s tragic unraveling aren’t just character arcs—they’re indictments of a system that commodifies youth and ethics. The show’s frenetic energy and unflinching gaze mirror the dehumanizing grind of finance culture, asking: What does "merit" even mean in a world this broken? It’s messy, provocative, and uncomfortably relatable.
So far so good and I'm only halfway through the first season.
Let me unpack this. Manus AI… hand-tracking, motion capture, AI-driven gloves. At first glance, it feels like another tech gadget, but there’s something deeper here. Hands are everything in how humans interact with the world. If you can digitize that nuance—every flex, tremor, grip—you’re not just capturing motion; you’re translating human intent into data. That’s… significant.
But how disruptive is it really? Traditional motion capture relies on cameras, markers, controlled environments. Expensive, clunky, limited to studios. Manus AI’s gloves with embedded sensors? They’d bypass all that. No markers, no multi-camera rigs. Just slap on a glove, and boom—real-time tracking. That’s a cost killer. Smaller studios, indie game devs, even schools could afford this. Democratizing motion capture? Yeah, that’s disruptive.
How does the AI factor in? The algorithms. They’re not just recording movement; they’re predicting it. Like filling in gaps when fingers are obstructed from view. That’s clever. Could this tech eventually learn individual users’ movement patterns? Personalize prosthetics or rehab protocols? In healthcare, that’s gold. Imagine stroke patients retraining motor skills with gloves that give real-time feedback. Or amputees controlling robotic hands with natural gestures. That’s not incremental—it’s transformative.
Teaching robots fine motor skills by mimicking human hand data? That’s how you get machines that can thread a needle or handle fragile objects. But here’s the thing: Human hands are insanely complex. Can AI truly replicate that dexterity, or will it hit a fidelity ceiling?
Now, the big question: What’s stopping this from taking over? Adoption barriers. People hate changing workflows. Legacy studios have sunk costs in old motion capture systems. And hardware—gloves need to be comfortable, durable, maybe even stylish. Battery life? Calibration? If the tech feels finicky, it’ll flop.
Oh, and ethics. Hand movement data is biometric. If Manus AI’s systems are used in healthcare or security, who owns that data? Could hand gestures become a password? Or a privacy risk?
But stepping back—Manus AI isn’t just selling gloves. They’re selling a bridge between human action and digital reaction. If they nail scalability and usability, they could redefine how we animate, heal, build, and play. The key is partnerships. Team up with VR headset makers, hospital networks, animation studios. Embed the tech where it’s invisible but indispensable.
Will it revolutionize industries? Maybe. But revolutions aren’t just about tech—they’re about timing and friction. If Manus AI balances innovation with practicality, they’re not just a player. They’re rewriting the rules.