Early internet was about getting everybody online. Now that we are, many want to unplug.
The business model of social media platforms is incompatible with human flourishing. Their incentive is to keep us engaged with their platforms for as long as possible so they can sell our attention to advertisers. Thus they use algorithms to show us content that is designed to be addictive. They are not interested in helping us find the truth or connect with each other in meaningful ways. Yet few try to unplug, and fewer still succeed.
Although some chose a middle way, of not returning completely, but resorting to smaller communities of like-minded people. 
<blockquote>
2010s: bundling phase — get everyone online.
2020s: unbundling phase — get people into trusted communities.
As great as getting everyone online was, the end result is that they mostly just fight with each other. Not ideal for anyone involved.
<cite><a href="https://twitter.com/lastcontrarian/status/1585692097981579269">– Last Contrarian</a></cite>
</blockquote>
This is because key technologies are unbundling the mega platforms. Invite-only, encrypted chat platforms like Signal, and the technical ease with which you can now build your own, are ending the era of FAANG.
<blockquote>
Other things being equal, the more widely dispersed key technologies are, the more widely dispersed power will be, and the smaller the optimum scale of government.
<cite>– James Dale Davidson</cite>
</blockquote>
And there is one key technology to rule them all. Decentralized identity (read Urbit) will deprecate the unaligned social network, but probably the current version of invite-only, "trusted communities" like Poaster and private Signal groups too (unless they integrate). No need for trust if you can't be canceled.

Early internet was about getting everybody online. Now that we are, many want to unplug.
The business model of social media platforms is incompatible with human...

The End of FAANG

Millions of books. Computational power Neil Armstrong couldn't have dreamt of. If we can't think about the future, no one can. So why is effectively no one trying?
<h2>The Filter Bubble No One Talks About</h2>
<blockquote>
Medieval men despaired of the will. They thought of humans as wounded and weak. But they respected the intellect.
Modern men worship the will, but they despair of the intellect. The wisdom of crowds; the swerve of random particles; the influence of unconscious biases: all of these contemporary clichés are ways to talk about intellectual weakness-or ways to talk ourselves into it.
<cite>– Peter Thiel's preface to The Sovereign Individual</cite>
</blockquote>
Either it's a terminator that will kill you or it's The Matrix that will enslave you. Nothing to be done – perhaps start an underground fight club. Culture in its current form is not optimistic, does not encourage inventiveness.
But one way to break out of our increasingly homogenous, Netflix-watching, Uber-eating culture, is to not take great ideas for granted. Choose a tested book and reread it 15 times – and by God, do not log it on Goodreads.
<h2>The Status Trap</h2>
Thinking about the future cannot be tracked. To think about the future does not mean getting another certificate or high-status job. Pursuing these things will put you on a track towards short-term stability and social acceptance, but it is not thinking about the future, because thinking about the future cannot be tracked.
The future is different, and you must be bold enough to think you know how.

Millions of books. Computational power Neil Armstrong couldn't have dreamt of. If we can't think about the future, no one can. So why is effectively no one...

To Make Bets You Must Be Bold

It can’t be a coincidence that so many good programmers have a math/physics background.
What's more, they all claim that knowing math “helps you think."
I’ve usually dismissed this reasoning as hand-wavy.
How will L'Hôpital's rule help you build an Electron app?
<h3>Is It All Correlation?</h3>
Back in university, although I enjoyed the stringency of math, I used to dismiss its transferability as a skill along the lines of: Analytical people go into math, and being analytical also helps in programming. If you're good at the former you'll probably be good at the latter. But it doesn't imply that math will make you a better programmer.
I have since changed my mind about this.
<h2>1. Math as a Teacher of Abstraction</h2>
If the main idea in programming is divide and conquer, then the main idea in math is abstraction.
<blockquote>
Studies in mathematical theory is an excellent opportunity to learn to analyze, reason, argue, structure and arrange. Mathematics is based on abstraction and those who master abstraction possess enormous strength in analytical contexts.
<cite> — My old calculus compendium (translated by me)</cite>
</blockquote>
Let's be clear, nothing will teach you more about programming than programming. But the abstraction ability that math gives you can help you grow into more senior roles and do higher-level tasks like designing systems. And if you want to go into deeper domains like quantitative finance, machine learning, or research in general, advanced math is a must.
Of course, not all math is created equal to the programmer. There is a reason why computer science degrees focus on discrete mathematics, linear algebra, and statistics. But there might be some alpha in learning more esoteric math like abstract algebra too.
<h2>2. Math as a Teacher of Confidence</h2>
<blockquote>
Read the source of your dependencies, if that’s not already a habit you have. Do you write webapps on React? Try grabbing a checkout and reading through the source sometime.
<cite>— Nelson Elhage in <a href="https://blog.nelhage.com/post/computers-can-be-understood/">Computers can be understood</a></cite>
</blockquote>
If you've ever fought, you'll know that a good sparring session will have you walk out of the gym chest up, top of the world. Taking blows to the face instills godly levels of confidence. Makes you humble too.
Likewise, a focused math session will make you feel like no problem is too difficult to solve. Is your ego inflated? To some degree, for sure. Doesn't matter. Bring this intellectual confidence to your programming and you'll go where others fear. The time isn't always right to go down that dependency rabbit hole to gain a multi-leveled understanding of the system as a whole. But when it is, you'll kill.
Furthermore, math is ruthless – it won't allow you to prove a theorem if you don't understand all required definitions and axioms inside and out – it constantly humbles you to study more. This is gold in programming.
<h2>Should You Study Math as a Dev?</h2>
This weekend I picked up an old calculus compendium from university, and it made me nostalgic for the tightness of math. Opinionated definitions, abstract theorems – it's a breath of fresh air compared to complex systems and poorly documented tools. Working through a couple of chapters on sets and logic reminded me of the stringent state of mind doing math puts you in.
After a couple of years in software engineering, I still haven't found an application of L'Hôpital's rule, but I have found a meta application. Math teaches abstraction ability, but above all, it instills the view that everything is figureoutable.

It can’t be a coincidence that so many good programmers have a math/physics background.
What's more, they all claim that knowing math “helps you think."
I’ve...

Rediscovering Math as a Dev

What's your soul worth, anon?
Do you want snacks or skills?
If Software Engineer at MANGA is peak competition,
What's an underpursued path for the modern programmer?
<h2>Avoid Tracks</h2>
I have not worked for MANGA. But the fact that there is a booming industry for cracking the Coding Interview™ should be an obvious tell. It's no place you want to be. Grinding LeetCode is like SAT prep; a safe track if you can compete. But it is a track: It will narrow your vision, and it lacks asymmetric upside.
<h2>Be a Curious Grug</h2>
Petroleum engineering is asymmetric, but perhaps not too exciting. What future do YOU want to bring to be?
(Think hard about the future.)
To find existing efforts, look for the strange and esoteric. Even better, what does the mainstream condemn? Paths with asymmetric upside must have little competition.
<blockquote>
Why do we fight each other about this piece or that piece of land?
Why are we not looking outwards?
<cite>– Ragnar Lothbrok</cite>
</blockquote>

What's your soul worth, anon?
Do you want snacks or skills?
If Software Engineer at MANGA is peak competition,
What's an underpursued path for the modern...

What Good Career Are Others Not Pursuing?

Many bigger companies ask coding interview questions you will never have to solve while actually programming.
Topological sort, reversing a linked list™.
If you want to get hired by Big Tech, it’s the game you have to play. Stop complaining, grind LeetCode.
Question is, should you?
<h2>Grinding LeetCode Is Girardian</h2>
Just like SAT prep, practicing coding interview questions turns potential geniuses into conformist idiots.
Disagree? Here's what will happen.
You'll solve 100 LeetCode problems.
You'll crack the coding interview.
You'll enter the gates to the adult daycare.
You'll drink the smoothies and play the ping pong.
You'll get a notification in Jira, open the task and read the title:
"Increase back btn padding to 24px"
<h2>Are Coding Interviews Pure Garbage?</h2>
In theory, coding interviews test computer science knowledge. They filter out code monkeys who learned ReactJS this past weekend. Perhaps they test for IQ too.
In practice, however – because they're gameable – coding interviews end up testing for obedience. (Will you jump through the hoops?)
But in startup land, figure-it-out ability is more important than scalability, which is why many startups ditch the CS questions for practical programming in an online editor.
<h2>Showcase Your Ideas and Creations</h2>
What's good about the tech industry is how results-oriented it is. Original companies don't care about credentials. And as stated above, they don't care about your topological sort.
What are you building? Do you have thoughts of your own?!
I have gotten in touch with a handful of stealth startups and based founders via Twitter. I would have never made these connections by uploading my resume to LinkedIn.
You need to showcase your ideas and your creations.
AFFIRM: I WILL NOT REVERSE THE LINKED LIST

Many bigger companies ask coding interview questions you will never have to solve while actually programming.
Topological sort, reversing a linked list™.
If you...

Reversing Linked Lists Is For Losers

90% of developers will NOT pay $10/month for GitHub Copilot.1
This is irrational:
<ol>
<li>
Say Copilot increases your productivity by just 1%.
</li>
<li>
Say you value your time at $50k a year.
</li>
<li>
Then Copilot will add $40/month of value for you.
</li>
</ol>
$40 > $10, Q.E.D.
GitHub Developer Advocate offer wen.
<h2>Prompt Programming Is the Future</h2>
We are entering a new era of programming.
As AI tools continue to improve, mastering syntax will become less important. You’ll become less of an implementer and more of an architect.
By outsourcing the boilerplate aspects of programming to AI, we humans can focus on what we do best – being creative. This is Garry Kasparov’s idea behind Deep Thinking. Synergizing with the machines will save us time and make work more meaningful. This is great news!
But still, there are reactionaries hating on AI programming, saying it’s stupid. It’s akin to what we’re seeing with DALL·E 2 and art.
These nostalgic programmers are holding on to a past they should be letting go. Perhaps they're SCARED AI will replace them?
In a way, they’re right – they should be scared.
There will be techno-shamans and peasant programmers.
Learn to prompt or become worthless.
<hr>
1 If you're wondering where the 90% stat is coming from, the coding channel Fireship did a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxVUxLUaQwTZdhvHzXp1wjnSUdAD0vd6zp">YouTube poll</a>. Perhaps not super representative of practicing software engineers at large (should have been a third "student" option), but with 1.5M subscribers, it's saying something.

90% of developers will NOT pay $10/month for GitHub Copilot.1
This is irrational:


Say Copilot increases your productivity by just 1%.


Say you value your time...

Should You Pay For GitHub Copilot?

You can never let a bug defeat you.
It's like a fighter losing a fight.
It crushes your confidence.
And next time you'll throw in the towel even faster.
<h2>Shippers Have Character</h2>
I know programmers who ship in a weekend what takes others a month. It's a matter of character.
You want to pick the tasks no one else dares to.
Avoid what Will Larson calls "snacking" (low-effort tasks without impact). Leave instant gratification to some junior.
Pick tasks you might not be able to solve. Worst case you'll have to ask for help. As long as you get it done, you'll finish stronger.
<h2>How I Learned React.js by Being Pissed</h2>
I was in university, studying physics.
Top of my class, one year in.
But it was turning me into a bureaucrat.
And I wanted to make money.
So I started scheming.
And I realized the quickest way to make money was to get a high-paying developer job.
But I wasn't a good developer; all I knew was university math.
So I took a Udemy course on React.js, applying the information on a side project in parallel. At the same time, messaging impressive people on LinkedIn.
And eventually, I made good friends with another teen programmer – he too was pissed and driven to get paid.
So we started coding together. And one weekend we built a React app together that made a couple of grand. We then leveraged the app as an experience to land high-paying developer jobs.
We didn't know what we were doing, but action had served us.
<h2>You Need to Be Energy Maxing</h2>
Difficult problems require courage ...which requires ENERGY.
Sticking with it requires pain tolerance ...which requires ENERGY.
Good news is, energy can be increased with lifestyle and mindset.
Talk to you later.

You can never let a bug defeat you.
It's like a fighter losing a fight.
It crushes your confidence.
And next time you'll throw in the towel even faster.
Shippers...

Never Let a Bug Defeat You

Learning new tech can be like going to WAR.
<ul>
<li>It takes courage (to enter the unknown)</li>
<li>It takes pain tolerance (to sit with discomfort)</li>
</ul>
In other words, serious levels of WILL is required.
But learning new tech doesn't have to be taxing.
Sense-based learning can cut the effort in half (it did for me).
<h2>Technique 1. Minimal Viable Code Snippet</h2>
Find the smallest possible code snippet that exemplifies the theory you're learning, and get it to run it locally.
Poke at it.
See what happens.
Poking will skyrocket your understanding because you're mining first-hand experience.
<h2>Technique 2. Non-tech Analogy</h2>
Some concepts are too big to be run as code snippets.
And putting every single concept you learn into practice is too time-consuming.
So what we can do instead is think up non-tech analogies that exemplify the theory.
<h3>Example: Scaling a Bakery</h3>
I'm currently reading Designing Data-Intensive Applications. It's about distributed systems – huge topic! – very scary!! If I were to build something for every new concept in this book, I'd finish when I'm 60. So this is where non-tech analogies come in handy.
For instance, the different types of systems scaling can be compared to managing a bakery:
<ul>
<li>Vertical scaling = paying the bread baker more money</li>
<li>Horizontal scaling = hiring another bread baker</li>
</ul>
See how this brings it down?
<h2>Senses Are Your Best Friend</h2>
Both these techniques have the same premise: jargon is the enemy.
Jargon will trick you into thinking you understand something you really don't.
Abstractions shut off the brain.
Instead, dumb down every new concept to something you can either try or analogize.
Our nervous system is way older than our neocortex.
Bring it down to the senses.

Learning new tech can be like going to WAR.

It takes courage (to enter the unknown)
It takes pain tolerance (to sit with discomfort)

In other words, serious...

How to Learn New Tech FAST

Remember Nokia?
They used to be worth $250 billion.
Everyone you knew had a Nokia.
You used to flex ringtones on lunch breaks.
Now everyone has an iPhone.
Why did that happen?
The obvious answer is that they failed to ADAPT.
But your side project isn't Nokia.
<h2>Your Biggest Threat is You</h2>
I almost titled this: "Speed is The Only Thing that Matters in Software".
It's technically true – speed matters.
But for indie hacking, I think it's misleading.
Your side project will not be killed by competition. Most likely, it'll die from starvation.
Having abandoned ship multiple times – and contrasting it with my current project GitLetter – I've come to realize that consistency trumps intensity.
And to stay consistent, there are two enemies we need to avoid:
<h2>Enemy #1 – Lack of Passion</h2>
You know the feeling.
"Your domain will expire in 30 days."
A landing page that makes your stomach turn.
A failed side project is like getting punched in the stomach.
You feel like a loser, and it hurts.
If your project isn’t a joy to work on it will die from inactivity.
Or, as Naval famously tweeted:
<blockquote>
Startups don't die when they run out of cash, they die when the founders run out of energy.
</blockquote>
Step #1 is always showing up. If you stop showing up, your project will die. You need to treat it like a baby that needs to be fed. Problem is, it's not a baby; so if you lack the passion, you'll carelessly quit, and the project will die.
<h2>Enemy #2 – Lack of Simplicity</h2>
If your project turns complex, this too can discourage you from keeping at it.
Rich Hickey on devs who keep it simple:
<blockquote>
He's going to kick your ass. He's gonna spend more time simplifying things up front and in the long haul, he's gonna wipe the plate with you because he'll have that ability to change things when you're struggling to push elephants around.
</blockquote>
<h2>Our Time's Biggest Lever</h2>
If you can program, you can Build Once and Sell Twice™.
With some upfront work, the programmer can scale thought over space and time – deploy his code like personal servants – outperform corporations with thousands of employees.
That's leverage.
But software alone is not a world-changing force.
It only has power when linked to a product with merit. And merit is not found in a vacuum. So we need to keep at it.
Keep things passionate, and keep em' simple.

Remember Nokia?
They used to be worth $250 billion.
Everyone you knew had a Nokia.
You used to flex ringtones on lunch breaks.
Now everyone has an iPhone.
Why...

How to Not Quit Your Side Project

How come Twitter has 7500 employees, whereas FTX – the crypto exchange company – grew to $18B with just 6 engineers?
If you ask their CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried, this is not an accident.
In fact, many of their 10- and 100x-ers were rejected by bigger employers like Twitter.
Sam claims these engineers learned to be effective on the job.
Having interviewed hundreds of high-performing engineers and leaders at big tech companies, Edmond Lau tells us how this is possible in his book The Effective Engineer.
Effective engineers do not work more hours.
They simply follow a few simple rules:
<h2>1/ Prioritize High-Leverage Work</h2>
Effective engineers recognize time as their most precious asset.
They use leverage (value per unit time), as their primary metric.
To increase your leverage, ask yourself before any activity:
<ul>
<li>What if this was simple? (decrease time cost)</li>
<li>What if this was huge? (increase value)</li>
<li>What else could I be doing? (opportunity cost)</li>
</ul>
High-leverage work is writing an automation tool in 1 hour that will save you 10 minutes a day. That would save you a full work week every year. (This is why effective engineers also obsess over seemingly silly things like touch typing and keybindings.)
Low-leverage work is debugging. A junior dev may spend hours or days searching for a bug, neither progressing nor learning. Luckily, fruitless debugging can be prevented with a healthy dose of TDD: It enforces cleaner API design and atomic development.
<h2>2/ Give Accurate Time-Estimates</h2>
Netscape's browser was delayed by 2 years and its market share plummeted from 80% to 20% as a consequence.
Missing deadlines is deadly. Here's how to avoid it:
<ol>
<li>Decompose your project into granular tasks that are easier to estimate.</li>
<li>Use the most likely estimate, not the best-case (be wary of anchoring bias from pushy manager).</li>
<li>Compare your estimate against historical completion times for similar tasks.</li>
</ol>
<h2>3/ Grow Your Team</h2>
<blockquote>
Your career success depends largely on your company and team’s success, and the success of your company or team depends on more than just your individual contributions. You’ll accomplish much more if those around you are aligned with you rather than against you, and you can do that by investing in their success.
— Edmond Lau
</blockquote>
It might seem like keeping knowledge to yourself increases your value.
Not so, growing your team will benefit your career. But it will also free up your workday. And you won't get paged while hiking.
Examples of growing your team include:
<ul>
<li>Code labs.</li>
<li>Shared code ownership.</li>
<li>Onboarding a team member.</li>
</ul>
<h2>The Exception</h2>
Follow these rules and you'll become a force multiplier.
BUT.
Your leverage is ultimately capped by your environment.
You might be at a company that is either immature or fake:
<ul>
<li>Like a startup whose sole purpose is impressing investors and vision is measured in weeks.</li>
<li>Or a big corp whose office politics conflates high-visibility work with high value.</li>
</ul>
If so, consider jumping.

How come Twitter has 7500 employees, whereas FTX – the crypto exchange company – grew to $18B with just 6 engineers?
If you ask their CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried,...

Are You an Effective Engineer?

Do you hate unit tests?
Perhaps you're overthinking.
We want our code to WORK.
We want it to KEEP WORKING.
And we want to develop FAST with CONFIDENCE.
It's as easy as 1-2-3.
<h3>Rule 1/ Make it FAIL before you make it pass.</h3>
To eliminate false positives.
<h3>Rule 2/ Test with FIXED INPUT.</h3>
Don't use named constants from the model code.
If you change the model code a test should complain.
<h3>Rule 3/ Don't touch the scary outside world.</h3>
Mock network calls, local files, your girlfriend, etc.
<hr>
Follow these rules and testing is trivial.

Do you hate unit tests?
Perhaps you're overthinking.
We want our code to WORK.
We want it to KEEP WORKING.
And we want to develop FAST with CONFIDENCE.
It's as...

3 Rules for Effective Unit Testing

In this issue, you'll learn about:
<ul>
<li>How to self-teach CS</li>
<li>What we can learn from Floki the boat builder</li>
</ul>
<h2>The best study guide on the internet</h2>
Here's a quote, read it twice.
<blockquote>
Don’t be a boilerplate programmer. Instead, build tools for users and other programmers. Take historical note of textile and steel industries: do you want to build machines and tools, or do you want to operate those machines?
<cite>—Ras Bodik</cite>
</blockquote>
Don't know about you, but I don't want to get stuck developing derivative CRUD apps.
Learning shiny technologies that will only come crashing down as quickly as their meteoric rise.
I want to evolve, understand what’s happening under the hood, and innovate.
If you want to evolve too, then I recommend <a href="https://teachyourselfcs.com?ref=broman.blog">teachyourselfcs.com</a> (I'm currently on Computer Architecture).
<h2>What Floki the boat builder has to teach about mastery</h2>
The TV show Vikings has made its way into my consciousness, and it has a character I really admire, named Floki.
Floki is a boat builder. He's unlike the rest of the tribe. He builds these beautiful boats which the vikings use to sail west and discover new land with villages to plunder. This brings the tribe great riches and pride, and the community respects him for it.
I want to be like Floki.
Not like the sailors with a replaceable skill anyone can learn in a matter of months. Someone with real mastery, and who can push the frontier because of it.
This is why I'm <a href="https://teachyourselfcs.com?ref=broman.blog">brushing up</a> on my CS theory, maybe you should too.
<blockquote>
All father. Forgive me for daring to speak to you. In any case, you don't need to listen. I am just a boat-builder, an artist, not a real person.
<cite>—Floki to the Gods</cite>
</blockquote>

In this issue, you'll learn about:

How to self-teach CS
What we can learn from Floki the boat builder

The best study guide on the internet
Here's a quote, read...

Do you want to be a boat builder?

In this issue, you'll learn about:
<ul>
<li>How Vercel is becoming the Google of web dev</li>
<li>Why I'm on board the Urbit train</li>
<li>Whether writing tests is a waste of time</li>
</ul>
<h2>Is Vercel becoming a monopoly?</h2>
<blockquote>
An interesting trend over the past few years has been how many of the popular static site generators and frameworks we rely on are tied to a company that aims to monetize usage of that tool
– Brian Rinaldi
</blockquote>
Jamstack companies like Astro, Remix, Gatsby, and Vercel are conducting cutting-edge open-source development of frontend frameworks with monetization happening on some proprietary backend. In a way, they're self-funded research companies.
The business model is similar to Google's: Offer an amazing product for free, and once the users (developers) are hooked, provide an accompanying service that is unmatched because you own the ecosystem (no one sane deploys their Next app with AWS).
Vercel is also in the business of sponsoring and acquiring popular frameworks (<a href="https://github.com/withastro/astro#platinum-sponsors">Astro</a>, <a href="https://remix.run/conf/2022#sponsors">Remix</a>, <a href="https://vercel.com/blog/vercel-welcomes-rich-harris-creator-of-svelte">Svelte</a>).
So it's not hard to put two and two together – that Vercel wants to make its hosting service an unmatched option not only for Next, but the whole frontend ecosystem.
They're becoming the Google of web dev, and I ain't even mad.
<h2>Why am I so obsessed with Urbit?</h2>
My interest in Urbit is primarily about attention, and by extension, mental health. <a href="https://twitter.com/gdbroman/status/1518314137977241601">This thread</a> I wrote sums it up pretty well.
<h2>Is writing tests a waste of time?</h2>
I’ve recently gone through what I think is a pretty common story arc for developers:
<ol>
<li>Start out despising tests.</li>
<li>Absolutely detest them.</li>
<li>Don't see the point in writing them.</li>
<li>Start to believe writing tests is an exercise in masochism and excuse for seniors to bully juniors over in PRs.</li>
<li>Ship some painful bugs.</li>
<li>Grow to love tests.</li>
</ol>
<h3>Should indie hackers write tests?</h3>
As much as I love tests now, I think it'd be ridiculous to claim that everyone should write tests all the time.
If you're working on a large-scale project, the main value prop for tests is preventing breaking changes.
But not everyone is in a high-stakes environment. What if you're just building your own little project?
As a solo dev, you can oftentimes keep the whole app's functionality in your head. Does this eliminate the need for tests? To a certain degree, yes – primarily as documentation – but not entirely.
<h3>Tests as a speed insurance</h3>
You may be able to keep the whole application in your head today – but will you from a month from now? How about two months from now when you realize a major architectural rehaul is due?
And that is why I think tests' biggest value holds true for solo devs too: namely, speed.
Given you have a long-term vision, tests become a speed insurance: A hedge against debt-induced stagnation. They are about front-loading work to ensure a high development speed long into the project.
Anyone can sprint the first 100 meters, but if you're running a marathon, it's ill-advised.

In this issue, you'll learn about:

How Vercel is becoming the Google of web dev
Why I'm on board the Urbit train
Whether writing tests is a waste of time

Is...

Should you write tests?

In this issue, you'll learn about:
<ul>
<li>What an Urbit dinner is like</li>
<li>What makes Vercel so great</li>
<li>The grug-brained dev</li>
<li>Announcing a project</li>
</ul>
<hr>
I recently attended an Urbit dinner. I've been fairly active in the Stockholm Urbit community (or, as active as one can be with ~one meetup per month).
It's been a blast meeting these geniuses. Urbit people are not smart in the conventional sense. They're unconventional – fringe yet sociable.
Anyway, the dinner being a bit pricey, it filtered for more die-hard fans compared to the free meetups. Not only did these people write Hoon, they were doing it full-time for grants. It was the real deal, would recommend!
<h2>What makes Vercel so great?</h2>
Chipping away on my new side project (more on that below), it has once again become apparent to me how great Vercel is – including their wonderchild Next. So the question intrigued me; why is Vercel so great?
The tribe is certainly part of the answer. By <a href="https://twitter.com/gdbroman/status/1542103276199354368">proclaiming</a> oneself a fan, one is in some sense passing an entrance exam to the community. But I don't think this is all.
Taking a look at Next, it has a meaningful value prop. It’s static/SSR, i.e. fast. And with its folder-based routing system, it’s idiot-proof and just works.
Lastly, the speed at which Vercel ships and improves is just impressive. Google tells me they're roughly 350 people which strikes me as refreshingly reasonable. Maybe applying Zucc-level scrutiny one can declare 50% of employees to be net negative, but that's less than 99% of big tech still.
<h2>The grug-brained dev</h2>
So I think this is the most entertaining yet wise piece of dev content – nay art – I've read this year. It's called <a href="https://grugbrain.dev">The Grug Brained Developer</a> and contains common-sense nuggets on how to survive as a software engineer.
Here are my takeaways on how to be a grug-brained dev:
<ul>
<li>recognize the enemy: complexity
<ul>
<li>big-brained developers fail to do this</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>learn to say no, an 80/20 solution will probably do</li>
<li>refactoring is good, but do it in manageable chunks</li>
<li>don't use microservices lol</li>
</ul>
<h2>Announcing a project</h2>
As mentioned in the previous issue, I've been building a new side project, and you are seeing its product now. It's a <a href="https://gitletter.co">newsletter tool for developers</a>. Check it out if you're into writing.

In this issue, you'll learn about:

What an Urbit dinner is like
What makes Vercel so great
The grug-brained dev
Announcing a project


I recently attended an...

How to be a grug-brained dev

Yesterday night I wrote in my journal...
I think I can finally see myself working with software for a big part of my life.
Finally gained enough mastery to confidently be willing to dedicate myself more to this craft.
Don’t know how many hours I’ve racked up programming, but it’s a sizeable amount at this point.
It feels amazing, to possess a skill, you know? 
Having a craft is like a safe space from chaos: It's somewhere you don't feel like an impostor, and where you get to experience the otherwise rare joy of having control. It's a cheat code, because no matter what life throws at you, this corner of order will always be there for you. And I think it adds to your character.
Craftsmen are interesting people.

Yesterday night I wrote in my journal...
I think I can finally see myself working with software for a big part of my life.
Finally gained enough mastery to...

A corner of order

Last week I started building something new.
Will reveal more as I go, but it's solving a niche problem of mine, and I can't wait to use it. Maybe it'll help others too.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Building something new, can you guess what it is? <a href="https://t.co/Rll9kkaROo">pic.twitter.com/Rll9kkaROo</a>&mdash; Gustaf Broman (@gdbroman) <a href="https://twitter.com/gdbroman/status/1535613987332804608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 11, 2022</a></blockquote>
<h2>In No Rush Whatsoever</h2>
It’s been a while since I felt this creatively invigorated, so I’m in no rush whatsoever. Just enjoying the process. &#x3C;3
@csallen sums up the vibe:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Starting a business, but don&#39;t know what your mission is? How about: making your life better. Working on the things you enjoy, at the pace you set, from wherever you want, with the people you love, so you can be happy… these are perfectly fine reasons to start something.&mdash; Courtland Allen (@csallen) <a href="https://twitter.com/csallen/status/1118952086127902723?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 18, 2019</a></blockquote>
<h2>Why Projects and Mastery Are So Important</h2>
Especially for men. Since we can't birth babies, I think it's imperative we find something beyond our egos, to give ourselves over to, and ground our being in pursuit of immortality.
Heck, you probably stuck with software because it provides you that sense of mastery. A craft to hone.
Programming is a craft by the way. Not a science, not an art. We’re craftsmen.

Last week I started building something new.
Will reveal more as I go, but it's solving a niche problem of mine, and I can't wait to use it. Maybe it'll help...

Building something new

I wonder: is this the future the audience had in mind, cheering along to those visionary words of JFK in 1962? One could start listing examples of decadence—of how we've lost our way as a civilization. Perhaps more tellingly, however, is a pondering: when was the last time a politician spoke with such vigor about anything even remotely as ambitious as going to the moon?
<h2>Heroic Projects as Value Clashes</h2>
One has to serve. The choice we have is a cause by choice or a cause by chance. Make your frame or get it passed down. By your parents, boss, society, etc.
A heroic life is a life in service of values. But values clash (it's what they do), so will you have the energy and courage to honor them? Will you assert your frame, or cave in to the outside world?
The stoner might convince himself he values another hit. The alcoholic another glass. These people cannot be heroes because they lack structural integrity. They are not captains of their ships.
But if you stick to your guns—at some point (especially if you happen to find yourself within a decadent society)—you might clash so hard that you cannot continue life as normal. And so you are called to a heroic project.
A heroic project is a way to immortality. Not in the reductionist sense of eating metformin pills, but by eternal glory in the minds of descendants. By taking on a heroic project, one not only escapes the present refrigerator hum of existence, but one also candidates for future minds, centuries ahead.
So the hero is immortal, but it does not drive him. The hero takes on his project because refraining to do so would violate his integrity, and he might as well cease in the instant.
<h2>The City Problem</h2>
In the leading startup city's own words:
<blockquote>
Our civilization is unwell. We eat food that kills us, we’ve lost sight of beauty, and we neglect our spiritual lives. The world is deranged and decayed, and this frightens people. We don’t look up from our screens; we seek to live within them.
</blockquote>
<a href="https://mirror.xyz/0x7a02D50B22cC79a3dc667E80B413996b81f5ED6E/ZIUh2ni7rm7j7IaxyLJMtJT5KzbU9xg6P-SQbSJhHj4">Praxis</a> is a heroic project because it is founded on values—more specifically, the value of vitality—and modernity presents an obvious clash. I think they are trying to revive a vision of the future of the kind that JFK evoked in his audience.
The city problem is unique, because whilst contemporary <a href="https://www.spacex.com/human-spaceflight/moon/index.html">moon missions</a> exist—lack of community and quality of life is something that affects every person, right at this moment. Furthermore, there can only be so many SpaceXs; but if one is to believe prophets like James Dale Davidson and Balaji Srinivasan, we will be needing a lot more startup cities like Praxis going forward, as the nation state continues to crumble.
<h2>Washington, Not Walden</h2>
At what point do you begin anew? Maybe we'll look back at current cities like a barbarian relic from the past. "We used to live like ants!" Maybe it's just villages from here. Either way, not trying to solve for better ways of living together, is at this point rearranging deck chairs when the titanic is sinking.
If you're building rockets, you get a pass. If not, think about real estate, food supply, governance, etc. Amid seed oils and TikTok, don't let the seductive fantasy of Walden seduce you—let the vigor of Washington inspire you! Here is a heroic project up for grabs for the free-spirited individual. Cities! the moon of our age. Don't retreat, start a city.

I wonder: is this the future the audience had in mind, cheering along to those visionary words of JFK in 1962? One could start listing examples of decadence—of...

Cities! The Moon of Our Age

I was 13 years old and no one in my family knew how to code. None of my friends knew what it was. But I was lucky enough to get my hands on a computer at this age.
The reason why I got a computer was that my parents felt bad for me. I had informed them of how "every friend at school had an Xbox." The half-lie worked, and for my birthday, my parents gave me a personal computer. "Even better than Xbox," they said. It was cheaper of course. But I can’t complain, because as you might have guessed, this cheap PC led me to programming.
<Image src="/images/software/old.webp" alt="Old computer" />
The games this fat Dell computer could handle were embarrassingly bad. So pretty quickly, the idea of creating my own game was planted in my mind.
There was one game I loved however: it was called Flyff. It was a massively multiplayer RPG; like a free, Asian alternative to World of Warcraft. My computer could barely start the thing of course. What if I could create my own Flyff which my computer could handle?
So I started googling. But I struggled; there were barely any resources in my mother tongue, and my English wasn’t good. But eventually, I came across something called C++. Apparently, all the best games—including Flyff—were written in it. Bingo.
<h2>Year 1: C++</h2>
So during summer break, I started watching YouTube tutorials by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/thenewboston">thenewboston</a>. He'd always start with “What’s up guys, Bucky here.” Turns out he's still making videos!
I remember those summer mornings. I'd wake up early, make coffee, bring it to my room, boot up the fat computer. Netbeans on the one side of the screen, thenewboston's C++ playlist on the other. I was ecstatic.
And after two weeks of hard work, I had scraped together a barely functioning calculator. On the one hand, I was proud, on the other, I was realizing how far away I was from creating Flyff. Furthermore, even Bucky—the man himself—didn’t seem capable of writing anything close to a massively multiplayer RPG (or why hadn't he?). So reality was catching up, and I was feeling discouraged.
In hindsight, C++ is maybe not the best language to start with. If you're wondering where to start, I'd recommend a high-level language instead, like Python or JavaScript. But I'd also say, whatever language gets you started is the language for you.
<h2>Year 2: Java Swing Applets</h2>
Fast forward two years and I'm in high school. I'm 15 years old and taking one of the few programming classes my school had to offer. It was in Java.
<Image src="/images/software/swingraphics.jpeg" alt="Java swing graphics" />
My desire to create games was still alive. So I started out creating simple text-based console games, and then moved over to graphical games using the Swing package—like Snake and Pong. I wasn't a big fan of Java's verbose and boilerplate nature, but my old dream of creating an RPG was now considerably closer.
And then, because I was really into math at the time, I got into using Java for numerical problem-solving on <a href="https://projecteuler.net">projecteuler.net</a>. Project Euler is like the godfather of LeetCode, except it's for fun instead of job interviews.
<h2>Year 3: Web Dev! HTML, CSS, jQuery</h2>
In high school, I also took a web development course, where I learned HTML, CSS, and jQuery. This I loved even more than Java.
A new hobby of mine became copying website designs. I distinctly remember recreating SpaceX's landing page. I also learned about design frameworks like Google's material design.
I found this more enjoyable than previous programming because it was more visual. Takeaway: Keep trying different kinds of programming until you find one that resonates with you.
<h2>Year 4: Battlebot</h2>
Last year of high school, together with my classmate, I built a remote-controlled battlebot using Arduino and 10kg of metal. Check out the spinning blade peeking out underneath.
<Image src="/images/software/battlebot.jpg" alt="Remote-controlled battlebot" />
If you don't know, Arduino is a bit like Raspberry Pi. A small computer, programmable with C++ (which was nostalgic for me).
The construction turned out a bit too heavy for the motors, resulting in bad mobility. But the spinning blade was a great success (no fingers lost).
<h2>Year 5: PHP and SQL</h2>
At 18 years old, I enrolled in university to study physics. I chose physics because it seemed more evergreen than computer science. I have changed my mind about this since. But at this time, I also still wasn't entirely sure if programming was for me, so physics seemed like a more diversified bet.
The first year, the only programming we did was one class in Python, and one numerical analysis class, using Matlab. So after my first year in university, I was craving web development. More specifically, I was longing for that creative process I had experienced when I was copying website designs back in high school. Furthermore, I wanted to make money. I was sick of being a broke student.
I decided I was going to build a SaaS app, which I'd charge people money for. I had no idea how to achieve this with the sparse jQuery knowledge I had, so once again, I started googling. And I found a full-stack YouTube tutorial by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmyMFZQDWyU">Will Kwan</a>, which used NodeJS and MongoDB for the backend and EJS for the frontend. That was a few too many new technologies for me at the time, so I resorted to learning PHP and SQL instead.
Beginning my second year of university, I had finished the first version of a marketplace app. So not quite SaaS, but it had authentication, profiles, and everything. The product was shit. The world didn't need another marketplace app. And when the app didn't make me any money, I realized I was going to have to get a job. For now.
<h2>Year 6: React</h2>
Problem is, you can't get a job knowing some PHP and Python. All the cool companies use frontend frameworks. I learned this the hard way by answering "jQuery" upon being asked what framework I preferred in my first interview. Needless to say, they never got back.
After that embarrassing experience, I started learning React. It was pretty tough, and I underestimated how long I would be learning it for. Two years later, I'm still learning.
Luckily, I connected with someone on LinkedIn who was also trying to learn React. We had coffee, became friends, and built some projects together—some of which made money.
<Image src="/images/software/ui.png" alt="Remote-controlled battlebot" />
That summer, I ended up with an internship, and subsequently landing my first full-time job. It was at a venture-funded startup, I had to learn React Native on the job, and I was 21. I was finally earning a sizable income from programming, and it felt great. Takeaway: If you want rapid progress, get a learning buddy, and build projects together.
<h2>Year 7: Advanced Javascript</h2>
After landing my first job, I felt like I was stagnating. Every time I ran into a bug I resorted to Stack Overflow. I wasn't a mature enough developer to do debugging on my own. I realized that my weak point was pure JavaScript. I knew React, but not what was happening under the hood.
So I took an <a href="https://www.udemy.com/course/understand-javascript">advanced JS course</a>, which taught me about the event loop, hoisting, execution contexts, and how all of the different primitives differed. This was exceptionally fruitful, because that course took like a week for me to do. But it leveled me up.
And because I had some experience writing React apps, I had context to fit this new theoretical knowledge into. This is critical. Had I taken it earlier, it would have went over my head. Taking courses successfully is 90% about timing, and thus being self-aware about what to take and when.
After that week of studying, I started interviewing. I got a handful of offers, and eventually chose the job I now have, writing React in the frontend. Finally, I could confidently claim to be a decent developer. So much so, I decided to not return to university; because I had proven to myself: I could learn on my own.
<h2>Year 8: Style and Performance</h2>
In the new job, I found myself in a team with more experienced engineers, so I started to expand my thinking about code to more than mere syntax. How do you collaborate on code effectively? How do you write code that is performant yet maintainable?
<Image src="/images/software/pragprog.jpg" alt="The Pragmatic Programmer by Andrew Hunt" />
I read Clean Code by Robert Martin and <a href="/pragprog">The Pragmatic Programmer</a> by Andrew Hunt. I also took some Udemy courses in computer science, on data structures and algorithms.
This was a period where my perception of programming expanded. For instance, I realized there are no straight answers to what the best design pattern is, only different philosophies with different tradeoffs. My appreciation for the craft grew.
<h2>Year 9: Kubernetes</h2>
At my current job, I got offered to join our on-call rotation. For the uninitiated, on-call basically means you are delegated more responsibility to make sure all systems are kept up and running.
Thing is, I didn’t know any Kubernetes. And to be a good on-caller you have to know Kubernetes. So once again, I took a <a href="https://www.udemy.com/course/learn-kubernetes">Udemy course</a>. Meta note here: this is the best kind of learning you’ll ever do—when circumstances force you to.
So if you're feeling stagnant, put yourself in a sink or swim situation. I would not have learned Kubernetes if I didn't.

I was 13 years old and no one in my family knew how to code. None of my friends knew what it was. But I was lucky enough to get my hands on a computer at this...

How I learned software engineering

With state-infested megacorps writing the narrative on what it means to live a human life—what even qualifies as such—it is easy to grow cynical about the current system, and our civilizational prospects within it.
Censorship, greed, power mania. The great resignation. The great reset. Even war could arguably be blamed on capitalism. War is incredibly good business.
But some will argue that a better world is possible. How can we reverse this agario-esque trend of a handful of entities defining our lives? 
"Conscious Capitalism" will sound like an oxymoron to some, but it is the title of Whole Foods CEO John Mackey's book that talks of what makes a business conscious. This is a book offering the white pill on capitalism. The *consc* pill.
How to ascend? Mackey proposes a few guiding principles, such as 1) serving all stakeholders equally (customers, employees, not just management or shareholders), and 2) having a clear purpose that is heroic and not mere profit maximization.
This is all very good and needed—critical, even. Mackey seems like a genuinely good guy. Undoubtedly, he walks his talk of ascending an org. Question is, is it enough?
It seems to me we need new tools. Yes, accompanying philosophy on how to use them too, but tools nonetheless. With tyrannical tech such as surveillance AI and social credit systems already being implemented (unhindered in China, and POC here in West), the gravity of the situation calls for exit alternatives. Tools will constitute our escape pod, and one such tool is Urbit.
<h2>What is Urbit?</h2>
Invented by the american blogger Curtis Yarvin back in 2013, Urbit in its current state is an esoteric piece of software, known by a small group of libertarian programmers; used by even fewer still. On its <a href="https://urbit.org/">landing page</a>, it describes itself as “A clean-slate OS and network for the 21st century." Ok. Curtis stays clear from Urbit in interviews, which doesn’t help, but apparently the creative genius sees his job as <a href="https://urbit.org/blog/a-founders-farewell">done</a> and wants to move on.
Here's how others have described it:
<ul>
<li>A new way to relate (to others, and ideas)</li>
<li>A critical upgrade to human interaction</li>
<li>A new type of social computing</li>
<li>A world-changing project</li>
<li>A new internet</li>
</ul>
<h3>What it is technically</h3>
Urbit can be hard to describe because it is many things simultaneously. But in short, it's at least three things:
<ol>
<li>A super-private computer,</li>
<li>An identity,</li>
<li>A peer-to-peer network.</li>
</ol>
Or, in one sentence:
<blockquote>
Urbit is a peer-to-peer internet being built from scratch to be more private, secure, and durable than the current internet.
<cite><a href="https://urbit.org/blog/urbit-for-normies">—Erik Newton ~patnes-rigtyn</a></cite>
</blockquote>
Let's have a look at these three components separately.
<h4>Component 1. A super-private computer</h4>
Your Urbit computer is best run locally, with your personal computer functioning as your own server. Self-hosting your data is not only great for privacy, it also solves what Balaji Srinivasan called the <a href="https://balajis.com/yes-you-may-need-a-blockchain/">data export/import problem</a>:
<blockquote>
What if all of your relationships could simply appear, automatically, in every new social app that emerges for the next 100 years?
<cite>—Justin Murphy ~hatryx-lastud</cite>
</blockquote>
People hate Facebook, but they stay on it because their friends are on it. Not until we take matters into our own hands by self-hosting can we genuinely expect features like a persistent social graph. Their land, their rules.
<h4>Component 2. An identity</h4>
All of our communication channels on the internet today rely on someone else to authenticate our identity. Urbit utilizes a decentralized identity system, where your ID is pseudonymous, meaning you can stay completely anonymous if you choose to not publically share it. This has some interesting implications.
Because all Urbit groups are unindexed, they spread via word of mouth. So you find the communities you're drawn to, but stay oblivious to ones that make you cringe or enraged. No more heated comment sections.
People siloing into self-selected communities might seem like we’re just worsening the echo chamber. But one perspective is that when we take away the algorithm, we are reviving people’s ability to focus and think for themselves. So open-mindedness should increase as a result, not decrease.
<h4>Component 3. A peer-to-peer network</h4>
Today if you want to talk to other people on the internet, you have to go through an intermediary: Servers, owned by Google, Facebook, etc. The short-term cost is your data, which is stored on those servers. The long-term cost is your time and attention which those corporations use to sell to advertisers.
Because Urbit has a decentralized ID system, it cuts out the middlemen and lets you talk directly with people on the network. This has huge benefits for privacy and integrity.
Furthermore, Urbit implements a design philosophy called calm computing. With no notifications or blinking lights, it's going back to the original conception of the computer as a tool, to empower the human, treating its time and attention as something to be respected—not extracted. It strives to answer the question: What if we increased our attention spans?
<h2>How will Urbit save us?</h2>
Take a closer look at keywords like, "feed", "influencer", and "push notification". What do they all have in common? They describe a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)">master/slave relationship</a> between information producers and you as a consumer.
Like a hot girl entering a biker bar, just by logging on, one defaults to a compromised position, having to defend oneself from intruders. "Surfing" is now but a relic of our naive retro-future—the current web more aptly described as being "survived" or "trekked".
Make no mistake about it, there is an information war taking place, and it is happening on the boomer web. The price? Your attention. Worst part is, there is no “them.” Even curators and producers (devs, influencers, advertisers) are themselves addicted to their phones, and self-censoring their speech.
In the last couple of decades, it has been radically redefined what it means to be a human. Shorter attention span, less freedom of mind, less proactivity. No dignity. Urbit solves this. Not by partaking in the information war, but by offering an alternative. Because yeah you could quit socials, but will you? We’re social creatures in need of an alternative—without a "feed," to eat when we want.
<h2>How to get started</h2>
All you really need to get started is a planet. A planet is the permanent identity you'll use to navigate the Urbit network. It's a bit like a crypto wallet. But you can think of it more like a digital piece of land, that you buy once, and own forever.
To get hold of a planet, you’ve got two alternatives. The first is to buy one as an NFT on <a href="https://opensea.io/collection/urbit-id">OpenSea</a> or <a href="https://urbit.live/">urbit.live</a>. The problem is that Ethereum fees are sky-high, so I wouldn’t recommend it. The other alternative is to ask someone with a star to give one away to you for free or at a discounted price, since each star is capable of issuing 65,535 unique planets. For this, I can really recommend Justin Murphy’s website <a href="http://imperceptible.computer">imperceptible.computer</a> where he does exactly this.
Second, you’ll need to boot up your planet, but this is the easy part. Urbit has made it real simple now, so all you need to do is download their app called <a href="https://urbit.org/getting-started#port">Port</a> which is available on MacOS, Linux, and Windows, where you can boot up your planet locally on your computer in less than 5 minutes.
Worth mentioning is that there are alternatives like <a href="https://ceramic.network/">Ceramic</a> and <a href="https://www.deso.org/">DeSo</a>. But Urbit has the biggest small group of loyal adherents, at least for now.
<h2>Mass exodus wen?</h2>
Urbit is still technically difficult to get on for the average person. So not until my mom can boot up her own planet can we even start to entertain the thought of a mass exodus. Even when the UX is ready, there are still network effects.
So probably a dramatic event, like a massive password breach, making the old web unusable, will have to happen for the majority to consider moving over. For now, though, it’s mostly fringe nerds. It just makes it a more fun experience IMO.
An ending note: According to Heidegger, we have since the start of philosophy been concerned with simple matters. Each epoch allowing for a capped radicality in worldview. And he suggested that only now are we entering the epoch of a whole world view, along with the rising threat of a complete instrumentalization of our world via tech; risking becoming more things than persons. Maybe it's time to choose a ship wisely.

With state-infested megacorps writing the narrative on what it means to live a human life—what even qualifies as such—it is easy to grow cynical about the...

Will this new internet save us?

It has been stressful 
Maybe not so fruitful 
Right in this moment 
I am so grateful
I have made sacrifices 
Some respectable 
Others not so much 
Need to ask
When we sacrifice 
We have to ask 
To what cause 
And to what good?
Now I found this moment 
And so I have to ask 
To what cause 
And what good?
I am drilling my psyche 
Killing my self 
To what cause 
And what good?
But I am so grateful 
Whichever the way 
For I found this moment 
A time to ask

It has been stressful
Maybe not so fruitful
Right in this moment
I am so grateful
I have made sacrifices
Some respectable
Others not so much
Need to ask
When we...

A time to ask

Nietzsche predicted that when we no longer have transcendental values to bound ourselves to, we will become what he called "the last man." Pityable, nihilistic bugmen only concerned with avoiding pain and increasing pleasure. Never questioning, completely detached from the bigger picture. Completely detached. Unfortunately, Nietzsche's prediction has come to fruition.
<blockquote>
I teach mankind a new will: to desire this path that men
have followed blindly, and to call it good and no more to
creep aside from it, like the sick and dying!
<cite>—Friedrich Nietzsche</cite>
</blockquote>
Modern world sick.
Forget about DAOs.. not about seasteading.
In the last 20 pages of The Sovereign Individual, we find the book's real idea: Tech Bro needs an ethic.
Cold showers and EA: this can't do. An unbalanced view, won't hold through. Will you stop hiding from God? And I, meglect my spirit no more?
The founding fathers acknowledged: freedom—and religious such, yes—but a religious people, we need nonetheless. Transcendental values. Something to hold on to, other than our own self-interest.
A better world is possible. For some, this Religion. And contrarians, perhaps some form of Prometheism? Bottom line is: The potential of our century lies in recognizing what we are, and why we are here. What are you beyond? Do you resonate with life or death? Vitalism or safety? The path is made by walking.
<h2>The Path</h2>
The first step would be to end the book cope. Put down the book. A true ubermensch would not look to prestigious thinkers like Nietzsche, but to go inwards.
<h2>Descend</h2>
Human has two sides. Without the one, you won't come far. Together we dance. Remember the eagle with the serpent around its neck. We must do shadow work. The tallest trees have the deepest roots.
<blockquote>
It was the sick and dying who despised the body and the earth and invented the things of heaven and the redeeming
drops of blood: but even these sweet and dismal poisons they took from the body and the earth!
</blockquote>
Don't suppress the antichrist. The fourth part of God is evil.
<h2>Where We Are</h2>
Modern world sick. Rehash movies and tv series that make you smooth brain. No one has the attention span to read or write. Food numbs. Safety steals my edge. We stay inside. The five devilish esses: High fructose corn syrup, seed oils, starch, soy, sodium. Endless “entertainment.“ Infinite feeds. An unhealthy body, a mind in distress. The weight of existence. Low level refrigerator drum that makes you wanna take a hit. The satanic entertainment system is pulling your attention away from how simple things can be (are). Reclaim mental bandwidth. What if we increased our attention spans.
<h3>Classes</h3>
<ul>
<li>the masses (consumtariat): numb me daddy. give me endless autoscrolling news feed. supersize, starch, sugar, seedoil, sodium. numb me now. yes I'm a bad boy, don't let me think. put dopamine cord inside cranium. Blindfold me, choke me already, put a mask on my face, don't let me outside my cage. High fructose corn syrup. Tell me what to do tell me what to think.</li>
<li>the elite: disconnected from God, autistic, can't feel. only derives pleasure from dominance.</li>
<li>the upcomers: can somewhat see through the culture and how the masses are being hypnotized. some become eremites, the rest reach for the top as an only out, therefore justifying what the elite is doing via survival-rationalization. some are good however and believe a turnaround is possible.</li>
</ul>
<h3>The Path is Made by Walking</h3>
<blockquote>
You showed up. You're here, that's enough.
It won't be enough forever but tonight it is.
Right now it's everything.
</blockquote>
No one will unshackle us. We need to start walking.
The answer is not meditating. The answer is not hustling. The answer is not book cope. The answer is anti-mimetic. Going off-road: The answer is art. In whatever you do. Now read, work, meditate, etc. It's how you do it.
<blockquote>
Untroubled, scornful, outrageous - that is how wisdom wants us to be: she is a woman and never loves anyone but a warrior.
</blockquote>
<ul>
<li>Zoroastrianism</li>
</ul>
Health, vitality, and the furtherance of life. It seems like another product or piece of software will only take you that far. In order to really make progress with regards to this, an entirely new system is needed. A new paradise.
<h2>The Relief of Exhalation (The Potential of the Coming Century)</h2>
Is in recognizing
<ul>
<li>what we are</li>
<li>why we're here</li>
</ul>
What are you beyond?
You can love the world whilst pointing out its problems. In fact, if you need to lie to yourself about it, do you really love it?
<h2>The mad man (do I have it in me?)</h2>
"They've done it themselves and yet they know not what they do"
Who seeks god only when it suits him won’t be answered
I am sorry.
Help me God. Will you?
These urges to set it all on fire. Shouts. For something real?
So we over here trynna solve problem and then new guy come over start talking with these new words and we like wow those new words what do they mean and trynna figure out if they make sense if they can help solve problem that we trynna solve over here or if he just using new words to get the status of smart by pretending to trynna help out?
What do I want really?
Sunlight. A girl. Friends to see. Is this all.
The less I have of these the more I think I need God.
I would rather suffer and be in your bosom than happy and not know you.
Suffering reminds me of You.
Has he got lost or hiding? Is he on voyage?
What if I were smiling?
<hr>
<h2>P. S. Note</h2>
The modern idea of one idea per essay (or book even!) is sterile.
Do you resonate with life or death?
Throw as many ideas together you can fit. Melting pot boom vitality.
<h2>notes on nietzsche</h2>
The atheists like to claim him theirs, but N is far from someone who was against religion/spirituality
He was just against the kind of Christians he saw around him
He was against values that “devalue themselves”
Amor fati = becoming what you are
Not appeal to emotion? Pah. What else to appeal to?
<h2>skatteuppror</h2>
<a href="https://youtu.be/ol9pH9oqv8E?t=589">https://youtu.be/ol9pH9oqv8E?t=589</a>
<h2><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW_y4wveAmI">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW_y4wveAmI</a></h2>
<h2>mass(k) conformity</h2>
There are many ways in which physical conformity is more dangerous than confirmity of thought alone.
Physical conformity, such as waring masks, is visual and therefore much stronger. The inertia is gonna be bigger since everywhere you look it's gonna seem like people share the same view. At least when there's conformity of thought you can hold your stance silently. In physical conformity there is nowhere to hide. If you try to hold your stance you'll suffer consequences. Also, complying physically will disenfranchise you on a much deeper level than merely "hiding in your head," since it requires you to actively and continuously give up a part of you.
Even people who dislike mask mandates—who wear them just out of fear for confrontation, or for suffering personal consequences (a very strong incentive indeed)—you won't know what percentage they are. What percentage aren't willing to share their actual view, even if you ask them? This is terrifying. You have to press them on this. Because after a while of silence, soon they too won't be so sure of their view anymore.
Sure you can always move out to the countryside. But at what cost. We are supposed to be in nature but we're also supposed to be together. Why is my species going mad, we're social creatures damnit.

Nietzsche predicted that when we no longer have transcendental values to bound ourselves to, we will become what he called "the last man." Pityable, nihilistic...

A Programmer's Guide to Nietzsche

Imagine a dog, full of playful energy. The most wonderful joyous dog. Now imagine, each time the dog begs its owner for play (to go outside), it is without exception utterly ignored. The dog does not understand this. It starts wondering if it is a ghost gone mad? The dog behaves as any dutiful dog should. Eats its food, never barks. Why master doesn't let it outside—even a 5-minute walk would do!—it does not understand.
This is how I feel. A locked-up dog.
What to say. Not much. Is there anything to say? Almost certainly not. But writing is play. I want to play.

Imagine a dog, full of playful energy. The most wonderful joyous dog. Now imagine, each time the dog begs its owner for play (to go outside), it is without...

Can't write lately

Every upswing. The same damn thing.
All colourful, everything possible.
Surfing on clouds, the words are clay.
Angelic awareness please would you stay?
Back on earth I have merely faith.
Now all's blue, nothing to do.
Seeking to control, I fail to rejoice.
And so it goes—will there ever be choice?
An endless show in which I flow.
To and fro without plateau.

Every upswing. The same damn thing.
All colourful, everything possible.
Surfing on clouds, the words are clay.
Angelic awareness please would you stay?
Back on...

Back on Earth

How to become a pragmatic programmer<a href="#f1">1</a> in 10 simple steps, according to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pragmatic_Programmer">The Pragmatic Programmer</a> by Andrew Hunt.
<h2>1/ No dogma.</h2>
A pragmatic programmer is technology-agnostic, i.e. not wedded to any particular language, toolset, or operating system.
It's fine to have preferences, but we need to see each set of circumstances for what it is, applying a solution appropriately.
<h2>2/ Great power, great curiosity.</h2>
Programming is among the most autonomous professions there are. 10x engineers do not take this agency for granted.
They care about their craft and think about their work—like we're doing right now!
<h2>3/ Good-enough software.</h2>
"Good enough" does not mean sloppy. Of course, we must meet the user's requirements. But not more than this.
Time is precious. We're gonna have to make tradeoffs. And don't forget to involve the user when you do.
<h2>4/ No broken windows.</h2>
Quality is a team issue. Unfixed issues destroy the team spirit and shouldn't be tolerated. We need to set an example by fixing bugs when we encounter them—regardless if they're our own.
<h2>5/ Let it crash.</h2>
Dead programs don't lie. Crashing as early as possible prevents catastrophes from slipping by into production. Defensive programming is dangerous. Let it crash.
<h2>6/ Decouple your code.</h2>
If everyone has to attend a meeting because no one's sure what will be affected by a certain change, it's a big sign the code needs decoupling. Decoupled code is easier to change.
<h2>7/ Coding is non-mechanical.</h2>
Coding is not blindly transcribing the design into executable statements. If our software is to enjoy a long healthy life, we need to continually think about improvements.
<h2>8/ Keep it simple (for safety).</h2>
There are many reasons to keep design simple. It's easier to change, maintain—but it's also safer.
Higher code complexity means a larger attack surface. Less code means fewer bugs and fewer opportunities for security holes.
<h2>9/ Be a therapist.</h2>
Part of being a good programmer is helping the client figure out what they really want.
Never trust a customer's first statement of needs. Project requirements are learned in a feedback loop between both parties. Be a therapist.
<h2>10/ Don't panic.</h2>
If coding feels like an uphill battle, take a step back. It's probably harder than it needs to be.
Maybe the design is wrong? Maybe you're solving the wrong problem altogether?
Draw some doodles, take a walk. Talk to your co-worker and the solution will come. Let the friction foster simplification.
<h2>In conclusion,</h2>
Pragmatic programmers embody responsibility. They value quality, but not complexity.
Above all, pragmatism is about leadership. It's bringing the whole team together, helping our peers improve in the process.
<hr>
<h2>Footnotes</h2>
<a name="f1"></a>
[1] Within the context of software engineering, being pragmatic is basically synonymous with being senior IMO. But let's give the authors their due and use the terminology they've coined.

How to become a pragmatic programmer1 in 10 simple steps, according to The Pragmatic Programmer by Andrew Hunt.
1/ No dogma.
A pragmatic programmer is...

Decoding Pragmatism

Thanks to the introduction of Hooks in React 16.8, functional components now provide the same lifecycle functionality as class-based such. So we're left with two choices:
<ol>
<li>Class components, or</li>
<li>Functional components + hooks</li>
</ol>
If you're new to React, which style should you learn? Which one provides the most benefits? Is the most future-proof? The answer is most likely functional components.
<h3>The Syntactical Difference</h3>
A functional component is a regular JavaScript function that returns JSX/React Elements:
<pre><code class="language-js">const MyFunctionalComponent = ({ title }) => &#x3C;h1>{title}&#x3C;/h1>;
</code></pre>
A class component requires you to extend from <code>React.Component</code>, and create a render function. They come with a constructor, as well as some inbuilt lifecycle methods, such as <code>componentWillMount()</code> and <code>componentDidUpdate()</code>.
<pre><code class="language-js">class MyClassComponent extends React.Component {
 render() {
 return &#x3C;h1>{this.props.title}&#x3C;/h1>;
 }
}
</code></pre>
Hopefully you already see a clear winner. Nevertheless, three arguments for functional components for the tasteless:
<h2>1. It's the Future</h2>
Big Brother said so, alright:
<blockquote>
We don’t recommend rewriting your existing components overnight, but you can start using Hooks in the new ones
<cite><a href="https://engineering.fb.com/2019/02/22/open-source/react-hooks/">engineering.fb.com</a></cite>
</blockquote>
The key word here is overnight.
Almost all new projects are using functional components. And many old projects with class components are refactoring.
<h2>2. Leaner / Less Verbose</h2>
<ul>
<li>No constructor</li>
<li>Easier to pass props into (no <code>this</code> keyword)</li>
<li>Easier to test because they're so simple (no internal state, all they do is return JSX)</li>
</ul>
Have look at the syntactical difference above again. The functional example is less than 50% of the number of lines.
<h2>3. Easier Logic-Sharing</h2>
Instead of using ugly wrapper components, we can share logic between components using hooks. It's easier, look:
<pre><code class="language-js">const useCustomLogic = () => {
 // Your custom hook logic
};

function App() {
 const { sharedParam } = useCustomLogic();

 return (
 &#x3C;>
 &#x3C;Header param={sharedParam} />
 &#x3C;SomeComponent param={sharedParam} />
 &#x3C;/>
 );
}
</code></pre>
<blockquote>
Hooks allow you to reuse stateful logic without changing your component hierarchy. This makes it easy to share Hooks among many components or with the community.
<cite><a href="https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-intro.html">reactjs.org/docs</a></cite>
</blockquote>
<h2>Conclusion: Classes Are Doomed?</h2>
They're probably not disappearing any time soon. But considering the amount of effort the React team has put into hooks (and their widespread adoption), I'd consider React classes' demise pretty likely.

Thanks to the introduction of Hooks in React 16.8, functional components now provide the same lifecycle functionality as class-based such. So we're left with two...

For Functional Components in React

<blockquote>
I'm a single-threaded, non-blocking asynchronous concurrent language
I have a call stack, an event loop, a callback queue, and some other apis
<cite><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aGhZQkoFbQ">- JavaScript</a></cite>
</blockquote>
So you can make your app fetch an api. Your button consumes a global state. But whenever there's red in the console you go crying to Stack Overflow.
Building stuff with frameworks is great. Get started. Learn by doing and all that jazz. But, lacking under-the-hood understanding, you'll inevitably plateau (I did).
So I took a <a href="https://www.udemy.com/course/understand-javascript">Udemy course</a>.
<h2>How Your Computer Understands JavaScript</h2>
Problem: You speak JavaScript, computer no comprendo.
Solution: We dumb it down:
<ul>
<li>A syntax parser turns...
<ul>
<li>high level code -> a data structure (tree or graph)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>A compiler then translates...
<ul>
<li>the data structure -> lower level language (machine code)</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
This is not to be confused with transpiling, which is the syntax-conversion of one high-level programming language to another (e.g. TypeScript -> JS).
<h2>WTH's an Execution Context?</h2>
Before we can understand how JS runs, we need to understand what an execution context is.
The execution context is whatever environment in which a piece of code is executed. Type <code>this</code>, and you'll find out. Its content will depend on whether you're inside a function or not, but generally it contains...
<ul>
<li>Local code (variables, objects, functions)</li>
<li>Global object (accessed by <code>window</code> in the browser)</li>
<li>Lexical environment (a reference to its outer environment)</li>
</ul>
<h2>How Is Javascript Run?</h2>
An execution context is executed in two phases:
<ul>
<li>1. A creation phase: setup memory space for variables and functions (a.k.a. hoisting)</li>
<li>2. A code execution phase: run through the code line by line (explained how below)</li>
</ul>
During the creation phase, all variables are initially set to <code>undefined</code>, whereas functions are sat in memory in their entirity. Note, however, that <code>undefined</code> is not the same as 'ReferenceError: my_var is not defined', which is when a variable hasn't been allocated memory space.
<h3>Event Loop and Execution Stack</h3>
So, when running a program, the global execution context is created, and then, whenever a function is invoked, its execution context is put on top of the execution stack.
Keep in mind that JavaScript is single threaded, which means that it has one call stack. It is also synchronous—meaning each command is executed in order.
<blockquote>
Tip: <a href="http://latentflip.com/loupe">latentflip.com/loupe</a> is an interactive visualization tool for understanding the JavaScript event loop.
</blockquote>
Each function creates its own execution context, which runs through a create and execution phase. And when a function at the top of the stack finishes, it is popped off.
<h2>Understanding the Scope Chain</h2>
Consider the following piece of code—what will it log?
<pre><code class="language-js">function b() {
 console.log(myVar);
}

function a() {
 var myVar = 2;
 b();
}

var myVar = 1;

a();
</code></pre>
The correct answer is <code>1</code>. Why not <code>undefined</code>?
Because if a variable is not defined within the current execution context, it will go to its outer environment and look for it there (in this case, it's the global execution context). The scope chain is simply this chain of outer environment references.
<h2>JS Typing: It's Basically Untyped</h2>
JavaScript is dynamically typed; i.e. there are no keywords for the kind of data you intend pointing a variable to. This is obviously the main difference in TypeScript, which is statically typed.
<h3>What are Primitive Types?</h3>
<blockquote>
A primitive type is a type of data that represents a single value (i.e. not a name-value pair or an object)
</blockquote>
There are six primitive types in JavaScript:
<ul>
<li><code>undefined</code> = "lack of existence"</li>
<li><code>null</code> = also "lack of existence", but it's an assignment value</li>
<li><code>boolean</code> = can be either <code>true</code> or <code>false</code></li>
<li><code>number</code> = floating point number, i.e always some decimals (the only numeric type in JS)</li>
<li><code>string</code> = just text</li>
<li><code>symbol</code> = used in ES6</li>
</ul>
<h3>What *Are* Operators?</h3>
An operator is a syntactically different function. Operators generally take two parameters and return one result.
Unlike regular functions, they use infix notation, i.e. <code>3+4</code>, instead of prefix notation <code>+(3,4)</code>, or postfix notation <code>(3, 4)+</code>.
<ul>
<li>Operator precedence = which function gets called first</li>
<li>Operator associativity = in what order functions get called (left to right, or right to left)</li>
</ul>
<h3>What Is Coercion?</h3>
Coercion means to convert a value from one type to another, e.g:
<pre><code class="language-js">var a = 1 + '2';
</code></pre>
Sometimes coercion behaves weirdly:
<pre><code class="language-js">console.log(3 &#x3C; 2 &#x3C; 1); // true
console.log(Number(undefined)); // Nan
console.log(Number(null)); // 0
</code></pre>
Equality (<code>==</code>) coerces, strict equality (<code>===</code>) doesn't:
<pre><code class="language-js">console.log(Number('3' == 3)); // truthy
console.log(Number('3' === 3)); // falsy
</code></pre>
In other words, use strict equality when you can. Otherwise code becomes hard to anticipate.
Lastly, we can use coercion to check if a var has been defined (but mind zero!)
<pre><code class="language-js">if (a || a === 0) {
 console.log("There's a there there.");
}
</code></pre>
<h3>JSONs vs. Object Literals</h3>
JSON requires quotes for keys, objects do not. All JSON's can thus be used as objects, not vice versa.
But since they're so similar, JavaScript has a lot of inbuilt functionality for JSON's:
<ul>
<li><code>JSON.stringify()</code> takes an object &#x26; spits out JSON as a string</li>
<li><code>JSON.parse()</code> takes a string &#x26; spits out an object</li>
</ul>
<h3>Object Literals vs. Constructors</h3>
<code>{}</code> is essentially the same as <code>new Object()</code>, but objects created using literals are global. And constructors allow us to create instances of objects.
<h3>Functions Are Objects!</h3>
JavaScript has first-class functions, i.e. they can be treated as any other object/type (create them, pass them around, etc.) This is why JS is great for functional programming.
Although, functions differ from objects in two ways:
<ol>
<li>anonimty—name is optional</li>
<li>invocable() code</li>
</ol>
When a function is attached in an object, <code>this</code> within the function refers to the object, whereas anonymous functions' <code>this</code> refers to its creator.
<h3>Passing by Value vs. by Reference</h3>
Lastly, all primitives are passed by value, and all objects (including functions) are passed by reference.
A primitive value variable <code>a</code> points to a place in memory (e.g. 0x001). If we pass a new var <code>b</code> to that var <code>a</code>, it will create a copy of the primitive value located somewhere else in memory (e.g. 0x002). This is called by value (i.e. copying value into two separate spots in memory). It means we can change <code>a</code>, after the fact, without affecting <code>b</code>.
When we copy an object variable however, that new variable will point to the same location in memory (aka by reference):
<pre><code class="language-js">a = new Object(); // 0x001
b = a; // 0x001
</code></pre>
<h2>To <code>pop()</code> things off...</h2>
Poor JS. They call you weird.
Isn't fair. Shouldn't be feared.
Those who learn your quirks—
We shall hear them cheer.
See, you're effective,
Not defective, dear.


I'm a single-threaded, non-blocking asynchronous concurrent language
I have a call stack, an event loop, a callback queue, and some other apis
- JavaScript

So...

Poor JS. They call you weird.

To open oneself to experience is to enquire into what is arbitrary and what is meaningful. Diverse experience isn't as much about extracting insight as it is training depth-mobility. The voyager’s purpose is to arrive one level above: To transcend any one experience or way of life in favor of paradise a moment away. As he with one tongue cannot triangulate language, so he who has bathed in only one set of circumstances cannot understand what it is that is life.
<h2>1 Finding Self Through Curiosity</h2>
<blockquote>
Wanting to reform the world without discovering one's true self is like trying to cover the world with leather to avoid the pain of walking on stones and thorns.
It is much simpler to wear shoes.
<cite>—Ramana Maharshi</cite>
</blockquote>
Whilst nothing wrong with sticking with what works, some cannot help to wonder “what if?” and must thus first quench this thirst to know. The curiosity of what Japanese forests smell like?—or what is the view from mount Kilimanjaro?
Pilgrimage’s contribution to self and society comes from the realignment of the latter with the former. Through mapping out the territory before a confident embark. Because to search widely, whilst initially slower compared to deep dive, will pay off in the long term via reassurance; of being on path.
<h2>2 Nature Bathing as Societal Detox</h2>
<blockquote>
I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived.
<cite>—Ralp Waldo Emerson</cite>
</blockquote>
Although naturally good and intelligent, Man's nature hides under layers of conditioning and may thus require to be brought forth by reattunement with nature. All spontaneous travel will awaken natural creativity, but long-distance hikes—through nature in isolation especially—brings forth the Self like few endeavors will. Prolonged travel will teach you how to align self with nature, instead of—as modernity has it—trying to fit it to your demands.
<h3>2.1 Rebels Turn, Heroes Return</h3>
As he who doesn’t turn away from society is a sheep, so he who doesn’t re-turn is a coward. The hero returns. The point is not to escape, but to bring back clarity. To not leave civilization behind, but to help it revive; remember.
<h2>3 The Failed Revival That Is Tourism</h2>
<blockquote>
In order to understand the world, one has to turn away from it on occasion.
<cite>—Albert Camus</cite>
</blockquote>
Pilgrimage being internal, tourism—with its complete ignorance of the inner journey—is a weak attempt at bringing it back. Pilgrimage isn't leaving an office in exchange for a five-star hotel. We are looking for Self. The familiar has to be left.
<h3>3.1 Divine Drought</h3>
Consider the rise of public intellectuals. Their newly acclaimed rock-star level status is an extension of the tourist phenomenon. If tourism is trying to bring back direct experience, then Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris are culture’s recent attempt at bringing back the Big. Both, however, are symptomatic of the same divine drought.
Public thinking has ultimately been unsatisfactory because big questions cannot be outsourced. Big thinking is personal and requires a space in culture that inspires exploring in order to work at scale (a role churches once played). But this is the healing function of nature tripping as a means of temporarily turning away from the uninspired society. The divine will not be found at an all-inclusive resort.
<h2>4 The Logification of Religion</h2>
Since the divine cannot be institutionalized, in order to fit the box of modernity, religion has been turned into dogma: A dull logos, or moral code, instead of a guide for transcending. Obviously people will not go to church for judgment!
If not earlier, in our last breath I think we shall see, that not when, but how we found our groove is what matters. How I treated my neighbor. What did I share along the way to gold? Notice it is not called a life lived effectively—but a life lived fully. The idiom lives for a reason. So will I feel proud of my integrity? Will I have sacrificed? and fundamentally, had faith in the good? Then I will peacefully surrender. But peace is not exclusive to death, always awaiting he wishing to let go to the will of life, as God does not want robots.
<h2>5 Surfing Will</h2>
Not doing nor non-doing, balancing will is like friendship. Not achievable through force alone, neither through idleness. Not pushing the Sisyphean boulder uphill, the remaining option is to surf. Academic philosophy turns into nihilism because it disregards—even denies our possession of—this kind of innate ability to flow with creation.
Life is self-developing, self-organizing, and striving towards complexity. One cannot step outside and watch the show from above. Any effort in separation will be in vain. Actors cannot judge their play, fish can’t talk about water. Life can attempt to talk about itself: I wouldn’t be writing this if I didn’t believe there to be value in it. But it will have to be via participation rather than separation. Enjoy the ride.

To open oneself to experience is to enquire into what is arbitrary and what is meaningful. Diverse experience isn't as much about extracting insight as it is...

Revive Pilgrimage

Reality appears to be accelerating towards complexity. We do not know what this complexity is. More importantly, our role as human beings in this unfoldment—if we’ll even get to pass through the keyhole—we also do not know.
To complicate the matter, reality seems to dislike being talked about. But there’s a sense in which, through attempting to speak the unspeakable, the understanding of this isness can be approached on a larger scale.
<hr>
<h2>1 Why Consciousness</h2>
<blockquote>
If the expansion of consciousness doesn’t play a major role in the human future, what kind of future is it going to be?
<cite>—Terence McKenna</cite>
</blockquote>
Any world order based on knowledge other than our shared being is at best a fragile alliance. To not become mechanical technocrats, the spirit somehow has to be brought along with us. To not leave our human soul behind, there have to be effective efforts in accelerating awakening. With growing existential risks, large-scale top-down governing is Russian roulette. Consistently wise species-level decision-making has to be done in a many-to-many fashion. The path isn’t quick, but it is necessary, and it starts in Mind.
<h3>1.1 Fundamental Okayness</h3>
In failing to look past evolutionary fear, not much has changed since first leaving the savannah. Physical needs remains the go-to space for seeking wholeness. And it is no doubt that contemporary western ontology, with its dead mechanistic outlook, has contributed to our materialistic worldview in this everyday (and not only metaphysical) sense. But what those letting go of scarcity discover—if only for a moment—is when the fight with fear subsides, a fundamental okayness remains: An inherent joy of being—which doesn't make you complacent, but which makes you okay. More likely to achieve good, such as when seeking to help corners of the world actually living under scarcity. So it is from this recognition the future has to be built.
<h3>1.2 Can We Engineer Enlightenment?</h3>
<blockquote>
How do we inspire action from joy, wonder and compassion, rather than fear, need and desire?
<cite>—Gino Yu</cite>
</blockquote>
Of course, no effort in engineering enlightenment will ever be complete—will never be it. Like the dog fixating on your fingertip instead of tracing the imaginary line extending beyond it—this can never be explained, never fairly represented; only experienced. But as Picasso said, although art lies, it points to truth. So external efforts may be insufficient, but they are necessary. In other words, there is stuff to do.
<h3>1.3 What Is Happening</h3>
<blockquote>
Our civilization is unwell. We eat food that kills us, we’ve lost sight of beauty, and we neglect our spiritual lives. The world is deranged and decayed, and this frightens people. We don’t look up from our screens; we seek to live within them.
<cite>—0x7a02, Introducing Praxis</cite>
</blockquote>
For many current cultural shifts, malignancy is too early to tell. But even in the gloomier cases, such as physicalist atheism, the game is far from over. Some mere intuitions:
<h4>1.3.1 The Secularization of Meditation</h4>
The clinical rebranding of meditation has been two steps forward and one step back. Its nuts and bolts have been abstracted, and its deeper purpose—of awakening the practitioner—left behind. Meditation apps have played an important role in this spread via secularization. Let's just not end the discussion with listicles on how a daily practice makes us more effective worker bees.
<h4>1.3.2 The Church of Technology</h4>
Second, technology has its eyes on the throne of God. When nature is merciless, we consult rationalism. When death discomforts, we turn to transhumanism. One shouldn't reject this sort of religion on principle, as long as we recognize it as such; but if not, we’ll end up longing for all we’ve dismantled. So not disregarding change per se, theological innovation should accompany an utmost caution, since we're treading land where any misstep could bring risk of special significance. Put bluntly, theology demands a level of wisdom that remains uncommon within the boyish field of technoscience.
<h4>1.3.3 A Psychedelic Renaissance</h4>
Mostly through personal accounts online, and a few outspoken celebrities (Joe Rogan, Mike Tyson, Tim Ferriss), psychedelics are making a comeback—this time with a wider appeal. More states and countries are legalizing; although similar to meditation, it is with industrial practicality as carrot whilst their real potency remains largely undiscussed. Furthermore, there is a lack of cultural infrastructure to ground and guide their destabilizing effects on the individual and society.
<h4>1.3.4 Science Turning Its Gaze Inward</h4>
Lastly, science is going through an epistemological crisis. Thinkers are dismantling the pseudophilosophy that has been scientism, and the belief in matter is revealing itself as such: A belief that has produced the so-called “hard problem,” as well as a meaning crisis among its predominantly western adherers.
Ordinary folk are realizing that science has been operating rather dogmatically with regard to its metaphysical assumptions. What field wouldn't—given the same societal success—have turned equally arrogant? And the science community is beginning to see how admitting these philosophical errors is but a momentary strike to the ego: An insight that doesn't disqualify every previous finding, but will instead strengthen its long-term integrity: How it permits a more solid—indubitably more hopeful—interpretation of what we are doing and why.
<h2>2 How to Catalyze</h2>
<blockquote>
The dichotomy between Nature and Technology is a superficial and untenable distinction. Technology is actually a teleological phenomenon intrinsic to the cosmic evolutionary process. The danger is not from Tech as such, but from the technological equivalent of viruses or cancers.
<cite>—Jason Reza Jorjani</cite>
</blockquote>
The goal is prosperity with individual sovereignty. There are already consciousness-catalyzing technologies that may help us get there. But all technology being inherently neutral—so as to not risk corruption—we must come from joy, wonder and compassion, rather than fear, need and desire.
<h3>2.1 Contemporary Work</h3>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf">Immutable money</a>, and <a href="https://urbit.org">new inter-networks</a> can aid decentralization of power and thought.
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.citydao.io">DAO-cities</a>, and <a href="https://www.praxissociety.com">communities</a> promoting natural living.</li>
<li><a href="https://mirror.xyz">Censorship-resistant media platforms</a> built on public blockchains, enabling freedom of speech.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><a href="https://twitter.com/phusikoi">VR games and media</a> creating induced awakening experiences.
<ul>
<li>Mind alteration is as old as us, but there is likely much unexplored territory using modern hardware and software.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><a href="https://maps.org">Psychedelics R&#x26;D</a>, including funding and legislation.</li>
<li><a href="https://www.hereticon.com">Meetups</a>, <a href="https://www.dhamma.org">courses</a>, and <a href="https://burningman.org">participatory culture</a>.
<ul>
<li>Good things happen when individuals get together—if not only to inspire others' to individuate.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_cyCuCKQhs">Art</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/c/TheoriesofEverything">independent journalism</a>, and <a href="https://palladiummag.com">integrous intellectual work</a>.
<ul>
<li>Ideas change the world, and beauty will save it!</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
Tools like these constitute our escape pod. With tyrannical tech such as surveillance AI and social credit systems already being implemented, the gravity of the situation calls for acceleration.
<hr>
<h2>Thank You for Reading</h2>
On a personal note, I'm looking for future-oriented conversationalists. Topics of interest include the death of the nation state, decentralized work, monistic idealism and similar metaphysics, emerging ethics, and spirituality. If this sounds like you, I'd love to <a href="https://twitter.com/messages/compose?recipient_id=3040648866" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">connect</a>.

Reality appears to be accelerating towards complexity. We do not know what this complexity is. More importantly, our role as human beings in this unfoldment—if...

Catalyze Consciousness

Trying to stay afloat, we grab on to anything which postpones the ever-pressing question patiently awaiting us in silent darkness on the ocean floor.
Knowing we cannot kick forever, some anxiously start to wonder what it is that is waiting? Realizing that one day, we too—irrespective of desire—in battle or resignation—will have to let go, and confront our situation.
We can sleep in light or awake in darkness, but most reject death before death and so they die cowards having never lived. Terrified of what lingers in the crevasses of the mind, we answer to boredom and tragedy by pressing buttons and chewing corn. Reflexively reaching for water whenever the flavor grows too strong. In the end, we all are—and, as is realized on the other side, always were—alone...all one.
I too have been fleeing. All the while naively thinking of myself as having an interest in this issue of Being; only now realizing my deceit. Only now dipping my toes in its existential peace and accompanying unease. In total surrender I see: Love awaits. Love waits for all.

Trying to stay afloat, we grab on to anything which postpones the ever-pressing question patiently awaiting us in silent darkness on the ocean floor.
Knowing we...

Everpresently Awaiting

How come who is tightest integrated in the uncaring machine is prettiest of all? Suit or dress, a combed hair; perfume and makeup, hygienic and orderly? It's a devilish beauty. The devil doesn't come dressed in pointy horns, but as all our wishes. The insistence on order and obsessive sanitation—it shows a hatred for life. Imbalance! is how you recognize evil. The obedient student, overpromising projects, the impeccable guru. I was the most productive I've ever been during emotional sickness.
It is uncaring because it interferes with individual flourishment, and it is a machine because it lacks a heart. Does it make you feel alive? Then it is living. But most work does not make us feel alive and is therefore not living. Living is feeling, not merely surviving. Let this be a reminder that yes you are a cog, and it is your obligation to set yourself free. That whilst enslaved, hope persists. Every day people escape the suffocating grip.
Beauty is balance. Real beauty is in the form of an adventurous pirate or a forceful warrior—more disorderly than the worker. Salty hair; muscles tanned, sandy feet. Living fully, yet not in anarchy. Beauty is found in between.
How to be free? Brisk walks, loud laughs. Fast runs, a lighter heart. Nature shouts can't you hear? Come n get me, seek me out! Mystery and miracle everywhere. Philosophy should invigorate, not drain and deaden like school. To invite deeper breaths, seeking and striving. Life is hard but living is easy: The hill—climb it over. What’s over there? But it is also here. Right now it is here.

How come who is tightest integrated in the uncaring machine is prettiest of all? Suit or dress, a combed hair; perfume and makeup, hygienic and orderly? It's a...

Koyaanisqatsi

Whenever we hear "I'm an aspiring X," it should call for skepticism. To me it's a tell that X is probably not that person's calling. That they place value on the label—or the valuing of the label—as supposed to the craft itself.
I think we tend to know what we're supposed to do, it's just that oftentimes we don't like the answer. Sometimes, the answer is uncomfortably inconvenient, and maybe not as trendy as we'd like. So we replace it with something more culturally acceptable.
But even if X happens to be our life's purpose, this kind of aspirational signaling remains dysfunctional. You're demonstrating a level of self-awareness required for acknowledging how you're not yet where you seek to be, whilst—ironically—not being self-aware enough to realize that this is what you're actually doing. It tries to signal ambition by leeching off a label's authority, which is really more parasitic than it is ambitious. And it's an attempt at signaling humility through the previously mentioned, halting self-awareness—but to no avail! since premature declaration is the opposite of humility, no matter the prefix. All doublethink aside, truth is we seldom achieve aspirations with our eyes fixed on the label. This should be enough reason to stay out of signaling hell.
Label anxiety seems particularly prevalent in creative fields, where qualifications are vague. Never would anyone call themselves an "aspiring MD"—you either are one, or get away from the operating table! Whereas, the labels "actor," "painter," and "musician" are a lot more ambivalent. But here lies freedom. Why call yourself an aspiring writer when you can simply write?
Language, how troublesome. But what does it matter? what it is called. If it makes you happy, do it now. Picasso couldn't have cared less if you called him a painter, sculptor, or artist. He just did his thing, and so should we.

Whenever we hear "I'm an aspiring X," it should call for skepticism. To me it's a tell that X is probably not that person's calling. That they place value on the...

Forget What It Is Called

Be wary of works that are void of humor, outrageous claims, or short on schizo qualities.
Forget the previous line. Just this: A work's number of jokes is proportional to its level of truth.
This is self-evident and doesn't require any justification.

Be wary of works that are void of humor, outrageous claims, or short on schizo qualities.
Forget the previous line. Just this: A work's number of jokes is...

But is it funny?

I don't want to hear what I said, read what I wrote, think what I thought, or know what I knew.
Today is alive, today brings potential.
This day I want to do something else; express the unsaid, appreciate the unseen, and meet someone new.
The past is passed, the passed is dead.
This day we start anew.

I don't want to hear what I said, read what I wrote, think what I thought, or know what I knew.
Today is alive, today brings potential.
This day I want to do...

This day we start anew

In Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind, author Shunryū Suzuki asks, would you rather be a bad horse, or a good horse?
Naturally, we’d all want to be a good horse.
But—he says—it does not matter what we choose. And the bad horse is also better. This is Zen.
Likewise, bad parents are the best parents. A good childhood does not equip for life.
Parents? Horses? Where are we going?
Here: Imperfection is our carrot.

In Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind, author Shunryū Suzuki asks, would you rather be a bad horse, or a good horse?
Naturally, we’d all want to be a good horse.
But—he...

Bad Horse, Good Horse

It’s the ever-narrower tracks that are working less well: college, jobs, media.
Inertia combined with straight-up outoftouchness.
This is great. The availability of power is shifting from institutions and organizations to the individual.
You no longer need immense wealth, the right surname, or the King’s permission to make change. People can express their selves and test their ideas. You can start a podcast, do business, and speak your mind on social. If you go for it—with ever-increasing probability—you can have it.
A healthy society hinges upon the freedom of its participants to try new stuff. And in this way we’ve never been healthier. The aspiration to do so is another question.

It’s the ever-narrower tracks that are working less well: college, jobs, media.
Inertia combined with straight-up outoftouchness.
This is great. The availability...

Gatekeepers a Dying Breed

Friedrich had been having trouble with finding ground underfoot lately, so in a last attempt to restore some sanity he called up an old friend for advice.
BUDDHA: Yes, this is Buddhahood?
NIETZSCHE: Language, sensations, concepts—at most, these are useful metaphors.
BUDDHA: Amazing—yes go on, please.
NIETZSCHE: Words -
BUDDHA: Thank you.
NIETZSCHE: Words—they provide relations. But to mistake language—a human product—with what is...is nothing short of anthropocentrism.
BUDDHA: Yes.
NIETZSCHE: Concepts arise from the equation of ultimately unequal things. This is where human hubris lives.
BUDDHA: Mmm. Very good. I can sense you are close. But like the forms, you're busy pointing! May I ask, have you ever tried observing?
NIETZSCHE: All perception starts out as nerve stimuli, but at this instance, it—whatever it is—has already left the
thing in itself and turned into representation.
BUDDHA: Have you tried observing this moment? And...this?
NIETZSCHE: The distinction between the general—such as time—and individual instance—such as now—is also dogmatic. If it originates from the nature of things, we cannot know. Nonetheless, I shall do as you ask and observe with my own mind's eye.
BUDDHA: And?
Ans so they were. Not forms, nor conepts. Monistic, eternal—one and forever.

Friedrich had been having trouble with finding ground underfoot lately, so in a last attempt to restore some sanity he called up an old friend for...

Thing-in-itself

Think you have it all figured out yes?
With all your takes and cute little projects.
Don't worry, it'll all disgust you soon.
Relax! You're a fool. We all are.
Now, what silliness will I conjure up today?

Think you have it all figured out yes?
With all your takes and cute little projects.
Don't worry, it'll all disgust you soon.
Relax! You're a fool. We all...

You're Gonna Look Silly

Once upon a time, on a tiny speck. Monkeys became aware, and now they’re depressed.
So off they went, on a meaning quest. Tried with values, grandiose and noble!
And how they searched! But to no avail. They had seen the absurd, and there was no going back.
Hopelessness! Despair! What were their options? To continue as usual? As if nothing had happened?
Never with will—not even death. Unavoidable, unseeable, absurdity prevailed.
Why hold reason to such high regard? When it cannot provide, even meaning for the scarred?
Time is brief, we are not. May I never mistake a hammer for God.

Once upon a time, on a tiny speck. Monkeys became aware, and now they’re depressed.
So off they went, on a meaning quest. Tried with values, grandiose and...

That's Odd

I'm crying as I'm writing this. Nostalgia I guess. It's in moments like these we get to pause. Turn around and look back for a bit.
After three months of solo travel I'm at last leaving for Canada. It has probably been my life's most eventful period yet. What will the next chapter bring?
I'm thinking about my days in grade school—the friends I made. I'm thinking about the trips I've done. The insights they've spurred. Most memories are episodic mundanities. A late-night text exchange, standing up for your friend. Things you didn't think much of but that clung on as emotional passengers.
It is clear what is meaningful in retrospect. Not highs per se. Hard hikes, odd encounters. Moments of dread, courage, love and despair. The challenges. Because whether we turn them around or not, through we nonetheless go. Exiting, here.
Just finished this book Vagabonding. Already thinking about what the next adventure will bring. I want to drive across the US and walk the woods of Canada. I want to surf in Hawaii. I want to speak to melancholic Russians, and do justice to Asia. I want to stroll the savannah, climb Kilimanjaro, and meditate in India. I want to sail to Antarctica. I want to do Ayahuasca in Peru.
It is in moments like these we see how much is happenstance. I have previously understood this, but—for some reason—kept resisting the idea. Now it is clear: I did not decide where to be born... To be born. I did not pick my teachers. I did not choose my single mom or alcoholic dad. My entire childhood, I had virtually no say in what food I ate, activities I did, or people I met. But I am forever grateful. I thank it all.
So much that has shaped me, I did not choose. How to claim agency? Because I am you, and you are me. Not everything happens for a reason, but reason makes everything happen. May this not slip my mind. But when it does, may it peacefully rearise and everything is going to be okay. As it is, already.

I'm crying as I'm writing this. Nostalgia I guess. It's in moments like these we get to pause. Turn around and look back for a bit.
After three months of solo...

I'm Leaving

We head to work like we've never heard of sex, sadness, or shitting. All neocortex, survival but a story. Not afraid, never confused. Not secretly dying to know whether everyone else is simply faking it. No sir.
Industrial society has taken on a life of its own that can only be appropriately described as parasitism. We're embarrassed by our own condition and look up to technology because it's clean and predictable. It's made us adopt its goals in preference to our own. Technology's our god and the robot our hero: does exactly what it's told, without complications.
We're messy, vulnerable creatures. But as much as we'd like to, our true nature cannot be overridden after a mere couple of hundred years. Being human is embarrassing—but only if we suppress it. Embracing it, one finds real beauty in it.

We head to work like we've never heard of sex, sadness, or shitting. All neocortex, survival but a story. Not afraid, never confused. Not secretly dying to know...

The Urban Animal

You're fucked and I don't mean it in a derogatory way.
You know how your brain automatically ignores your nose if you don't consciously focus on it, but you can see everyone else's perfectly clear?
It's obvious how your neighbor has character flaws. It is obvious how your mom self-sabotages. You could destroy your friend in a sentence.
Everyone has demons, but why is it so goddamn hard to see our own? We like to think we see them. How could you know? that you're not blind to blindness like every other fool?
Get some upright friends.

You're fucked and I don't mean it in a derogatory way.
You know how your brain automatically ignores your nose if you don't consciously focus on it, but you can...

Eyes on the Nose

"No!" he mimed. Gazing over the lake surrounded by silent trees. This is magic, he thought. Weird, even. Emotion colours the mind in such unusual ways.
"Follow me, will you? It's no longer occupied." Once again, she turned around to the table in the opposite end of the boathouse pier and stood there waiting for him with a smile.
He didn't. For some reason, this table in the shade felt just right. Why didn't she understand? Not that it angered him. But, the fact that half the restaurant was now becoming aware of their act—did. And the fact that that did—really did. So actually, you could say it drove him fucking mad.
He returned to the lake for consultation. Looking; but it wasn't as beautiful as the previous minute. That's it. Getting up from his chair. He approached her, avoiding eye contact, "if you're gonna be this stubborn I'll leave right now. I'm not even hungry—I've eaten twice already."
"No, I want this to be nice, it is our last day together."
The pasta was now all over the stove with water running down the floor. He turned, substituting her for the lake that had now joined the trees in silence.
"I can't see why it's such a big deal, the table's much nicer," she said as they finally sat down in the shade. "What's the matter with you? Why aren't you answering? It's not nice."
"Answer what?" he retorted, almost hypnotized.
"Well, I'm speaking to you—I asked you a question."
"Mm...no you didn't? Whatdya ask?" Now a bit nicer.
"Why you didn't want to sit in the sun?" Remarkably, still with a smile on her face.
"Is this what you want to discuss before I leave?"
"HellohowmayIhelpyou?" the young waitress asked in a way only someone who has said it a thousand times can.
"Hello! Haven't got to look at the menu yet but-"
"Meatballs and still water, thank you." Handing over his menu.
"Okay, I'll have the same then." Following up with an insecure—and, under regular circumstances, amusing—laughter.
The waitress retrieved the menu from under the girl's heavy palms and left them observing air in silence. A bypasser would've thought they were attending a funeral right after.
Yes, he was leaving tomorrow, but not now. The lake had shown him. It was eternity, and everything was sparkling. She was sparkling.
"I'm sorry."

"No!" he mimed. Gazing over the lake surrounded by silent trees. This is magic, he thought. Weird, even. Emotion colours the mind in such unusual ways.
"Follow...

The Lake

Potential: More a moon,
than everglowing star.
At times deeply hidden -
how murky clouds, they are!
Sometimes others see,
and we? No, nothing at all.
It calls for unraveling,
in our own mind's eye.
Ha! Prefer blind traveling?
Think I'd rather die!
I, my own cheerleader,
as well as worst critic.
Seeing what could be,
and oh, so far a way.
This is my journey.
I mustn't go astray.

Potential: More a moon,
than everglowing star.
At times deeply hidden -
how murky clouds, they are!
Sometimes others see,
and we? No, nothing at all.
It calls...

Making One's Way

Different is not the same as better, it's better than better.
Consider mediocrity. Simply going about things differently isn't such a terrible strategy.
When something's different, contemporary yardsticks won't do. Playing the long game however, you may get to witness the yardsticks adapt. And now different is better.
Or maybe you won't. Hey: at least you weren't boring. Boring's badder than bad.

Different is not the same as better, it's better than better.
Consider mediocrity. Simply going about things differently isn't such a terrible strategy.
When...

Different, Not Better

Frida Kahlo and Thomas Edison sat down at a table at the local restaurant, awaiting the waitress.
EDISON: How fun of you to swing by, but I have got to be frank. Whilst your paintings move me, I struggle to see; what's it for?
KAHLO: The purpose of art is art.
EDISON: What silliness! It's a means to an end—not an end in itself. Entertainment! and so on, and so forth.
KAHLO: Tell me, what's this "end?" Is capturing states of consciousness an end? Each artwork is another swing at switching our stagnant brain's gear. It is telepathy—the sharing of consciousness.
EDISON: What is it with you artists and pseudoscientific terms? Telepathy, ha! You sound like my worker Tesla.
KAHLO: Upon consuming another state of mind, some part of our own has to die—has it not?
EDISON: I reckon, in some way it has. In order to make space for it, that is. Nonetheless, a painting will never help me get across the country as a locomotive will. It is a dysfunctional form of innovation.
KAHLO: But you said it yourself! The paintings moved you. Is this dysfunctional? I consider it the ultimate mover.
WAITRESS: Hello—would you like to order something to drink? Appetizer, perhaps?
EDISON: Yes, I wou-
KAHLO: A glass of red wine, thank you. But I doubt this gentleman would like anything. It won't get him across the country after all!

Frida Kahlo and Thomas Edison sat down at a table at the local restaurant, awaiting the waitress.
EDISON: How fun of you to swing by, but I have got to be frank....

Art a Dysfunction?

It's what you see in others
From which you think you're exempt
But the unconscious bothers
Feeling unworthy
Tripping yourself up
A human without shortcomings
Would be not
Rising what's lurking
For a life of our making
To shine light underground
This is the undertaking

It's what you see in others
From which you think you're exempt
But the unconscious bothers
Feeling unworthy
Tripping yourself up
A human without...

Shining Light Underground

If you're somewhat smart (in the conventional sense of the word), there's a big trap of conformity. You're expected to tread one of a handful laid out paths.
To go to the same good school, chase the same career, live in the same area. And when someone bright doesn't walk a preset path, we say "what a waste!"
<blockquote>
But you might wanna think about going to Paris and being a poet for a few years
<cite><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPbcM5N5Sqg">—Steve Jobs</a></cite>
</blockquote>
Having the same set of experiences as everyone else, we're gonna make the same connections (and feel dead). It can't be a coincidence that expression is linguistically opposite to depression. To be liked by many for a shell, or loved for your core by a few. To express or depress one's self. These are the choices we have.
If reality is what is, and 'realistic' everything in its proximity—who gets to decide what is near? Who's job is it to bring closer that which is far? At least some have got to be bold.
What do you think? Not your parents, not your neighbor, not your president. The potential of our future is threatened by the degree we let an external government replace our internal governing.
To fear selfhood is natural, but to lose it, we should fear more. An arm or leg is violent, losing ourselves is silent. Rediscovering ourselves, then, becomes a task by contrast. So we drown in the herd, perceiving selfhood too risky. Becoming a copy in quiet desperation.
<blockquote>
He feels best, considers himself to be healthiest, can appear to others to be in the pink of condition, just when the illness is at its most critical.
<cite>—Søren Kierkegaard</cite>
</blockquote>
Everyone is capable of hiding, but to be—unapologetically—only you can do. And one of the best feelings there is, is doing the whole poet-in-Paris thing, and then putting something back in the pool.

If you're somewhat smart (in the conventional sense of the word), there's a big trap of conformity. You're expected to tread one of a handful laid out paths.
To...

Putting Back In the Pool

Great movies are as much about stories
As they are about ourselves
Fiction's about being human
And we read because it teaches us
Great art makes us feel heard
Less alone
It sympathizes and enlightens
Imitates
And we watch because it is us

Great movies are as much about stories
As they are about ourselves
Fiction's about being human
And we read because it teaches us
Great art makes us feel...

We Watch Because It Is Us

Some are birds, others are frogs.
<blockquote>
Birds fly high in the air...out to the far horizon.
Frogs live in the mud below and see only the flowers that grow nearby.
<cite>—Freeman Dyson</cite>
</blockquote>
Society incentivizes frogness in the short-term, whilst birds are naturally considered ungrounded. But a world that is detailed and large, needs both frogs and birds.
<blockquote>
It makes no sense to claim that birds are better than frogs because they see farther, or that frogs are better than birds because they see deeper.
</blockquote>
Maybe you feel like society isn't structured to fit your persona. Hey, maybe you're not meant to be a frog.

Some are birds, others are frogs.

Birds fly high in the air...out to the far horizon.
Frogs live in the mud below and see only the flowers that grow...

Maybe You're Not a Frog

A karate kid walked up to the black belt and asked excitedly, "how do I get as good as thou?"
"Ah, there's not much to it" said the black belt. "It's just practice. But do not bother, you will give up soon."
"You watch! I'll invent new kicks, do moves never imagined. I'll become the greatest master who's ever lived! I'll show you." said the beginner.
Ten years later the beginner received his black belt. A white-belt walked up to him:
"Oh master, how do I get as good as thou?"
"Practice 12 hours a day for ten years straight, and you may receive a black belt like me."
The white-belt did as told. After ten years he too recieved a black belt. With a scissor he instantly cut it in half and went on to become a musician.
He was now the greatest karate master who had ever lived.

A karate kid walked up to the black belt and asked excitedly, "how do I get as good as thou?"
"Ah, there's not much to it" said the black belt. "It's just...

The Master Beginner

There are fighters
And there are apathetics
Troublemaking winners
And lazy losers
There are those who don’t fight, and still succeed
Do not declare war, neither surrender!
They are the non-competing
Still and happy
The ultimate winners

There are fighters
And there are apathetics
Troublemaking winners
And lazy losers
There are those who don’t fight, and still succeed
Do not declare war, neither...

Ultimate Winners

We seek completion yet there is none.
Anticipating arrival but it’s always forgone.
No destination, and never will be.
An everlasting journey, is all there could be!
Depressing? Grudging?
You do the judging.
We make our own meaning. Don’t you see?
Suffering we can transcend.
But never forget: there isn't an end.
It may seem absurd—perhaps make you vengeful?
Ultimately, there's nothing more meaningful.

We seek completion yet there is none.
Anticipating arrival but it’s always forgone.
No destination, and never will be.
An everlasting journey, is all there could...

The Myth of Arrival

Progress, in the midst of it, seldom feels like it.
Looking back personally, the most valuable lessons have always come from chaos. When you're seemingly effed.
On the flip side, successes seldom change you for the better.
But having internalized this, we can remind ourselves in those darker moments: It is now I grow.
It's hard to remember of course. Part of me still doubts every time: “This can’t possibly turn out good.” And yet, things have their way of sorting themselves out if you let them.

Progress, in the midst of it, seldom feels like it.
Looking back personally, the most valuable lessons have always come from chaos. When you're seemingly...

Life Was Messy and It Was So

I just discovered Santa Claus doesn’t exist. And by Santa Claus I mean adults. Adults do not exist.
The other day I witnessed a man die. He was a neighbor of mine and we had had a pretty good relationship.
As I sat down by his hospital bed, I felt relief. He was 95 years old and had been suffering lately. But I primarily felt uniquely present. Once again I was reminded. This shit ends. How we live out our days like we have an endless supply. As if we’ll always get another chance. We won’t. We know we won’t—some moment will have to be our last. But we forget in humdrum. Except for in certain moments. Like in the presence of death.
As I walked out of the hospital room, having said goodbye, one visitor asked the doctor if the dying are able to hear us when we address them? The doctor replied, “They say that semi-conscious people can actually hear others, even if they are unable to speak themselves.” The visitor smiled, nodded and left.
“THEY SAY.” Who are they? Presumably people who have thought about the brain a lot. Researchers, academics. Can you really know what someone’s subjective experience is through a brain scan? I reckoned it could give you a hint. Then I also nodded and left.
So much of civilized human experience relies on people knowing what to do, how to do it, and when. We have made an abstraction of this which we call “adults.”
An “adult” is someone responsible. Someone who you can rely on and who can answer your questions. Someone who gets things done and knows how stuff works.
When the car gets broken down, we call the competent mechanic to fix it for us. In social unrest we turn on the TV and listen to experts to tell us what's up. When our beloved is dying, we turn to the doctor for status reports. To answer our questions.
It seems like we are surrounded by adults. But let's for a moment think about what we do not see. What you don't see is that the skilled car mechanic is also clueless with women.
That the confident news anchor on TV recently had a fight with her husband and is now living with her mother. That the knowledgeable doctor who you turned to for answers is depressed, prays to God every single night, and is as clueless as you about what death really entails.
We do not see these things because people never share them. They are what we call “private.” Modern man lives a doubled life: one private, one public.
At home we get to do what we like. Watch our embarrassing TV-shows, dance shamelessly, sing and cry. We get to be ourselves. But the moment we step out our front door, a shell is put on. A shell in the form of achievements, conveniently hiding our flaws. We turn “professional.”
We smile and tell everyone about what’s going so great in our lives. Never revealing our innermost content, because that would make us vulnerable. Consequently, we perceive everyone as flawless, happy human beings. Whereas we can only verify how untrue that is for ourselves.
Living this sort of doubled life is very unfortunate for everyone’s—but especially our own—wellbeing. Because whilst comfortable to conceal large chunks of ourselves in the moment, it will ultimately make us feel, what you might choose to call, "unwhole.” Superficial. A fraud always on the verge of being found out. Not being ourselves. Never finding ourselves.
Not suggesting we should dance naked in the streets and tell our deepest secrets to strangers. Most likely, that’s not something you’d identify with neither. Instead, we might propose bringing the public and private self closer. Maybe they can meet somewhere in the middle.
This might mean letting loose a bit more in public, and at the same time taking your alone time more seriously. To reveal something embarrassing you did yesterday to your co-worker, and read a novel instead of watching TV before bed. Maybe even contemplate death à la the stoics. Internalizing the scarcity of life provides a great deal of courage—like for opening up.
Yesterday I realized the adult is a lie. An unreachable abstraction. Everyone we like to think of as happy, perfect human beings, we probably need to spend some more time around. A genius is someone we haven’t got to know yet.
But it is through bridging the gap between our two selves that we can mature. Not wearing a shell as a fear response, but instead cultivating a personality that is somewhat constant throughout environments, regardless of who’s watching. To become whole. This is what it should mean to become an adult.

I just discovered Santa Claus doesn’t exist. And by Santa Claus I mean adults. Adults do not exist.
The other day I witnessed a man die. He was a neighbor of...

The Adult Is a Lie

You can reach me on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/gdbroman">@gdbroman</a>, or on Urbit as <code>~lopsyp-doztun</code>, if you have questions or ideas.
Thank you for reading.

You can reach me on Twitter @gdbroman, or on Urbit as ~lopsyp-doztun, if you have questions or ideas.
Thank you for reading.


Hey friend, I'm Gus

To Make Bets You Must Be Bold