If this is all downstream of a small and relatively well-off group of high frequency posters (some of our elected officials among them), that would suggest what we might call an ‘elite radicalization’ theory of online politics. The idea is that social media has empowered a (relatively) small group of political influencers who, in response to the... See more
1. Most founders are bad at growth, so if you're amazing at it, the advantage is significant.
Consider: Most startups die not because founders are bad or products suck, but because they couldn't figure out how to get anyone to try them.
The difference becomes clear in how the feed responds to your behavior. Let’s say you click on a note about climate policy. In the old two-tower system, this single interaction would contribute minimally to your overall profile, especially if climate wasn’t already one of your core subscription topics. The model’s simplistic averaging approach... See more
Ownership = upside + control
It also equals risk, sleepless nights, opportunity costs, responsibility, working for little to no pay, tolerance for uncertainty.
To share the upside, you have to share the downside too.
Everyone wants to cook but nobody wants to do... See more
Above all, Sloman seems to be arguing for thinking through the practical implications of one’s beliefs.
Most issues can be framed in terms of the consequences they produce. Rather than asking whether it is right or wrong to, say, allow people to carry concealed weapons, we can ask what the consequences of such a policy would be. And asserting a... See more
The system always balances its books eventually. The more we optimize individual experiences for frictionlessness, the more collectively dysfunctional our systems become. All three worlds are interlocked in this economy of friction