与「disruptive」相关的搜索结果

$LMND is in a war most investors still don’t understand. Not just a war for customers. A war for narrative. A war for credibility. And ultimately, a war for its cost of capital. That matters because public markets do not merely observe a company’s trajectory. They can shape it. A company with a trusted narrative gets patience, liquidity, talent, strategic freedom, and cheaper capital. A company trapped inside the wrong narrative pays a tax on every ambition. Lemonade is still widely framed by many as an unproven, money-losing insurtech experiment. But the operating data has been moving in the opposite direction. IFP is growing. Revenue is accelerating. Gross profit is scaling. Loss ratios have improved materially. Cash flow is inflecting. The company is no longer asking investors to believe in a concept. It is increasingly asking them to reconcile their old model with new facts. And I have seen this movie before. First with Apple. Then with Tesla. In both cases, the market spent years debating the wrong questions while the business quietly answered the important ones. The consensus kept focusing on what the company used to be, or what incumbents wanted it to be, while the operating model kept compounding underneath. Lemonade is not Apple. Lemonade is not Tesla. But the pattern is familiar: a misunderstood company, a disruptive operating model, a hostile narrative environment, and a widening gap between perception and execution. That gap is where the opportunity lives. I have spent twenty years studying disruption as an investor. I also spent twenty years inside financial markets infrastructure, transformation, and business management. Those two tracks have rarely felt as connected as they do here. This is not about blind faith. It is about pattern recognition, operating evidence, market structure, and narrative reflexivity. The short interest is not the thesis. The business is the thesis. But when a company is executing and the market remains anchored to an outdated story, narrative becomes part of the battleground. And when that narrative affects valuation, liquidity, and cost of capital, it becomes more than noise. It becomes strategic. I am long $LMND because I believe the market is still underestimating the scale of what is being built. I could be wrong. That is always possible. And I invite the scrutiny. But I know what this setup looks like. And I know how rare it is. So strap in. Because history may not repeat itself. But it all too often rhymes.

Battlefield 6: Stream Snipers Can Now Receive VAC Bans Battlefield 6’s latest anti-cheat update expands enforcement beyond traditional cheating software. Players engaging in the following behaviors may face penalties, including VAC bans on Steam: - Stream sniping - Match manipulation - Win-trading - Team sabotage - Vehicle spawn blocking - Collusion with players on the opposing team - Targeted harassment of streamers and content creators Battlefield 6 uses new machine learning systems to detect these offenses by identifying repeated patterns of disruptive behavior. Enforcement focuses on repeated and intentional behavior patterns rather than isolated incidents. Confirmed offenders can receive both Battlefield-specific punishments and VAC bans visible on their Steam profiles.

While there’s a lot being written about the Supreme Court decisions on tariffs, I wanted to take a moment to step back and clearly lay out my thoughts on them. Many people think of tariffs as purely disruptive, but throughout history, they’ve been a primary source of government revenue. In an ideal world, you wouldn’t have tariffs — each country would make and trade the things they are capable of producing efficiently. But as the world becomes increasingly fragmented, we have to look beyond pure economic efficiency and consider the necessity of self-sufficiency. For that reason, tariffs are anything but simple. To understand who truly benefits and who pays the price, you have to look at the full system.

It is hard to communicate how much programming has changed due to AI in the last 2 months: not gradually and over time in the "progress as usual" way, but specifically this last December. There are a number of asterisks but imo coding agents basically didn’t work before December and basically work since - the models have significantly higher quality, long-term coherence and tenacity and they can power through large and long tasks, well past enough that it is extremely disruptive to the default programming workflow. Just to give an example, over the weekend I was building a local video analysis dashboard for the cameras of my home so I wrote: “Here is the local IP and username/password of my DGX Spark. Log in, set up ssh keys, set up vLLM, download and bench Qwen3-VL, set up a server endpoint to inference videos, a basic web ui dashboard, test everything, set it up with systemd, record memory notes for yourself and write up a markdown report for me”. The agent went off for ~30 minutes, ran into multiple issues, researched solutions online, resolved them one by one, wrote the code, tested it, debugged it, set up the services, and came back with the report and it was just done. I didn’t touch anything. All of this could easily have been a weekend project just 3 months ago but today it’s something you kick off and forget about for 30 minutes. As a result, programming is becoming unrecognizable. You’re not typing computer code into an editor like the way things were since computers were invented, that era is over. You're spinning up AI agents, giving them tasks *in English* and managing and reviewing their work in parallel. The biggest prize is in figuring out how you can keep ascending the layers of abstraction to set up long-running orchestrator Claws with all of the right tools, memory and instructions that productively manage multiple parallel Code instances for you. The leverage achievable via top tier "agentic engineering" feels very high right now. It’s not perfect, it needs high-level direction, judgement, taste, oversight, iteration and hints and ideas. It works a lot better in some scenarios than others (e.g. especially for tasks that are well-specified and where you can verify/test functionality). The key is to build intuition to decompose the task just right to hand off the parts that work and help out around the edges. But imo, this is nowhere near "business as usual" time in software.

A very Happy Thanksgiving salutation to all of our Great American Citizens and Patriots who have been so nice in allowing our Country to be divided, disrupted, carved up, murdered, beaten, mugged, and laughed at, along with certain other foolish countries throughout the World, for being “Politically Correct,” and just plain STUPID, when it comes to Immigration. The official United States Foreign population stands at 53 million people (Census), most of which are on welfare, from failed nations, or from prisons, mental institutions, gangs, or drug cartels. They and their children are supported through massive payments from Patriotic American Citizens who, because of their beautiful hearts, do not want to openly complain or cause trouble in any way, shape, or form. They put up with what has happened to our Country, but it’s eating them alive to do so! A migrant earning $30,000 with a green card will get roughly $50,000 in yearly benefits for their family. The real migrant population is much higher. This refugee burden is the leading cause of social dysfunction in America, something that did not exist after World War II (Failed schools, high crime, urban decay, overcrowded hospitals, housing shortages, and large deficits, etc.). As an example, hundreds of thousands of refugees from Somalia are completely taking over the once great State of Minnesota. Somalian gangs are roving the streets looking for “prey” as our wonderful people stay locked in their apartments and houses hoping against hope that they will be left alone. The seriously retarded Governor of Minnesota, Tim Walz, does nothing, either through fear, incompetence, or both, while the worst “Congressman/woman” in our Country, Ilhan Omar, always wrapped in her swaddling hijab, and who probably came into the U.S.A. illegally in that you are not allowed to marry your brother, does nothing but hatefully complain about our Country, its Constitution, and how “badly” she is treated, when her place of origin is a decadent, backward, and crime ridden nation, which is essentially not even a country for lack of Government, Military, Police, schools, etc. Even as we have progressed technologically, Immigration Policy has eroded those gains and living conditions for many. I will permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries to allow the U.S. system to fully recover, terminate all of the millions of Biden illegal admissions, including those signed by Sleepy Joe Biden’s Autopen, and remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States, or is incapable of loving our Country, end all Federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens of our Country, denaturalize migrants who undermine domestic tranquility, and deport any Foreign National who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western Civilization. These goals will be pursued with the aim of achieving a major reduction in illegal and disruptive populations, including those admitted through an unauthorized and illegal Autopen approval process. Only REVERSE MIGRATION can fully cure this situation. Other than that, HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL, except those that hate, steal, murder, and destroy everything that America stands for — You won’t be here for long!

Ok, a few reflections on the book: 1. qntm defines antimemes as self-erasing information, but this book has a different (but related) definition of the concept: antimemes are (a) high-impact and (b) low transmissibility. Roughly, they are "important secrets". 2. The low transmissibility can be because the ideas are dense/difficult to understand (e.g. Moldbug's blog posts), or taboo/socially forbidden, or transient in some way (e.g. daylight savings time annoys people once a year, then we all forget about it example). Thus, these ideas tend to thrive in group chats and small networks of dedicated/passionate people. Eventually, the burst onto the public consciousness, sometimes in disruptive ways. 3. Original ideas are inherently antimemetic: they're very hard to transmit at first because you don't have the right language to talk about them, and they're easy to forget. This is why so few people have them at all. The most important ideas start as antimemes. 4. Generative small groups are the optimal environment for new ideas to arise and be developed. 5. Nadia defines "supermemes" as high impact / *high* transmissibility. Supermemes often present as apocalyptic in some way -- if you don't listen to this, you might literally die. Hence climate change, AI risk, war/nationalism as all cited as example supermemes. The book is very suspicious of supermemes: they suck up everyone's attention and time and result in very little constructive action; they are parasites. 5(a). "Memes" are low impact / high transmissibility. Think cat videos or brief flash-in-the-pan cultural moments that get forgotten quickly. 6. The book points out that there's often a clear "patient zero" for important ideas in the discourse: e.g. Nick C. with the jhanas, Venkatesh Rao popularizing Scott's "Seeing Like a State", and various other 'patient zeros' for now-important ideas are discussed. Ideas that survive often have Champions who talk about them persistently for many years. 7. There's a fun discussion of memetic/information warfare, and how preference cascades can be best understood. A great way to spread antimemes is to form private groups around them but not make the existence of those groups public, and have individual members of the group sometimes promote the ideas in a way that looks uncorrelated. Makes it seem that the support for the idea is more widespread than it might be initially. Eventually you reach a tipping point where it becomes socially ok to express that idea. 8. The Hayekian case for capitalism is an antimeme. Whereas communism is a supermeme: the ideas are very intuitive to everyone, unlike with capitalism where you need a lot of logic to understand how it works and why things end up being better over time. This explains why economists are so resigned to being perennially misunderstood: economic ideas are just quite hard to understand! Luckily, capitalism (a) works (b) can hook into people's greed, and so it survives, even though comparatively few people understand why. 9. It's a fun exercise to identify ideas that are 'on the cusp' / in the dark forest right now, but aren't quite fully acceptable to say out loud yet. I can think of quite a few. 10. Part of the implicit challenge of the book is "what good ideas will you be the champion of?" and "stop thinking so much about dumb culture war stuff and form more small groups to develop and propagandize the actual good ideas!". So even though the book laments the death of the open web, I also read it as pro group chat. 11. Some meta points: it's refreshing to read something that's written like a blog post, but in book form; almost all non-fiction is written in the same journalistic voice nowadays, but this one just gets to the point and packs an impressive number of insights per page. It's also great to read a book that cites the current intellectual scene, more or less as it's happening (most of the citations are URLs to blog posts). 12. Going beyond the book: many words and stories function as containers for ideas that are too complex to be put into legible language. The story of Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac in the Bible (Genesis 22) for example, is not merely a carrier for the idea "you should obey God unquestioningly". The story is more than that, but it's hard to say how except by meditating on it a lot and making it a part of yourself. Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling, one of my favorite books, is about this: the narrator, a non-believer, tries to explain the Abraham story several different ways and through various conceptual lenses (universal ethics, etc.), and concludes that it's fundamentally inexplicable in plain language. Thus the need for 'faith'. I view this as saying that the idea underlying this is real, but too high-dimensional to be flattened into any kind of explanation; it must instead be felt viscerally. Many of the most important ideas are like this.

🚨 RESPECT ORDERS - You don’t need to break the law to be criminalised in Britain. You just need to annoy the wrong person. The government is pushing through something called a Respect Order, part of the new Crime and Policing Bill now moving through Parliament. Respect Orders are civil, not criminal, so they don’t require a jury or criminal standard of proof. Just someone saying you’re causing a nuisance, even online! 
If someone complains, that you're too loud, too disruptive, too opinionated, you can be banned from: ▪️Posting on social media ▪️Attending a protest ▪️Speaking in a public place ▪️Even entering certain areas All without ever being charged with a crime. And if you break the order?
well … that’s a crime. You could be fined, arrested, or jailed for up to two years. It’s pre-crime policing and It’s about control, not safety. It’s a ban on dissent.

Join us as Issa Rae, Monique Francis, Talitha Watkins, Montrel McKay, and Stephanie Diaz-Matos head to the @Variety Entertainment Marketing Summit to have a conversation on how @HOORAEMedia’s, @TheRaedio’s, and @CoCreMgmt’s synergy & disruptive storytelling are making an impact!

I first read this book about Seymour Cray and the supercomputer space a couple decades ago. Rereading it now, with some big-company experience and after the extended-and-disappointing Rage development at Id makes me feel even more kinship with Seymour. The ability to start each engineering project with a clean sheet of paper and build something new and incompatible can, given the right people, be magical and move things forward rapidly. But if you are successful, eventually you reach a point where that is no longer the winning strategy, and incremental, compatible changes are optimal for larger goals. You either need to adapt to that, or move to another problem space that is more ripe for disruptive engineering innovation. The fact that Cray was still sharp and working hard at 71 is also inspiring!