What you’ve written resonates deeply. I’m one of the people who walked away from systems that optimized institutions or profit over purpose and instead built one grounded in restoration, discernment, and generational renewal.
We don’t need more clever tools, we need more whole humans.
That’s what I work on. Happy to share what I’ve learned if the tribe is gathering.
Couldn’t agree more! It’s so seductive to build just for building’s sake.
I’m hopeful that AI will lower the barriers that have divided the social sciences from STEM and create a new generation of builders that put people first - and not just from a “good UX/UI” perspective
I had a similar vision recently while I’m writing https://yixiuer.substack.com/p/next-gen-compute-platform. Just like what Albert Einstein said “Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Yes, I am working specifically on this sort of destination awareness in some of my projects: "Every builder’s first duty is philosophical: to decide what they should build for. This duty has largely been forgotten."
We need to enable, teach, and empower those to be able to do this. Time is of the essence, as pace and acceleration of certain aspects of our lives are rushing ahead, as others stand still, or appear to go backwards. How can we develop thinkers, doers, and builders within this context? That's a major challenge of our shared moment.
My take away from this is personal responsibility. It is so easy to despair that the tech elite have already defined what will be (by using their power to cement certain ideologies).
But if Benjamin Franklin could democratize learning at a time when clergy and state had such a monopoly and firm grip on learning, truly all you need as a philosopher builder is to not back down.
Take it upon yourself to challenge the norm if whatever small or big way.
As AI lowers the barriers to entry, we’ll likely see more people from the humanities shaping the design of our technological system, hopefully embedding Enlightenment ideals in the Humboldtian sense: technologies that minimize coercion and protect the freedom to inquire and create.
At the same time, we’re witnessing the rise of a new elite class in big tech… consolidating power and often promoting ideologies fundamentally at odds with democratic principles (Curtis Yarvin comes to mind).
The tension between these two trajectories will define much of what’s to come!
I agree with this sentiment. It feels like what they are trying to do with Khan academy. It makes me wonder what ideologies are represented within design when there isn't this step of mindfulness you're advocating for? Are there ways to spot these engineered heedlessness's?
I want to build for meta-analysis and polycentric considerations, to help minimize risk of biased logic.
I will build for an egoless society, which means allowing people to travel, live, and contribute to their environment without relying on traditional means (such as family, accumulated wealth, a CV...)
When society doesn't require this to function, it becomes pointless to do it.
The invisible hand of self-interest cannot be ignored. Yet, this philosopher-builder appears to challenge it. I believe that the notion of business owners prioritizing human flourishing above their own self-interest is an idealistic belief.
An adaptive and emergent approach is always in effect; it operates continuously, whether in the realm of planned order (taxis) or spontaneous order (cosmos).
Democracy and republican systems have arisen less from the vision of individual founders like Benjamin Franklin and more from a dynamic process driven by technological change, journalistic scrutiny, and the continual adjustment of self-interest within institutions. Their emergence reflects society’s adaptive evolution, rather than the design or influence of any one person.
Awesome! Yep, we modeled the ultimate futures for 3y+ - turns out it's possible with just one assumption: non-forcing - people don't like being forced and so they'll make all of those things optional
We're pretty sure the best ethical ultimate future will have the direct democratic simulated multiverse as an optional video game. We shared a lot about how it looks, with photos and videos, the mechanics of being there, ethicalized computational physics of it, how to start profitably building it (half a dozen unicorn startups ideas), everything really
I think this piece also speaks to a quiet tension for a lot of us if we are frank about it, and it is how to hold onto our academic and scholarly fervor and translate it into a business.
I've been a vox clamantis in deserto for the past 12 years, ever since I quit my history PhD program and became a software engineer. I left the Bay Area precisely because of the "building unicorns" culture that you describe here. I needed something more, but I didn't find it.
Building startups without that philosophical grounding has been deeply demoralizing. I always dreamed of building big things, but I lacked precisely this kind of community. Your clarion call is galvanizing.
Clinging to old systems is futile—their time has passed. Wisdom is not imprisoned in books or broken structures. Let them burn, and trust the living to carry forward what must evolve. Your words are beautiful, but without rare evolutionary minds to architect and implement, they remain only echoes of what must come next.
What you’ve written resonates deeply. I’m one of the people who walked away from systems that optimized institutions or profit over purpose and instead built one grounded in restoration, discernment, and generational renewal.
We don’t need more clever tools, we need more whole humans.
That’s what I work on. Happy to share what I’ve learned if the tribe is gathering.
We don’t need more smart people, we need more compassionate people.
Couldn’t agree more! It’s so seductive to build just for building’s sake.
I’m hopeful that AI will lower the barriers that have divided the social sciences from STEM and create a new generation of builders that put people first - and not just from a “good UX/UI” perspective
Absolutely! My view is that we need to start encouraging a building (rather a measuring, correcting, or policing) imagination early. We have the tools to better envision with AI. Imagine new worlds! https://hollisrobbinsanecdotal.substack.com/p/toward-science-fiction-education
I had a similar vision recently while I’m writing https://yixiuer.substack.com/p/next-gen-compute-platform. Just like what Albert Einstein said “Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.”
Yes, I am working specifically on this sort of destination awareness in some of my projects: "Every builder’s first duty is philosophical: to decide what they should build for. This duty has largely been forgotten."
We need to enable, teach, and empower those to be able to do this. Time is of the essence, as pace and acceleration of certain aspects of our lives are rushing ahead, as others stand still, or appear to go backwards. How can we develop thinkers, doers, and builders within this context? That's a major challenge of our shared moment.
This post is worth a read: https://thegrandredesign.substack.com/p/ai-and-the-future-of-human-autonomy
My take away from this is personal responsibility. It is so easy to despair that the tech elite have already defined what will be (by using their power to cement certain ideologies).
But if Benjamin Franklin could democratize learning at a time when clergy and state had such a monopoly and firm grip on learning, truly all you need as a philosopher builder is to not back down.
Take it upon yourself to challenge the norm if whatever small or big way.
Timely and well-articulated piece.
As AI lowers the barriers to entry, we’ll likely see more people from the humanities shaping the design of our technological system, hopefully embedding Enlightenment ideals in the Humboldtian sense: technologies that minimize coercion and protect the freedom to inquire and create.
At the same time, we’re witnessing the rise of a new elite class in big tech… consolidating power and often promoting ideologies fundamentally at odds with democratic principles (Curtis Yarvin comes to mind).
The tension between these two trajectories will define much of what’s to come!
Thank you!
I agree with this sentiment. It feels like what they are trying to do with Khan academy. It makes me wonder what ideologies are represented within design when there isn't this step of mindfulness you're advocating for? Are there ways to spot these engineered heedlessness's?
I want to build for meta-analysis and polycentric considerations, to help minimize risk of biased logic.
I will build for an egoless society, which means allowing people to travel, live, and contribute to their environment without relying on traditional means (such as family, accumulated wealth, a CV...)
When society doesn't require this to function, it becomes pointless to do it.
The invisible hand of self-interest cannot be ignored. Yet, this philosopher-builder appears to challenge it. I believe that the notion of business owners prioritizing human flourishing above their own self-interest is an idealistic belief.
An adaptive and emergent approach is always in effect; it operates continuously, whether in the realm of planned order (taxis) or spontaneous order (cosmos).
Democracy and republican systems have arisen less from the vision of individual founders like Benjamin Franklin and more from a dynamic process driven by technological change, journalistic scrutiny, and the continual adjustment of self-interest within institutions. Their emergence reflects society’s adaptive evolution, rather than the design or influence of any one person.
Awesome! Yep, we modeled the ultimate futures for 3y+ - turns out it's possible with just one assumption: non-forcing - people don't like being forced and so they'll make all of those things optional
We're pretty sure the best ethical ultimate future will have the direct democratic simulated multiverse as an optional video game. We shared a lot about how it looks, with photos and videos, the mechanics of being there, ethicalized computational physics of it, how to start profitably building it (half a dozen unicorn startups ideas), everything really
Great essay - one clarification: ARPANET was designed to allow command and control survivability in a nuclear exchange:
I think this piece also speaks to a quiet tension for a lot of us if we are frank about it, and it is how to hold onto our academic and scholarly fervor and translate it into a business.
Where have y'all been my whole career?
I've been a vox clamantis in deserto for the past 12 years, ever since I quit my history PhD program and became a software engineer. I left the Bay Area precisely because of the "building unicorns" culture that you describe here. I needed something more, but I didn't find it.
Building startups without that philosophical grounding has been deeply demoralizing. I always dreamed of building big things, but I lacked precisely this kind of community. Your clarion call is galvanizing.
Hello, thank you for inspiring.
I think you will find this interesting https://chrisperkins505.medium.com/the-ghost-in-the-machine-76f4b43f07ff
Clinging to old systems is futile—their time has passed. Wisdom is not imprisoned in books or broken structures. Let them burn, and trust the living to carry forward what must evolve. Your words are beautiful, but without rare evolutionary minds to architect and implement, they remain only echoes of what must come next.