Post-industrial hardcore noise blog.
It isn’t enough for me to know that one thing is right and the other is wrong because it’s already been proven. I like to know the reason and circumstances surrounding how that came to be.
I do think there is a sort of short-sightedness—even among people who I have lots of respect for—to settle for conclusions and be less enthusiastic over contexts.
«There’s a brother on Substack who apparently publishes exclusively via “podcasts” [1] and I appreciate the candidness that they seem to evoke although I haven’t listened to any of them except the one that I am linking to today.
I left a comment there that I want to keep here for the posterity of this blog:
As salaamu alaykum.
I’ve enjoyed this series of yours from afar and this is the first time I actually sat down to listen to an entry. It was worth it.
Humanity is less curious about life and the world around them today than it was in the past; Everyone feels involved and interconnected with everything in the world as it is portrayed through objects and events, and at the same time detached from each other as humans; People are anxious—or careless at best—in this complex age; Non-Muslims and Muslims alike, sadly!
But the lack of curiosity, as I feel like you eluded to here, is what bothers me the most. And I think I get why people feel this way.
The stakes are so high. The annals of tradition are so rich with insight and direction that you really can’t help but question and wonder about how it all relates to the present. But questioning and wondering about present-day problems…maybe is treated like a sign of incompetence. And everyone wants to portray themselves as perfectly competent and in control to whatever extent they think they are able to, which is by and large only an intellectual sort of competence rather than a practical kind. So we write, talk, shout and think out loud in confidence for head pats and back rubs.
You can make a decent living like this if you turn the right heads.
But this sort of performative resoluteness or what I want to call “anti-intellectual intellectualism” is antithetical to the spiritual discontent that is evident throughout society. We cannot “intro, body, conclusion” our way out of these problems! Or at least that format is not enough alone. Or at least today to achieve spiritual renewal through text and speech you have to pack millennia of the human experience into a corpus to get your point across in the way that it needs to be felt to evoke any change. But it’s not like we don’t have the resources to try. However I do sense a lack of boldness in that respect.
I hope this makes some sense. I don’t know what else to say.
Thank you for sharing this. I look forward to what comes next and I hope to get to listening to what you’ve posted already.
Wa-salaam
They’re actually more like voice memos. ↩
I’m confident that my current understanding of the world is inadequate aside from the fundamental convictions that enable me to get out of bed or off of the couch every day. Why does this bother me? It shouldn’t. It doesn’t.
The more I talk and the more I listen and the more I hear the things that come out of my own mouth…it’s probably for the better than I stay indifferent to a lot of the popular issues of notice today. While my fundamental convictions may be enough for myself and the people who already believe in them the same or are so intrigued by me personally that they’ll hear me out on those grounds alone, I don’t expect them to be enough for other people in and of themselves. This says more about the state of the world today than it does about my beliefs.
Any given stranger is subject to a variety of influences to different degrees. To be honest the influences themselves are limited to the point of being predictable. And the degrees that these influences are believed in are neglible. But they’re beliefs nonetheless colouring someone’s worldview and contextualizing their life experience.
Why do I care? Because apparently I have some social grievances that I want solved and I think that everyone who feels the same is interested in affecting other people’s beliefs. There’s no way around it. If you think otherwise I don’t believe you. Perhaps you’re assuming that most of the people you interact with implicitly share the same views as you and they just need a little bit of help becoming better informed and engaged with the world in a way that just so happens to conform to your expectations.
For a lot of people I think they misconstrue these shared views with…basic needs. Food, shelter and welfare are things that even rats prioritize. Ideals like “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” seem to trend in that direction. What good is getting all hopped up and passionate and whiny if really this is all that you’re after?
«Distillation attacks query a target AI model hundreds of thousands or millions of times to generate data that is used to train another company’s model. Through this practice, companies can back out a significant percentage of the AI training process, which is enormously expensive and difficult, at effectively no cost. While all frontier U.S. AI labs do use distillation to train smaller versions of their own models from their larger ones, they do not distill from each other’s models, which is against their terms of service.
All three frontier U.S. AI labs, as well as the White House, have accused China of engaging in distillation attacks at a massive scale. When prompted by users, Kimi K3 even often identifies itself as Anthropic’s Claude, and shows evidence of significant linguistic similarities with Claude Fable—further indicators of distillation.
Chris McGuire, 2026, from the interview “The Latest in U.S.-China AI Competition”
So is this just a fancy way to describe AI companies using their competitors product to generate training data for themselves? That’s funny. Even funnier—Chinese models are usually open models.
Another quote explaining distillation attacks:
Model extraction, where an actor uses legitimate access to an application programming interface (API) to systematically harvest output from a proprietary ‘teacher’ AI system to train a ‘student’ model, is a widely used and legitimate technique. Frontier AI labs – companies developing the most advanced AI models – routinely distil their models into smaller, cheaper versions for commercial deployment, occasionally licensing others to do the same.
Virpratap Vikram Singh, 2026, from the article “AI distillation attacks in the US”
This spoils the silly image in my head of people using the normal chat interfaces to do this. An API makes more sense; less goofy.
Both sources are useful for figuring more out about the dynamics at play; intellectual property; geopolitics; open models.
Here’s something from U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent:
We support open-source AI and the innovation it unlocks. But open source is not open season on American IP. When PRC firms conduct covert, industrial-scale distillation attacks that cross the line into IP theft, sanctions and Entity List designations will be on the table.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, 2026, from the tweet “Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on X”
I would like to amend my previous remark about intellectual property(20260704215606). It’s probably more so a thing because information is the lifeblood of organizations like corporations. People like calling dibs on good ideas. Pooh-pooh.
«An old Wall Street saying has it that when everybody’s getting into the market and even the shoeshine boy is giving stock tips (or the barber/hairdresser or the taxi driver or the waiter or the bartender), then it’s time to sell.
Barry Popnik, 2008, from the blog post “‘When even shoeshine boys are giving you stock tips, it’s time to sell’ (Joseph P. Kennedy?)”
«These days it feels like everyone—self included—is labouring to try and command these grand sweeping statements about the world; bromide pontifications; knitty little miniatures of society all scrunched up.
I think there’s something to take away from this here when you consider it alongside that David Sejusa tweet from a while back. Everyone knows everything about everyone—superficially—and they expect to spontaneously rally around the chatter that ensues.
«Curry argued that the recent rise of liberalism in the modern academy has allowed us to examine and cite the works of Africana philosophy insofar as they highlight the ‘inadequacies of traditional European thought’. Africana philosophy, in other words, has begun to enjoy increasing validation for its critique of the Anglo-European past. But, because it comes with tacit prejudices deeply rooted in the very tradition it criticises, which still dictates the terms of what counts as philosophical discussions, the whole process of integrating Black thinkers into the traditionally white/Western-style academy ends up validating what European philosophy thinks of as the proper form of being human (or any other major conceptions in philosophy). In other words, by reading the works of Black thinkers, our faith in the white establishment and white philosophy paradoxically increases, and the potential impact of radical philosophy is softened and turned into a kind of ‘racial therapy’ for Western philosophers.
Takeshi Morisato, 2026, from the article “Epistemic convergence in the study of world philosophies”
I’ve always found Tommy Curry’s ideas interesting as he stands virtually solo with respects to his ideas about Black men in Western civilization. This essay is essentially a review of an article written by Curry in 2011 that refers to a concept called “epistemic convergence”. I guess that’s a fancy philosophical way to refer to the co-opting of radical ideas into the mainstream of Western philosophy.
A comment from an apparent former colleague of Curry’s, Gregory Pappas, reads:
I also do not think this is, at the end of the day. all that important compare to the forms of domination, racism, xenophobia, lynching happening in “the streets” and outside of the academic world and professional academic philosophy. I mean, does fixing “epistemic convergence” or even departments and disciplines is all that consequential to concrete lives and non-academic communuties?
This is a good question to ask and highlights one of my main gripes with critical theory as a methodology. The obvious issue, at least to me it seems, is a lack of thoroughgoingness from the so-called ‘radical’ non-Western-minded thinkers. I mean how far did DuBois, Fanon, Newton, etc. really go with their thinking? Is it just enough to say, “Bad, white man” and be applauded and acquiesced to?
Do people have any idea about how to transform their supported transformative brand of virtue into action?
«I can consider my convictions to be not a suite of personal affectations. Not whims that happen to side with truth but matters actually contingent on the very nature behind my existence; a part of my purpose; what I love and hate and live to die for.
«I think whatever worries me is a reflection of an age where men where at odds with the world and felt its system against him and his interests resisting their demands forcing him subservient to the state and placating him with its material vacuities in spite of his own recognition of his self, his Creator and the self-determination required to please Him. The world chasing progress and comfort and you’re just after some level of control and comprehension; not over everything but just what you ought to be concerned about philosophically; spiritually; morally; ethically, politically—religiously.
«Because I am a man I have a higher probability of hurting someone than I do being hurt.
Although I know I’m not invincible still I know that I can offend.
[This is something I saw last year], a traffic guard the other day, no not really one but he acted like he was trying to divert motorists away from whatever was the cause of some seriously backed-up traffic all down the road. Just a guy on the edge of the median. Who knows how he got there or where his own car was. Just a guy trying to signal cars away from the direction that they really had no choice but to go down except for the few who could turn back around. Just a guy standing and waving his arms about in the heat.
«The fact that nobody reads is exactly why we should write more. The barrier to entry should be next to nil when no one is paying attention anyway.
«I don’t know when this started or if it’s always been a thing that I was too ignorant or naïve to notice previously but there is a rhetoric present in both online writing and even among people who I hear speak upon earth, like “This is serious, I’m serious, you need to listen to me.”
It is serious. You are serious. I hear you. Everything that you’re saying is meant to follow logically from the last word. There is no hook nor crook in your demonstration. Commemeration is in order and your rank will increase pursuant to the status of those in attendance who are qualified to do so.
I, on the other hand—I’m sorry—I just got word that someone else has something to say on the exact matter you just divulged on. In fact, look they’re right behind you.
The banality that I’m referring to is what you’d expect from every essay, every lecture marshaled and even forms lesser than either like Twitter threads. There is a stuffiness. I worry I even affect it. First you write a sentence that becomes a paragraph introducing the matter at hand. Then you wring your hands around its characteristics for another 5 paragraphs or more either delving or diverting depending on how adept you want to seem. And finally that all coalesces with wit or calls to action. All forth to the front.
The remedy may be to start strong and take the reader or listener nowhere.
When public speaking I try to be brief about this. I don’t have any idea what is meant to logically follow from my spur of intrigue and excitement. My hope is that you do. This is exhausting for us both, I’m sure.
I know I am letting you down. I appear to be literate and have some control over the English language but don’t let that fool you. Or wait a week for me to pick up where I left off.
All the worries over what AI is going to do certain arts and crafts—I find it all hard to care about. A lot of what was once novel about human writing is exhaust.
«The amount of flattery and/or compromise and/or fear and/or secrecy that I imagine must exist in order for anarchy to work is unsettling.
«I don’t want to try and sound smart here, really, all I’m trying to say is that identity markers can be valid units for analysis. But not always. And you don’t want to swing these individual units around as though they comprise a whole rational thing and you don’t want to swing around this whole rational thing that you just compromised with bad thinking as though now you’re prepared to extract more itty bitty dumb bits of data to call attention toward.
«What I’m reading
I haven’t read much of this article from the Atlantic nor have I read the two other quotes about reading that precede this. I do intend to read the latter two pieces in full but I’m content with skimming the other. I was made privy to Hans Magnus Enzensberger through a lecture that I listened to by Michael Silverblatt, the host of Bookworm. The other quote comes from a reference found in Nicholas Carr’s The Shallows.
This Atlantic article, I don’t think it’s bad. Very long. My indifference towards reading it is because, well, I’ve heard some of it all before. It names the usual suspects. Ong, McLuhan, Postman.
I think it would have landed better to me…as a book. Would I read it? I’d try to get around to it… The other sources though, yes, there’s no excuse. Why not.
«[The second-order illiterate] has come a long way: his loss of memory causes him no suffering; his lack of will makes life easy for him; he values his inability to concentrate; he considers it an advantage that he neither knows nor understands what is happening to him. He is mobile. He is adaptive. He has a talent for getting things done. We need have no worries about him. It contributes to the second-order illiterate’s sense of well-being that he has no idea that he is a second-order illiterate. He considers himself well-informed; he can decipher instructions on appliances and tools; he can decode pictograms and checks. And he moves within an environment hermetically sealed against anything that might infect his consciousness. That he might come to grief in this environment is unthinkable. After all, it produced and educated him in order to guarantee its undisturbed continuation.
Hans Magnus Enzensberger, 01 Jun 2000, from the article “In Praise of Illiteracy”
Reading has always been associated with education and more generally with urban social elites. Although contemporary commentators deplore the decline of “the reading habit” or “literary reading,” historically the era of mass reading, which lasted from the mid-nineteenth through the mid-twentieth century in northwestern Europe and North America, was the anomaly.
Griswold, McDonald and Wright, 2005, from the paper “Reading and the Reading Class in the Twenty-First Century”
«As Frédéric Bastiat put it, the government is “the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.” It is a fiction in that it rests on the lie that one group within society operates outside of the basic ethical norms that the rest of us must abide by. That shared delusion, and the vacuum or absence of justified resistance it brings, is a source of enormous power. It allows those who wield it to simply take wealth from those who already created it. There’s no need to struggle to create it themselves.
It’s a good deal. But to maintain that power, state officials need to share it, or at least share some of the coercively-seized profits gleaned from it, with whoever they need to help keep the delusion that this setup is good and just alive. Or, at least, that resistance is just not worth it.
That basic formula is how states work; and it is how they have always worked. It doesn’t matter if you’re looking at the absolutist regimes in eighteenth-century Europe, the USSR at the height of Stalin’s rule, or the modern US. The narratives, rituals, and “scientific” arguments evolve into whatever form is necessary to keep enough of the population convinced. But the result is always the same: a small group of officials and well-connected courtiers and plutocrats use state power to enrich and empower themselves and their close friends and allies. State power is used to redistribute wealth from the broader population to whichever groups are organized and connected enough to steer it in their own favor.
Connor O'keeffe, 08 Jul 2026, from the article “Is This Country Having Its Socialist Moment?”
«Without any sound rule of law and order to wrap heads and hearts around a people are doomed to be forced to converge around the depraved.
«Blogger elder stateman Dave Winer says:
As a writer I’ve stolen lots of ideas. All writers do it. How do you think we get our ideas.
Which is why it’s so weird that they object to having their ideas stolen en masse.
We go through this regularly, basically you make a living doing something, and you aren’t paid enough.
So every subject in every context arrives at the same place. Why aren’t they paying me. I must be paid.
It is a permanent obsession with writers.
I try to be honest and admit that I steal from other writers, but I only steal from the best!
Dave Winer, 26 Jun 2026, from the blog post “Only steal from the best”
He’s right. So right in fact that I stole some of the design for this website from him. Can you tell?
We all take. I personally eschew the term “creator” and words like “creative” and “creation” when dealing with the things people make because you are not making anything from nothing. Any of you. Not ever have you done that! Only a materialist hubris permits such a notion.
Intellectual property is a get up from The Man™. The art of the remix has got to be as old as the time of men around fire; odes, epics and things. Look. If you don’t like AI taking it from you. Then I will. It’s only right and only human.
Some say that the art of perceiving, understanding, analogizing one thing into something anew without compromising the integrities of influence is a part of intelligence.
«vibe consultant
– I have no technical ability.
– You must know something.
– I know what I like and what I don’t like.
I tried to work my way through Rick Rubin’s book after amusing myself reading a transcript of his 60 Minutes interview. Much to Rick’s discredit I find greater intrigue in the thought of Kurt Gödel and this is despite having two left hands when it comes to things like mathematics.
A tad to Rick’s credit—good taste and vibes count when it comes to ingenuity. This is only to say that he thinks the same thing as a lot of other people, of which I am one from that many of which he is from too, along with all the slick tech dudes I imagine in Rick Rubin’s orbit who link taste with the future of (vibe) coding.
And I might be wrong but I think one of the points of Gödel’s theorem was that science is just a lot of vibes and knowing what to do with them within and without a system and most people can really only have taste within a given system but in that system is the only place their taste holds true.
With this in mind I imagine bad taste at scale being something like the Dunning-Kruger effect. I don’t know what much of this means yet but at least I can catch my own drift.
«I previously mentioned this quote somewhere else but I want to highlight on it’s own.
Truly great mind doesnt limit itself to a single conversation, thru an EVENT is the manifestation of IDEA then its impact on PEOPLE is understood. Analyzing human behaviour is not gossip that quote is artificial. The 3 dont have hierarchy
Akiiki Nyamabagu, 01 Jul 2026, from the tweet “RE: Intellectual and ideological limitations of African COLONIAL and POST-INDEPENDENCE ELITES”
Thank you, Akiiki.
«I think that the ideal organization is one similar to a corporation.
There is a “board of directors” whose presence is qualified by a minimum amount of shares or value invested in the prosperity of the organization and its objectives. This is a massive simplification of what I mean to convey. Shares in this case are not monetarily determined. Your competence, involvement and integrity are functions of your investment in the organization or in folk terms your community. These are the qualities that determine your “say”, or agency and authority in a group. If it can’t work then it must be an issue with the culture.
«I suspect that the concept of intellectual property only exists because people know that the thought of someone trying to make their living in ~10–20 dollar increments is absurd. Why should publishing a book be a form of passive income?
I argue from a vantage of ironic privilege that artists, writers, intellectuals, empaths and whatever tortured “creative” folk need to work. Until they are rich. The idea that an idea is something that one must accrue income through in perpetuity is highfalutin. Is this supposed to be the protestant work ethic?
«I don’t listen to music because
Beep–beep–boop–boop–bop. Strings and things. The clash of cymbals. All that. Lyrics even to the extent that they remain at all relevant in today’s soundscapes. Somewhere between folk pontificate or a kind of agnoticism depending on the temper of the listener? You get me? No. Not yet. Buying music isn’t strange to you? Recording music? Digitizing it? Hearing it. It’s not there? The sounds. What are they for? I can reason with the tribal sensibility for the sake of science but cosmopolitically speaking where do we rest with this.
The ontology of the online world is manufactured or rather it is socially constructed. What is other than the things in this world are its progenitors or rather they are a priori to them, I suppose. In some way. Like it is what it is out here. In real life. It’s really going down. What you get once what’s happening happens and gets transmitted to the internet your tasting a whole 'nother experience. What you get by the time that real thing hits online is something not quite like what it was on earth. Media like this is just a carnival lens for an experience.
«Typically I’m opposed to comparing digital things to physical spaces on the principle that I don’t like the comparison but you ever think that social media platforms are like project houses?
Flipping on dirty mattresses and playing inside refrigerators and things like that. Burning trash, burning cars, urinating where ever you like. A sense of community nonetheless. Not being too ashamed of coming from up out of that but never wanting to return.
«Anything close to the notion of privacy or anonymity that we expect from technology seems like an anamoly compared to say…Tsarist Russia. Or periods prior to that even. Yes the Gendarmes know you’re at the gym. Yes the Gendarmes know you ate lentil for supper. Yes the Gendarmes know you have four kids. Yes the Gendarmes read your mail. Yes the Gendarmes know all of this and guess what your neighbors do too.
I think Gendarmes is a term I picked up out of an audiobook, Stalin: Passage to Revolution. Great listen. Crisp narration. Painstaking detail. In little Georgian towns everybody knew everyone’s business (‘We don’t think that’s your real dad, Soso’) and then so did the Gendarmes in St. Petersburg.
«The modern world was built on bondage and pillage and exploitation of all sorts. Technology and world politics are pleasant reminders of this.
– But we should know better by now.
– So what. That isn’t the point.
Everything you think about when you think about the past and how much fun you had growing up and you would sit in the back seat of your parent’s car and go out and get pizza and rent movies and get the candy that came in boxes did you ever stop and think about the consequences of the former director of the CIA being the guy in charge of the free world that you were living in and who he was and what he waz doing to afford you all with this nice night out? Did you know?
«There is this quote: “GREAT MINDS DISCUSS IDEAS; AVERAGE MINDS DISCUSS EVENTS; SMALL MINDS DISCUSS PEOPLE”: These limitations which are really due Structural and pPsychological conditioning make it difficult for the so-called “intellectuals” to elevate discussions to focus on CONCEPTS rather than dwelling on the individuals involved.
Hence when I raised the issue of the EXTRADITION of Katungi, it has all settled on his personality, history, and my own motivation,etc! People can hardly elevate the conversation to the PRINCIPLE of TRYING A UGANDAN IN COURTS OF A FOREIGN TERRITORY. That’s how limitated we are, even COGNITIVELY!
Some of us are far beyond those ideological limitations. For instance, take the case of Gen Kale Kayihura. Perhaps, about 70% of the problems I had with government were caused by Kale. But when he had problems with the Americans over Nalufeenya, etc, and he was sanctioned, I saw many of our people celebrating that he was going to to be extradited to the U.S. At the time, i wrote that it would be wrong to Extradite a Ugandan to U.S. it didn’t matter whether I liked Kale or not! So I defend the PRINCIPLE, THE CONCEPT, the IDEOLOGICAL CORRECTNESS OF A POSITION and don’t get swayed by individual biases, or emotions.
REASON AFRICA IS STUCK AND CAN’T MOVE FORWARD!
David Sejusa, DM, 30 Jun 2026, from the tweet “Intellectual and ideological limitations of African COLONIAL and POST-INDEPENDENCE ELITES”
I don’t know who this guy is or the entirety behind why he’s upset but I feel him. I had to look him up after the fact. At first I was just interested if anyone had any interesting commentary on the “Great minds…” quote that’s attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt. This was it here. I love it.
Some responses to the above:
– I think you are giving that person over dose
– Want to drink form your cup Sir
– Kindly don’t get pissed off my senior.
– Those quotes are of ancestral time. Truly great mind doesnt limit itself to a single conversation, thru an EVENT is the manifestation of IDEA then its impact on PEOPLE is understood. Analyzing human behaviour is not gossip that quote is artificial. The 3 dont have hierarchy [My favorite.]
– Let them cook him. The cartel he works for kills on a daily in Mexico and USA. He knew the repercussions but still did it. Black market arms have no place in this world. [A response to this response: “We have an international crimes court in Uganda. He should face the same. Say no silly neocolonial overreaches.”]
– This one am with you. Katungi should stay here and face a competent court of law. If no American can be sent to the ICC then no Ugandan should be extradited to any foreign jurisdiction. We are an independent nation albeit poor . [Same person as the one who responded to the previous response.]
– I also found it weird that our government is willing to extradite a Ugandan to another country for trial without the slightest fight. Other countries at least negotiate to have their citizens tried locally and serve their sentences at home. But this is Uganda!!! [A response to this response: “But unfortunately you may find that you supported the abduction of @kizzabesigye1 and his illegal transportation back to kampala at the same time. What’s your position on that gentlemen?” Don’t know what’s going on here!]
– What more do you expect from a bitter society divided along party affiliations, personal localities and tribal segregation????? [Smart.]
– The determining factors of freedom of expression within the 21st century are highly enabled by technological advances where it is difficult to distinguish or digest high motives, Africa remains divided on it complexities around the world by our own limitations of solidarity. [Galaxy-brained.]
– There is ideology and there is realpolitic which would consider the asymeteic power between the two countries, the possible consequences of noncompliance such as sanctions and arms embargo, the possible benefits of compliance, the need for survival etc. [Solid runner-up.]
I’ve learned so much.
«Reading isn’t as fun if there’s nothing to write and writing isn’t fun either if you haven’t read a thing.
That is why this is here.
I don’t know why but I am subscribed to McKinsey’s mailing list and they just released their 2026 reading list. They allow you to curate your own out of their choices and export them. Here’s what I chose. Some of these I already have copies of. I included them as a reminder.
AI for Good: How Real People Are Using Artificial Intelligence to Fix Things That Matter
Josh Tyrangiel, Simon & Schuster
The Coming Wave: AI, Power, and Our Future
Mustafa Suleyman with Michael Bhaskar, Crown/Penguin Random House
Rewired: How Leading Companies Win with Technology and AI
Eric Lamarre, Kate Smaje, and Robert Levin with Alex Singla and Alexander Sukharevsky, John Wiley & Sons
Inside the Box: How Constraints Make Us Better
David Epstein, Riverhead Books/Penguin Random House
The Origins of Efficiency
Brian Potter, Stripe Press
The Unaccountability Machine: Why Big Systems Make Terrible Decisions—and How the World Lost Its Mind
Dan Davies, University of Chicago Press
Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (Third Edition)
Joseph A. Schumpeter, Harper Perennial Modern Classics/HarperCollins Publishers
Human Magic: Leading with Wisdom in an Age of Algorithms
Johan Roos, Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group
For some reason I expected to see Abundance listed. I don’t know why. At the same time I did not expect to see it. I don’t know why. Why do I care?
«