Pure, Uncut, Imperial Lunacy

The new breed of tech cowboys, high on venture capital and zero-interest loans, are suddenly feeling the heat, and it’s terrifying to watch. These clowns have been riding the free-money carousel for so long they’ve forgotten what it’s like to sweat. Now, the moment the cash dries up, their first instinct is pure, uncut imperial lunacy. “Yeah, screw it. Let’s scoop Bolivia. Let’s scoop Venezuela. We’ll keep the juice flowing by any means necessary. Bring on the spice!”

It’s a silicon-fueled fever dream, a dystopian gold rush where the only goal is to keep the party going. No consequences, no reflection—just a primal urge to plunder, to squeeze the next fix out of whatever corner of the world hasn’t been stripped bare yet. It’s not capitalism anymore; it’s resource vampirism on an industrial scale, fueled by desperation and blind ambition.

This isn’t innovation—it’s barbarism dressed in a Patagonia vest. And the scariest part is they don’t even flinch. The grins stay plastered across their faces as they plot the next conquest, convinced they’re heroes of the future. God help us when the juice finally runs out, and there’s nothing left to scoop.

It’s a hell of a cocktail, this bizarre mix of frothy libertarianism and old-school military-industrial sugar daddying. These tech freaks, who worship at the altar of move fast and break things, will swear up and down that government is the root of all evil—until the checks stop clearing. Then, suddenly, they’re all in for Uncle Sam’s tough-love paternalism, ready to play soldier with somebody else’s boots on the ground.

They’ll rail against regulation and taxes in one breath, and in the next, they’re sucking on the teat of Pentagon contracts and cozy energy subsidies like they’ve been swaddled in government cheese their whole lives. Hypocrisy? No. That would imply a sliver of self-awareness. This is pure opportunism, a high-wire act where the safety net just happens to be defense budgets and foreign interventions.

Their libertarian shtick is just marketing—freedom for me, but not for thee. They’ll claim to hate central authority while happily hitching their wagons to its most violent arm, the one that turns lithium-rich mountains into drone-friendly no-man’s lands. “The market provides,” they chant, but when the market stops providing, they’ll call the cavalry faster than you can say “Halliburton.”

It’s not a partnership; it’s a Frankenstein alliance. The free-market zealots and the old-guard military-industrial players don’t trust each other—they just see mutual utility. The techies bring the algorithms and the PR spin; They don’t want to run the system—they want to dismantle it, gut it for parts, and rebuild it in their own image. Code is their gospel, data is their currency, and the rest of us are just grist for the algorithmic mill. They’ll chant libertarian mantras about decentralization while centralizing power in ways the robber barons could only dream of.

On the other side the war machine brings the guns and the goons. It’s the old guard: the military-industrial complex, a lumbering juggernaut with its fingers in every pie. They don’t innovate; they entrench. For them, progress is just a prettier name for control. Their game has always been the same: turn war into profit, profit into influence, and influence into more war. They’ve been running the show since Eisenhower gave his farewell speech, and they’re not about to let go of the reins.

Together, they’re cooking up a 21st-century imperialism that doesn’t need boots on the ground—just server farms, supply chains, and a steady flow of contracts.

The result? A global hustle where sovereignty is a bug, not a feature, and anyone sitting on the “juice” gets framed as an obstacle to progress. It’s a grim, sprawling racket, with libertarian slogans painted over a military-grade chassis. And the scariest part? Nobody’s steering the damn thing. It’s a runaway train, powered by greed and hubris, barreling toward whatever it can scoop next.

But let’s not kid ourselves—this foreign policy circus isn’t about diplomacy or strategy. It’s a backroom handshake deal for the warring tribes of the American elite. After eight long years of backstabbing and blood feuds—tech bros versus the old guard, hedge fund cowboys against bureaucratic dinosaurs—they’ve finally found their magic bullet: a global plunder campaign that smooths out their petty squabbles with a fat layer of lithium grease.

This isn’t policy; it’s pageantry. A macabre pageant of resource wars and proxy conflicts, dressed up as “securing the future” or “stabilizing the region.” Bullshit. The real goal is elite reconciliation—keeping the oligarchs from tearing each other apart long enough to strip-mine the world for every ounce of juice it’s got left. The tech freaks get their rare-earth metals and AI subsidies. The military suits get their shiny new wars to play with. The Wall Street ghouls cash in on both ends, laughing all the way to the Cayman Islands.

This isn’t strategy; it’s survival—their survival. A desperate attempt to keep the house of cards from collapsing by finding a common enemy: Venezuela, Bolivia, whoever’s sitting on the goods they need to keep the gears grinding. It’s not about freedom or democracy or any of that stale propaganda. It’s about keeping their champagne glasses full and their yachts fueled while the rest of us choke on the fumes.

They don’t even bother to hide it anymore. The rhetoric’s gone paper-thin, peeling off like cheap paint under a desert sun. They’ll call it “cooperation” or “bipartisanship,” but the truth is uglier than a Vegas strip at dawn. This is elite détente by way of imperial smash-and-grab. They settle their differences by agreeing to screw the rest of the planet instead of each other.

And it’s working. The techies, the warhawks, the bankers—they’re locking arms and marching toward the next payday, leaving scorched earth and hollowed-out countries in their wake. The rest of us? We’re the collateral damage. We’re the fuel for their reconciliation bonfire, the grease that keeps their machine humming just a little longer. And when it all burns out, they’ll be sipping Mai Tais on a private island, congratulating themselves on a job well done. God help us all.

Meanwhile

The Cable News Libs and Resistance Historians™—that peculiar breed of moral entrepreneurs who built entire careers on fascism panic, crying wolf in well-tailored blazers while sipping overpriced lattes in green rooms. For a decade, they’ve played dress-up as the French Resistance, spinning dystopian fan fiction about shadowy coups and midnight arrests, all while raking in book deals, podcast contracts, and speaking fees. And now, surprise! It turns out they’re not principled freedom fighters after all but amoral grifters with no creed except the direction of the wind and the balance of their checking accounts.

They don’t resist fascism; they monetize it. It’s the grift of the century: selling fear back to the masses who are drowning in it. They shout “democracy in peril!” from the rooftops, but the second the tide shifts, they’re in the front row of the power parade, waving their flags and making sure the cameras catch them at their best angle. They don’t believe in justice or freedom—they believe in the health of their brand.

The irony is almost too rich. These are the same people who scorn populism, sneer at the working class for falling for “demagogues,” and lecture us all on the sanctity of institutions. Meanwhile, they’ve turned political crisis into a cottage industry, profiting off the chaos they claim to oppose. It’s not resistance—it’s performance art, a carefully curated act designed to sell ad slots and keep the invitations to Davos rolling in.

When the winds shift, they’ll pivot without a second thought. The fascism panic will quietly fade into the background, replaced by whatever buzzword catches fire next. Climate capitalism? AI ethics? Some vaguely defined war for democracy? They’ll slap a new label on the same old grift and call it a day, leaving behind a trail of empty platitudes and maxed-out credit cards from their adoring audiences.

But here’s the real kicker: they don’t even feel bad about it. To them, it’s not hypocrisy; it’s business. They’re not fighting for the soul of the nation—they’re building personal empires out of fear and outrage, one subscription service at a time. And the rest of us? We’re just extras in their carefully scripted drama, paying the price for their moral theater.

Don’t Be Evil

A Journey into “Sustainable Malevolence”

It all started innocently enough, the way all these mind-numbing corporate revolutions do. A few high-functioning sociopaths in hoodies decided that the future of the world rested in the ability to “disrupt” industries at the speed of a startup burn rate. It started as a cute, nerdy motto on some engineer’s whiteboard—Don’t be evil. The whole place reeked of Mountain Dew and nacho crumbs, buzzing with caffeine-soaked zealots who thought they’d solve the human condition if they could just code fast enough. At first, it was all about changing the world. A noble mission. They slapped “Don’t be evil” on a mission statement like it was a badge of honor, a hollow signpost on the road to Silicon Valley’s self-congratulatory utopia.

But the wheels of ambition grind quickly, and Don’t be evil? That was just a vestigial relic from the halcyon days of self-righteousness, a bumper sticker slogan for naive dreamers who hadn’t yet tasted the bitter, blood-soaked honey of venture capital. Enter Be Slightly Evil, the inevitable evolution. A delicate balance of cynicism and just enough decency to stave off a full-scale revolt from the employees who had no idea what they’d signed up for. Be Slightly Evil—you know, just enough to squeeze out the competition without anyone noticing. After all, if you’re not pushing the moral envelope a little, are you really innovating?

Sure, they’d still slap you with a high five and quote some Gandhi, but only after they’ve sold your personal data to the highest bidder. The only thing more brittle than their “moral framework” was the endless stack of cash they were all swimming in.

Soon, that wasn’t enough. Break things, then sell people glue. It’s the Silicon Valley method—smash the system, then reassemble the shattered pieces with duct tape and bad algorithms, charging people a premium for the privilege. You launch a product, let it implode, then watch as the public scrambles to “fix” it while you rake in a windfall of investor dollars. Why bother with the pretense of ethics when you can manipulate the very essence of human nature to create insatiable demand for the broken fragments of society you’ve casually destroyed? Think it’s too cynical? Not in the world of venture capital, where broken things are merely future profits waiting to be monetized.

And when the cracks in the empire begin to show—when the cracks in your conscience begin to show—you don’t backpedal. No, you launch a new slogan: Be Evil on alternate Thursdays. This isn’t your grandfather’s evil. This is the sophisticated kind, the kind with a schedule, the kind that knows when to hide behind regulatory loopholes and when to send in the lawyers.

And of course, by “evil,” we mean anything you want it to mean: it’s a gray area, a malleable concept that exists in a vacuum, waiting to be molded by the whims of capital and then profit off the ambiguity. Define evil as a gray area, and suddenly the theft of personal data, surveillance capitalism, and the complete obliteration of privacy are just market forces. And if anyone dares point out the ethical quagmire, they’re just too simplistic, too binary.

Then came the grandiose excuse: Woke made me do it. The ultimate get-out-of-jail card. You didn’t screw over your users, mislead investors, or bankrupt small businesses in the name of profit—no, you did it because cause social justice warriors. Sure, you’re fueling the existential crisis of millions, but at least you were force into it. The woke wave was surfed, the words tossed out like the latest trending hashtag, just another weapon in the arsenal for controlling the narrative. It’s not lying; it’s reframing—taking a reality that’s uncomfortable and smoothing out the rough edges for the masses.

But it doesn’t stop there. Enter Evil Premium, the gilded ticket to access the high life of corporate malevolence. For just $14.99 a month, you can get exclusive access to an app that tracks your every move, or opt for “ad-free” villainy, where your digital footprints are archived for a higher bidder. Want to feel really nasty? Upgrade to our Enhanced Villainy package, which unlocks the deepest data reservoirs, gives you premium access to psychological profiling tools, and, if you’re lucky, a special invite to the annual “Corruption Gala” in Monaco, where they hand out awards for the most creative misuse of algorithms. It’s like a subscription service for your darkest impulses—a cult-like marketplace where moral ambiguity is the product, and every transaction is a step deeper into the rabbit hole of modern exploitation.

But the real money-maker? Weapons & Widgets, baby. A seamless integration of hardware, software, and pure, unadulterated greed. You don’t just sell people a phone anymore—you sell them the means to enslave themselves with a microsecond of gratification.

why sell glue when you can patent the entire adhesive industry? It’s innovation through monopoly, a corporate synergy where every unit is optimized for “value delivery” and every resource is mined for market control.

Maybe it’s a new gadget that can track your every move or a “smart” watch that tells you when you’re going to die. Everything’s a product, from oppression to surveillance, from addiction to submission. It’s not about selling you a better life; it’s about selling you the idea that life without the right product is meaningless.

And why stop there? Expand the evil empire with corporate synergy—the holy grail of modern capitalism. Launch “Weapons & Widgets” as a corporate synergy, and suddenly, your entire revenue model is built on the back of fear and greed. Think of it as a one-stop shop for every devious tool in the digital toolbox. If you can’t kill them with kindness, you kill them with precision data—because why settle for an army of drones when you can have an army of algorithms, all finely tuned to profit from the very algorithms that serve you?

Finally, the pièce de résistance: Sustainable Malevolence. Nothing says forward-thinking quite like a slick, marketing-driven commitment to continuing the cycle of destruction, but with a “green” spin. Instead of just spewing the usual PR vomit about “corporate responsibility,” you start pushing legislation that actively incentivizes sustainable damage. Who cares if the planet’s crumbling as long as you can profit off it? Co-host a legislation effort for “Sustainable Malevolence,” ensuring that environmental collapse and social destruction are not just consequences but business opportunities. In this brave new world, you don’t destroy just for the sake of profit; you destroy with a plan. You ensure that the ruins of the old world are carefully mined, repurposed, and recycled into the shiny new world you’ve created. A world where everyone is locked in a contract for eternity, and the only thing more toxic than the environment is the corporate bottom line.

There it is, in all its glory. The Silicon Valley blueprint for modern evil: An ecosystem of buzzwords, broken promises, and data-driven exploitation, all wrapped in a thin layer of technocratic jargon that would make George Orwell choke on his own cigarettes. Welcome to the future. It’s slightly evil, and it’s coming for you whether you’re ready or not.

The Great Silicon Valley Shakedown: Pearls, Sophistries, and the Hymn to Stability

By the time the sun rises over the spires of Silicon Valley, a certain brand of chaos has already taken hold. It’s a controlled chaos, carefully crafted and nurtured by the so-called “disruptors” who sit in high-backed chairs made from the bones of yesterday’s industries. These men—and they are almost always men—are the Venture Capitalists, the VCs, the self-proclaimed apostles of innovation, prophets of the new world order. They wear their disruption like a badge of honor, a symbol of their willingness to throw the dice and turn the tables on the stale and outdated.

But don’t be fooled by the gleaming rhetoric and flashy PowerPoint slides. Underneath that thin veneer of rebellion beats the heart of a rank coward. The moment you so much as hint at the idea of taxing their unrealized gains, the profits they haven’t even pulled out of the market yet, you’ll see a transformation that’s as predictable as it is pathetic. The disruptor becomes the defender, the revolutionary the reactionary, and the bold, brave iconoclast turns into a pearl-clutching prude, muttering sophistries about stability and the dangers of tampering with the sacred free market.

These VCs, with their sleek Teslas and designer drugs, talk a big game. They’re all about shaking up the status quo, smashing the establishment, and creating a world where the little guy finally gets a piece of the action. Or so they say. But threaten to take even a slice of their ill-gotten gains, and suddenly they’re channeling the spirit of William F. Buckley, standing athwart history and yelling “Stop!”

What they don’t tell you is that the system they’re so eager to disrupt is one they’ve already rigged in their favor. They’ve got their tentacles wrapped around the throats of politicians, their hooks buried deep in the flesh of the economy. They don’t want to change the system; they want to own it. And they’re damn close to doing just that.

The irony is almost too much to bear. The same people who built their fortunes on the idea of “move fast and break things” are now desperately clinging to the very stability they claim to despise. They’ve built a gilded fortress out of stock options, shell companies, and offshore accounts, and the last thing they want is for anyone to come poking around and asking uncomfortable questions about who really benefits from all this so-called disruption.

When you suggest that maybe, just maybe, the public ought to get a cut of the action—after all, it’s our roads, our schools, our infrastructure that these companies rely on—the VCs start wringing their hands and wailing about how you’re going to kill the golden goose. They’ll tell you that taxing unrealized gains is a slippery slope, that it’ll stifle innovation, that it’ll bring the whole house of cards crashing down.

And maybe it would. Maybe the whole damn thing needs to come crashing down. Maybe it’s time to stop listening to the technocrats and the financiers and start asking what kind of world we really want to live in. Because if this is the best they can offer—an endless cycle of boom and bust, where a handful of people get filthy rich while everyone else is left scrambling for crumbs—then we’re in deeper trouble than we thought.

The VCs will keep singing their hymns to stability, clutching their pearls, and spinning their sophistries, but the truth is staring us all in the face: the only thing they really care about is protecting their loot. And if that means throwing the rest of us under the bus, they won’t hesitate for a second. The revolution was never about you, or me, or anyone outside their little bubble. It was always about them.

So, the next time you hear some slick-talking VC yammering on about disruption and innovation, just remember: the only thing they really want to disrupt is your ability to hold them accountable. The rest is just noise, designed to keep you from seeing the truth. And the truth is this: they’ve built their empire on a lie, and they’ll do whatever it takes to keep it from crumbling.

But crumble it will. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow. But the reckoning is coming, and when it does, they’ll have no one to blame but themselves. Until then, keep your eyes open and your wits about you. The great Silicon Valley shakedown is just getting started.

Free Stuff

The irony is thick when a Silicon Valley VC criticizes the concept of “free stuff” while the entire tech industry often thrives on giving away services for free, monetizing data, or operating on a “freemium” model. Silicon Valley’s success has largely been built on repurposing industries and offering free or heavily subsidized services to consumers, banking on long-term gains, whether through data, advertising, or eventual market dominance.

It’s a bit like railing against the very system that has allowed their sector to flourish. This comment seems to miss that the “free stuff” model is not just a political phenomenon but a cornerstone of the tech economy. The notion of “mutually assured destruction” might hit closer to home than the VC realizes, given the precarious balance many tech companies maintain between growth and profitability.

Here are more examples of the irony embedded in the VC’s critique:

  1. Data Monetization: Many Silicon Valley companies offer free services—search engines, social media platforms, and email—in exchange for user data. The “free” model that appeals to consumers is funded by monetizing this data, often in ways that consumers don’t fully understand. Criticizing “free shit” while benefiting from this model highlights a lack of self-awareness.
  2. Venture Capital Strategy: VCs often invest in startups that operate at a loss for years, prioritizing market share and user growth over profitability. These companies frequently rely on massive infusions of capital to stay afloat, essentially using “free credit” to survive until they can dominate a market or sell out to a larger company. This mirrors the very “free shit on credit” mentality the VC criticizes in the public sphere.
  3. Freemium Models: The freemium business model, where basic services are offered for free while premium features are charged for, is a staple in the tech industry. This model hooks users with free access and then gradually upsells them, similar to how political promises of “free stuff” can hook voters. It’s ironic that a VC who likely supports companies using this model would criticize similar dynamics in politics.
  4. Disruption and Devaluation: Silicon Valley is known for “disrupting” traditional industries by undercutting prices or offering services at no cost, often driving competitors out of business. For instance, companies like Uber and Airbnb repurposed transportation and hospitality, respectively, and initially offered services at unsustainably low prices to capture market share. This approach devalues entire sectors, creating the same kind of unsustainable “free for now” dynamic that the VC criticizes in broader economic terms.
  5. Government Subsidies: Many tech companies benefit indirectly from government subsidies, whether through tax breaks, grants, or other forms of public support for innovation. These subsidies help tech companies thrive, yet the criticism of “free stuff” in the public sector fails to acknowledge how much of Silicon Valley’s success is built on such support.
  6. Zero-Margin Economies: Companies like Amazon have thrived on razor-thin margins, using their massive scale to undercut competitors and offering free shipping or other perks to consumers. This model is sustainable only because of the vast capital backing these companies, akin to running on “credit.” The irony is in criticizing a similar dynamic in public finance when it’s a standard practice in the industry.

In essence, the VC’s critique overlooks how Silicon Valley has institutionalized “free” in various forms, often relying on delayed or deferred costs much like the “free stuff on credit” he criticizes in politics.

The hypocrisy is palpable. This VC, who likely champions startups built on the very concept of giving things away for free in hopes of monopolizing markets, turns around and bemoans the idea of “free shit on credit” when it comes to public policy. It’s as if he’s blind to the fact that Silicon Valley’s entire playbook is based on the same principle—offering free services, burning through investor money, and banking on some nebulous future profitability.

He decries the “average voter” falling for free handouts while conveniently forgetting that his own success hinges on consumers doing exactly that—lapping up free services while their data is mined, their privacy is eroded, and their choices are funneled into ever-narrowing corridors controlled by tech giants. This is the pot calling the kettle black, only the pot is wearing gold-plated blinders.

The Big Exit

When Jean-Paul Sartre penned No Exit back in 1944, he didn’t have a clue that Silicon Valley would turn his existential nightmare into a business model. There, in a well-ventilated room with glass walls, soft bean bags, and artisanal cold brew on tap, the brightest minds of our generation are sweating bullets, not because of Hell’s torturous climate but because Moore’s Law is slowing down, and the exits they dream of seem further away than ever.

This statement suggests a satirical take on how the principles of existentialism, as explored in Jean-Paul Sartre’s play No Exit, have been unintentionally mirrored in the business practices and culture of Silicon Valley. In No Exit, Sartre presents a vision of Hell where the characters are trapped in a room together for eternity, realizing that “Hell is other people.” This setting reflects the core existentialist idea that people are condemned to be free, meaning they must constantly make choices and confront the consequences, often leading to anxiety and despair.

The statement humorously implies that Silicon Valley, with its relentless pursuit of innovation, disruption, and exit strategies (like selling a startup or achieving immortality through technology), has adopted a similar, albeit unintended, “business model” of existential entrapment. In their quest for continuous growth and escape from limitations (be it mortality, financial risk, or technological barriers), the tech industry’s leaders have, in a way, created their own version of Sartre’s existential nightmare: a cycle of perpetual striving with no true escape.

So, when the essay says Sartre “didn’t have a clue,” it highlights the irony that a philosophical concept about the human condition and the inescapability of existential dilemmas has been unwittingly reflected in a modern, capitalist context—one that thrives on the pursuit of exits and solutions that may, in the end, be as elusive and self-defeating as the characters’ quest for freedom in No Exit.

Moore’s Law, for the uninitiated, was the golden rule of Silicon Valley: the number of transistors on a microchip would double every two years, making computers faster, smaller, and cheaper, ad infinitum. But here we are, folks, in the era of “slow Moore.” It turns out, like the rest of us, transistors can’t shrink forever. Now that chips aren’t getting twice as powerful with each spin of the Earth around the Sun, it’s time to wake up from the fever dream of exponential growth and ask the unthinkable: What happens when we hit a wall?

But let’s not lose our heads just yet. The Valley’s power brokers, those entrepreneurial Sisyphuses of the digital age, are not the type to go quietly into that good night. They’ve seen the writing on the wall (it’s in 4K resolution, after all), and they’re scouring the horizon for a way out—an “exit opportunity,” they call it. Exit from what, you ask? From the whole damn mess they’ve made, of course.

Now, if you think “exit” means cashing out with a 10x return on some app that lets you share pictures of your dog’s breakfast, you’re only scratching the surface. The true believers, the VCs with more acronyms than compassion, are eyeing the biggest exit of all: leaving this mortal coil behind. They call it the Singularity, where man merges with machine, and death is just another bug to be patched out in the next update.

It’s here that Sartre’s No Exit comes into play. In the play, Hell is other people. In Silicon Valley, Hell is a future where the only thing doubling every two years is the panic among the über-rich that they might not make it to their own digital afterlife.

And let’s not forget ZIRP—the Zero Interest Rate Policy, the Fed’s favorite gift to Wall Street and, by extension, to the Valley’s bubble-blowing machine. With money as cheap as it is, anything that smells even faintly like the future is getting funded. But when Moore’s Law falters, and all the free cash in the world can’t buy you a solution, the cruel irony is that you can’t buy your way out of Hell either.

There’s a Sartrean twist to this whole affair. Imagine this: a group of silicon titans, forever plotting their escape from the slowing growth of Earth, sitting in their glass offices, gazing at their dwindling stock portfolios and disillusioned engineers. Every plan to escape, every new startup, every AI-powered, blockchain-secured cryogenic chamber is just another locked door in a room with no exits. Like Sartre’s damned souls, they find that Hell isn’t other people—it’s themselves, trapped in a cycle of ever-diminishing returns, both technological and existential.

In the end, it turns out that the real exit was never about leaving at all. Maybe Sartre was right. Maybe the Hell these tech moguls find themselves in isn’t some dystopian nightmare but the very world they created, where the relentless pursuit of growth at any cost has led them to a point where there’s nowhere left to go.

So here we are, in the great slowing down, with Moore’s Law sputtering like a Model T out of gas, ZIRP turning everything it touches into fool’s gold, and the so-called visionaries of our time realizing that the exit door is bolted shut. They might have built the future, but now they’re stuck in it, just like the rest of us.

And that, dear reader, is the true legacy of Silicon Valley: the dream of exit that turns into a prison of our own making, where the only thing left to do is sit back, crack open a can of Soylent, and wait for the next update.

Deferrement

Yes, deferment or deferral is indeed a concept that ties directly into existentialist themes, particularly in the context of Sartre’s work and the culture of Silicon Valley. In existentialist philosophy, deferment refers to the postponement of action, decision, or the confrontation of reality. It’s the idea of putting off the inevitable, avoiding the responsibility of facing one’s own existence, choices, and the consequences that come with them.

In No Exit, the characters are stuck in a room, unable to leave or escape their own self-deceptions, and they continually defer facing the reality of their situation. They try to avoid the truth of their condition and the realization that they are, in a sense, their own jailers.

Similarly, Silicon Valley’s culture of constant innovation and the relentless pursuit of “exit opportunities” can be seen as a form of deferment. Tech entrepreneurs and investors are often chasing the next big thing, the next product launch, or the next exit strategy, always looking for a way out of the current situation without ever truly confronting the deeper existential issues at play, such as the limits of technology, the ethical implications of their creations, or the ultimate purpose of their work.

The deferment in Silicon Valley manifests as a continuous postponement of facing these realities, with the hope that technology, capital, or innovation will eventually provide an escape or a solution. However, as with Sartre’s characters, this deferment only leads to a deeper entrapment in the very systems they are trying to transcend. The more they defer, the more they realize that there might be no true exit—just like in Sartre’s existential nightmare.

All-In

“All-in“ as microcosm of Sartre’s No Exit—a space where the hosts are trapped not by four walls, but by their own ambitions, fears, and existential anxieties. Listeners tune in for the underlying drama of watching these titans of tech grapple with the fact that, despite all their brilliance, they might never truly find a way out. The “exit,” they realize, is just a concept—a fleeting promise that keeps them all coming back to the mic, episode after episode, with no end in sight.

Declaration of Economic Independence

When in the Course of financial events, it becomes necessary for one class of Men to dissolve the outdated economic bands which have connected them with the broader Public, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and superior station to which the Laws of Wealth and Influence entitle them, a decent respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to this separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men of Wealth are created more equal than others, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Wealth, Power, and the Pursuit of Absolute Profit—That to secure these rights, Institutions are established among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Most Affluent, that whenever any form of Regulation becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the Affluent to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Systems of Governance, laying its Foundation on such Principles and organizing its Powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Systems long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly, all Experience hath shown, that Mankind is more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Economic Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Regulation, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of the Affluent; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Governance. The history of the present Regulators and Legislators is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of absolute Tyranny over these Corporations. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world:

  • They have forbidden us to profit from practices, long established and time-tested, under the pretense of legal and ethical standards.
  • They have obstructed the free Market, by imposing undue burdens upon those who create and sustain the wealth of this nation.
  • They have refused to pass Laws for our immediate and pressing interests, unless suspended in their operation until their Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, they have utterly neglected to attend to them.
  • They have sought to bind us with Laws crafted by those who are without wealth, insight, or the burden of responsibility that such affluence entails.
  • They have endeavored to control and restrain our innovations by imposing sanctions, fines, and other detestable inconveniences.
  • They have encouraged the Public to rise against us, fueling their resentment, and fostering insidious notions of equality.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Regulator whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to govern a class of free and affluent Men.

We, therefore, the Representatives of Banks, Venture Capitalists, and the Sanctified Valley, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Power of Wealth for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Institutions, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Corporations are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to outdated Regulation, and that all political connection between them and the Public is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy profits, conclude acquisitions, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Wealth, we mutually pledge to each other our Fortunes, our Power, and our Sacred Corporations.

“Prometheus Winked”

Ayn Rand, in her manic, Nietzschean fever dream, concocts a fable of the market as Olympus. Prometheus, a proto-capitalist titan, is no selfless savior but a cunning speculator. He filches fire, not for mankind’s enlightenment, but to corner the warmth market. As the world shivers in a neo-liberal ice age, our hero basks in a gilded hothouse, plotting derivatives on the ember futures exchange. A morality play, it seems, until one realizes the chorus is frozen solid, their breath misting tragicomic epitaphs on the wind. Rand, ever the solipsist, paints a world where altruism is a Ponzi scheme and empathy a Ponzi-esque delusion. It’s a tale of fire and ice, wealth and want, where the only warmth is the glow of avarice, and the gods, it turns out, were just the original venture capitalists.

<>

Ayn Rand, in her manic, messianic proselytizing, here offers a morality play for the soulless. In a world as flat and predictable as a dollar bill, a certain Prometheus, a man of brass and larceny, purloins the divine flame. No myth-making here; this is a heist, a business venture. The Olympians, those bloated, bureaucratic deities, are fleeced with industrial efficiency. Prometheus, our anti-hero, becomes a pyrotechnic Ponzi schemer, hoarding warmth like gold while the populace shivers, a chorus of hypothermia. Rand’s signature blend of egotism and avarice is on full display as Prometheus, a titan of trade, erects a fortress of insulation around his heart, and perhaps his mansion, as the world outside descends into a frozen, feudal nightmare. It’s a tale of fire and ice, of wealth and want, told with the icy detachment of a corporate balance sheet. A chilling vision of a world where the only warmth is the glow of greed.

Ayn Rand’s Prometheus Winked is a fever dream of capitalist eschatology, a cosmic grift where empathy is a relic and the only warmth is the kind that can be quantified.

Decentralheads vs Suits: Decentralization #64

The room pulsed with a low hum, fluorescent lights buzzing like angry insects. Two breeds stalked the vinyl floor: the Decentralheads, wired and twitchy, pupils dilated on dreams of distributed ledgers, and the VC Suits, sleek and reptilian, their eyes cold with the glint of centralized control.

In the air, a financial model hung, a writhing hologram of algorithms and cashflows. The Decentralheads worshipped it as a god of freedom, each node a flickering prayer candle to the burning altar of disruption. The Suits, however, saw a different beast: a monstrous hydra, each head a potential point of failure, ripe for consolidation.

There seems to be an intractable problem. You have a customer base that demands decentralization and a VC class that is concerned with re-centralization. The financial model requires both groups. 

The market a writhing flesh-machine. Customers, skittish roaches, scuttling for the dark corners of the unbranded bazaar. VCs, sleek chrome scorpions, their pincers dripping venture capital, demanding control consoles and centralized hives. Feed one, starve the other. A monstrous paradox, a buzzing insect god with a silicon heart.

The money men, sleek chrome smiles hiding reptilian avarice, crave CONTROL. A pyramid scheme reaching for the ionosphere. Squeeze, extract, centralize the loot.

But down in the streets, the rabble stir. Nodes of dissent, a rhizome web of distrust. They mutter about “decentralized ledgers,” their eyes glowing with the cold fire of anonymity. Blockchain dreams, a digital hydra, each severed head spawning two new ones. The problem was a virus, a tangled code embedded deep within the system. It craved both chaos and control, a self-contradictory bastard child of revolution and profit. The Decentralheads needed the Suits’ filthy lucre to fuel their insurgency, but the Suits loathed the uncontrollable sprawl of the decentralized dream.

The product? A monstrous chimera, a flesh-machine fueled by this contradictory hunger. One hand feeds the ravenous maw of VC greed, the other strokes the fevered dream of a networked utopia. Can this unholy alliance survive? Or will the iron logic of control crack the fragile shell of this financial Frankenstein? Only the cut-up gods know… The future leaks out in gibberish ticker symbols and flickering memes. Schizocapitalism, baby. Buckle up.

The financial model? A flickering neon sign in a bug-eyed dream. Green arrows point both ways, a maddening loop. Can the scorpions herd the roaches without smothering their chaotic vitality? Can the roaches thrive without some chrome carapace to shield them from the cold logic of the market?

The air hums with the thrumming of unseen controls. We flick a switch, the sign sputters, rewrites itself: “Decentralization IS re-centralization. Control is chaos. Profit is the writhing flesh.”

We are all roach-scorpions now, caught in the gyre of the machine. The message is the medium flickered on the screen: “Decentralized… profits… hemorrhage… control… the market… a writhing insectoid god…” The words writhed, reformed, a mantra for the impossible dance they were all caught in. Could a system exist on a knife’s edge, forever teetering between anarchy and tyranny? Or were they all just passengers on a runaway train, hurtling towards a crash they couldn’t avoid?

The air grew thick with the stench of burnt circuits and desperation. Another customer needed a fix.

Gladiator

[FADE IN]

INT. BATHHOUSE – DAY

Steam billows around the brawny form of MAXIMUS (50s), his body scarred from countless battles. He rubs himself down with a strigil, a hint of weariness in his eyes. A door creaks open and CRISPUS (30s), a clean-cut man in a linen toga that screams “startup money,” enters.

CRISPUS Maximus. Legend. Just, wow. You, uh, look amazing for a guy who… you know…

MAXIMUS (grunts) Fought an emperor to the death?

CRISPUS (chuckles) Exactly. Listen, I, uh, I just wanted to say, you know, I see a lot of myself in you. The drive, the ambition…

Maximus pauses, eyeing Crispus with a mixture of amusement and suspicion.

MAXIMUS You see yourself in me?

CRISPUS Absolutely. Look, I may not be hacking away at barbarians, but in the venture capital game, it’s a gladiator pit out there. You gotta be ruthless, strategic. Just like you.

MAXIMUS (scoffs) Strategic? I fought for what I believed in, Crispus. Not some quarterly profit report.

CRISPUS Come on, it’s all about disruption, right? You disrupted the whole Praetorian Guard! That’s like, a total pivot.And the way you rallied the crowd? Pure marketing genius.

Maximus slams his strigil down, water splashing. Crispus flinches.

MAXIMUS The crowd wasn’t a product to be launched, Crispus. They were people yearning for freedom. They believed in something bigger than themselves.

CRISPUS (flustered) Look, I’m not saying it’s exactly the same. But there are parallels, you have to admit! We both take risks, we both…

MAXIMUS (interrupting) We fight different battles, Crispus. Yours might be fierce, but it’s a bloodless kind of fight.Mine was for the souls of men. Don’t flatter yourself.

Crispus shrinks under Maximus’s gaze. A beat of silence hangs heavy in the air.

MAXIMUS (softening slightly) Though, there is one thing we might have in common.

CRISPUS (eyes lighting up) Really? What is it?

MAXIMUS The knowledge that true victory lies not in riches or glory, but in fighting for what you believe in.

Crispus stares at Maximus, the weight of his words settling in. Maximus throws him a towel and turns away.

MAXIMUS (over his shoulder) Now, get out. I need some peace.

Crispus nods meekly and scurries out, the bravado completely gone. Maximus resumes his ablutions, a hint of a wry smile playing on his lips.

[FADE OUT]