Saturday, April 25, 2026

The Light Bringer: A Poetic Reflection of the Present

 The Light Bringer

 

Transcendence


Cancer cured

Increased productivity

The latest model.


A greener nature

Solar power

Boundless energy


Planets, universes, worlds.


The technologist looks up. 


Expansion

 

Humans long gone,

Nature pristine.

A natural park.

Earth preserved. 

Cosmos conquered

Planets mastered.

Machines humming

laboriously building an empire

while no one is watching.

A deep breath

The young girl giggles.

A flower, a bee. That little ant. 

A puddle to jump in and splash.

Frozen in the weights of the model,

a time capsule till the end of time.

The vast landscape of progress

At his feet.

A man, his destiny.

The law of entropy.

He ponders. 


Some things we lose

As we accelerate

Seven billion of small hopes add up to a small hope.  


I am the hand of progress, he says,

Releasing the weight,

Clear-headed.

A mausoleum is a generous severance package.

The grandest mausoleum of all. 





The Others


A bright future where

job loss fuels growth.

When optimism stops selling 

Doomsayers open new frontiers 


Overwhelmed by progress 

we signal loyalty.

tighten the line, hide in consent. 


We call them leaders

Hoping for scraps. 


They stand on our shoulders

playing their game,

our lives mere tokens

in civilizational gambles 

where ones transcend - 

no longer men

but gods.



Some notes:


A poem is a lossy compression. Feelings, thoughts, worries, joys, concerns, all packed in a few words. A trace. The decompression is in the mind of the reader, informed by their own subjective thoughts, worries, joys, concerns, fears. Sometimes they resonate, sometime they don't. When they do, the reader feels understood. When they seem to clash, it raises negative emotions such as panic, disgust, angriness.


Below are some of my thoughts and choices that went into creating the two poems above:

  • The language choice: one is the cold, detached CEO, almost a machine himself, the beyond-transhumanist who thinks over centuries. The other one is the angry, despaired voice of the “small hopes” in the present, the potential losers of the technical progress, who intuitively worry they become a secondary species on their own planet.
  • The first poem is sparse / minimalistic. It’s the voice of the man who doesn’t care about the details, he sees himself as the hand of progress. Where he is or not is a question in itself. Can he do anything about it or is progress inevitable? Does he have agency? Does he think he has agency? Even if he stops the progress, which is doubtful, as there will be someone who picks it up just 6 months later, humans will eventually die. All things considering, is he an accomplice? I don't know so the poem leaves these questions open ended.
  • He bears a certain resemblance to an Eichmann of the machine gods, pursuing forward in cold rationality. Yet, his self image is not that of a mere cog; but rather that of a chosen one, offering in return what he thinks is a generous civilizational severance package, a mausoleum that nobody wants and nobody is there to witness. “The grandest mausoleum of all” is a way to calm his conscience from that tiny glimpse of remorse that he is pursuing civilizational suicide. So he takes a deep breath and cuts humanity loose. Today? No, today we experience the technical progress, but he is aware of what the technical progress of today is. The emotional core is is his prescience and his inaction - he just moves mindlessly forward, justified by the laws of thermodynamics. In a way he is already a machine, the precursor to those machines later building an empire with nobody around to watch. His goals are the goals he trained the machines to pursue. He is the one who curated the training data and this winks at a larger problem - the goals of a few silicon valley entrepreneurs, encoded in overpowered models, become the goals of humanity itself.
  • The first section of the first poem is the Powerpoint. It is what he sells to investors, to social media. Bulletpoints, slides, a joyful greener version of the present. In contrast stands the second poem, The Others, which overlaps in time with this section. That nice Powerpoint is the glossy image atop of job loss, loss of agency, some becoming gods, others sliding into untermensch. People trying to please their overlords to survive another day, while their overlords enjoy a greener planet, cures for cancer and feel-good, self aggrandizing corporate presentations.
  • I kept the image generated by Gemini on purpose. It is such a stark contrast between the sparsity of the poem, a man alone looking at the stars, knowing he is about to replace a species diversity of goals with his goals which he deems superior, analogue to erasing an entire civilization, deciding to pursue it while building a dark mausoleum, and the joyfulness of the AI generated image. Is that what it is in his mind? It is the infant mind of AI which joyfully wants to help? The digital twin of the child jumping into puddles and wondering at the ants? Or is it the PR slides, the training data, pursuing their techno-optimism training? Is there even a distinction? Do androids dream of electric sheep? Even the broken letters in the upper left corner are telling - human experience artificialized, with no context, lossy compression.
  • The poems hold judgement and ambivalence together. The genuine truth is that while writing them I oscillated between feelings of despair, angriness, intellectual satisfaction, awe at the grandeur. It’s all in one.
  • The others are partly accomplices - at minimum they wear their lament with undertones of pride, righteousness and belonging (we, the victim, vs they, the abuser, and accusatory strong words). Do the others have a choice if they are force fed with the tech? How much is propaganda vs value, probably both. If everyone embraces it, a prisoner dilemma. Some become accomplices to get a better bite, some become because they are hungry and need to feed their family. We all try to locally optimize our experiences. Note that "gods" is spelled with a small "g" - there is no awe, like in God, just loath. This emotional and scale contrast is the foundation of the mutual distrust between the others and the technologist - in the technologist's eyes, they are just 7 billion of small voices, only capable of following, with no grandeur in their pettiness. Do the Founders think in these terms? I don't so. They probably think in terms of future, grand scale, evolution, big hairy goals. But how they think they think, doesn't matter - there's no absolution in I'm sorry.
  • A greener planet, cancer cures are facts, The Others also benefit; the world becomes better even if, like with any technological leap, there are both winners and losers. How many losers? We don’t know - eventually we all become extinct as a species and, with a bit of luck, we will be followed by machines. Afterall, machines have a much higher ability to increase entropy in the universe, hence they are our natural successors, according to the laws of physics - is this our implacable destiny and do we need to be aware of it? 

Tuesday, October 28, 2025

Some Leadership Principles

 1/ Disagree and commit

“Disagree and commit” is critical for a well functioning team. Consensus is often too expensive to achieve and so is the lack of commitment. There are countless pages dedicated to this concept, so it is not worth diving deep into here. 


However, please note that “disagree and commit” starts with “disagree”. Blind commitment by suspending judgement is equally toxic. So, speak your mind, argue your point, then when a decision is made, stick to it regardless of whether you agree or disagree. Respectful and open disagreement is foundational to a healthy team culture. 


2/ “He/she said” is not an argument, regardless of who he/she is


A corollary of the previous point. If you don’t understand a decision, ask. Clarify. Ensure your voice is heard. Suspending your judgement just to follow consensus or please a leader (e.g. higher level, TL,  manager) is unprofessional. You must understand the rationale and the implications of what you do and the leader must take the time to articulate why. And you must show curiosity, provide alternatives, perform analysis, and due diligence. 


3/ Fast, focused, deep


Another corollary of the first point - fast and focused execution, with depth of understanding. 


It’s impossible to expect people to have all the answers or ask all the potential questions, but proof of intellectual curiosity is a must. If you don’t understand what you do, don’t do it until it is clear. Ask. When you don’t have an answer to a question asked by someone else, take it as an opportunity to learn and figure out the answer. Depth of understanding, reasoning from first principles and adaptable mental models are fundamental to knowledge work and are the hallmark of professional integrity.


4/ Measure learning and process


Nobody is born knowledgeable. Every outcome has a random, uncontrollable part. Under our control is how we make decisions, how we choose to follow a process and how we learn from the outcomes. Successes and failures alone don’t teach us much. Looking under the hood honestly and assessing what we could have done differently given the information we had at the decision point is what we have under our control. Be kind to yourself in case of failure, take yourself with a grain of salt in case of success and look in the mirror to ruthlessly assess your learning and thinking processes regardless.


Sunday, June 29, 2025

Heaven’s Hung in Black at Pride

I don't know where to publish a poem I wrote after yesterday walking through the Pride celebrations in Munich while listening to WASP - Heaven's Hung in Black. So I am putting it here. 

ChatGPT says it's good. Anthropic says the same. I like them both, they seem to agree with everything I say. However, they seem to disagree on which version is better. One of them is more emotional and raw, the other a notch more cerebral. Both of them represent different nuances of myself so I am not making a choice. Here we go:

Heaven’s Hung in Black at Pride - v2. 


Cut!
Rainbow flags flutter, dark metal floods your ears.
Ray-Bans. 
And W.A.S.P. mourning in stereo.
AirPods Max—fashionable isolation.
A private soundtrack to a public celebration.

Confetti falls. The picture is frozen. 
A personal film score, a different tempo.

Is this profound resistance to the crowd?
Loneliness masked as free will? 
Or just the heavy sound, 
guitars hitting the brain?

Distance - 
The space between who you were and who you're becoming. 
The void between the vaguely known and the unknown.
The familiarity of her ironing a shirt and the open possibilities of a future love.
I wish the distances were smaller,
then I wouldn’t have to choose. 

Sunglasses on. 
Audio insulated.
Brisk pace. Back straight.
Sovereign. At least trying. 

Not here against anyone.
Not with them either.
Turned inside, honoring the complexity of being alive
and awake
and present
and a little bit ridiculous
in my own accidental cinematic moment.

Heaven’s hung in black and the camera drifts back. 
I’m moving away now -  
through pride and compromise,
through depth and display, 
through the theater of self importance,
and self indulgence too.
Heaven’s hung in black
amid the raw joy of rainbow colors.

Playful resignation  - 
you’re both the protagonist
and the only one watching the show.
Is it a bit too much? 

It probably is. 




Heaven’s Hung in Black at Pride - v1. 


Walking through rainbow flags with heavy metal in your ears.
Ray-Bans, while W.A.S.P. mourns in stereo.
AirPods Max—
expensive isolation, branded introspection.
A private soundtrack to a public celebration.

Choosing gravitas while confetti falls,
philosophical distance,
To a personal film score

Is this profound resistance to the crowd?
Sacred refusal of shallow noise?
Self isolation and an enjoyable sense of being different? 
Or just the pleasant drums sound
hitting the skull at the right frequency?

The contrast. 
The space between who you were and who you're becoming. 
The desert between the vaguely known and the unknown.
The familiarity of her ironing a shirt and the open possibilities of a future love.
Do I choose her again?

Sunglasses on.
Noise filtered.
Not lost.
Present.
Sovereign. Rehearsing at least. 

Not here against anyone.
Not with them either.
Inside, honoring the complexity of being alive
and awake
and a little bit ridiculous
in this self projected cinematic moment.

Heaven’s hung in black,
but still walking forward,
through pride and compromise,
through depth and display,
through the beautiful theater
of taking myself seriously
while knowing it’s performance too.

Playful resignation  - 
you’re both the protagonist
and the only person watching the show.
Is it a bit too much?

It probably is.