In National Stock Car Racing the cars are all nominally equal, that’s far from the case in F1 where some years a single competitor dominates partially from having chosen a superior technological implementation.
I don't really follow NASCAR, but from listening to my (huge fan) father-in-law, that word is doing some work. His best (or, at least, my favorite) are the creative ways teams find to bend the rules - or blatantly cheat! - to give their cars an advantage.
One that made me laugh: a team once packed their suspension tubes with lead shot to make minimum weight. On the first lap the driver pulled a lever that dropped all the shot onto the track, and then enjoyed an underweight car for the rest of the race! They're always looking for "legitimate" optimizations, too.
To be, or not to be? That is the ultimate leadership challenge.
Are you playing it safe and suffering the "slings and arrows" of a volatile market? Or are you ready to disrupt the status quo and take arms against a sea of industry challenges?
Let’s break it down:
• Strategy vs. Execution: Is it nobler to endure the grind, or to pivot and end the struggle?
• The "Sleep" of Stagnation: We all want to end the heartache of inefficient workflows, but are we afraid of the "dreams" (or risks) that come with true innovation?
The "undiscovered country" of new markets can be intimidating. It’s easy to let the "pale cast of thought" lead to analysis paralysis. But great leaders don't let their "currents turn awry"—they take action.
Don't let your resolution be "sicklied o'er." It’s time to scale, optimize, and make your mark.
Who’s with me? #Leadership #Innovation #GrowthMindset #Entrepreneurship #ActionOriented #PersonalBranding
Output: Reflecting on the ultimate deadline today.
In the fast-paced world of business, we often forget that our time is the most finite resource we have. Facing the reality of our own mortality is the ultimate wake-up call to optimize our workflows, prioritize high-impact networking, and truly lean into our core value propositions.
Every ending is just a pivot to a new legacy. Are you maximizing your ROI before the final Q4?
The fight is not about where it is shown and not about what, not about "links in Wikipedia", but about whether News Inc will be able to kill AT, as they did with 12FT.
They are owner of ArsTechnica which wrote 3rd (or 4th?) article on AT in a row painting it in certain colors.
The article about FBI subpoena that pulled J.P's speculations out of the closet was also in ArsTechnica and by the same author, and that same article explicitly mentioned how they are happy with 12ft down
---
US publishers have been fighting web services designed to bypass paywalls. In July, the News/Media Alliance said it secured the takedown of paywall-bypass website 12ft.io. “Following the News/Media Alliance’s efforts, the webhost promptly locked 12ft.io on Monday, July 14th,” the group said. (Ars Technica owner Condé Nast is a member of the alliance.)
---
That doesn’t mean that the subscription itself is losing money. The margin on the subscription could be fine, but by using that margin to R&D the next model, the org may still be intentionally unprofitable. It’s their investment/growth strategy, not an indictment of their pricing strategy.
They have investors that paid for training of these models too. It could be argued that R&D for the next generation is a separate issue, but they need to provide a return on the R&D in this generation to stay in business.
reply