Josh Turansky

Married to Kristel 💍, Dad of 7 👨‍👩‍👧‍👦, Church Planting Pastor 🙏 in Baltimore, MD @havencitychurch. $ADA

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

https://t.co/9s05UHsf4e

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

I just lifted 9,182 lbs on @hevyapp

https://t.co/34jVxAfxdY

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

Congratulations Apple! You have caught up with 2024.

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

@chamath called it

[unusual_whales @unusual_whales]

BREAKING: Elon Musk has reportedly discussed possibly folding Tesla, $TSLA, and SpaceX together, per CNBC

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

@theallinpod @GavinSBaker the hair game in this episode is peak

[Blake Neff @BlakeSNeff]

One can have mixed opinions about AI itself, but the revolt against data centers is a very ugly sign for the U.S. It shows America headed in the direction of Europe, developing the moral sense that any kind of development or economic activity is somehow immoral, so it’s better to just not have such things. The proper response to worries about water is to point out that it is a hysterical lie (data center water use is minuscule compared to agriculture or other industries); the proper response to worries about electricity is to build more power plants as quickly as possible.

The end result of this panic will be economic stagnation and domination by foreign powers that choose growth.

https://t.co/LTSJR33Yfh

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

💯Agree

[Zeke Cohen @Zeke_Cohen]

The Council’s message is clear: If smoke shop owners sell illegal drugs to our kids and prey on our communities, we will use our padlock legislation to shut you down.

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

Reminds me of the Catholic Church trying to forbid the printing of the Bible in common language.

Heaven forbid that normal people have unfettered access to a high IQ assist that can help them do life.

[Garry Tan @garrytan]

Sanders and AOC introduced a bill to pause ALL AI data center construction. 300+ local bills filed. Half of planned 2026 data centers facing delays or cancellation. Each one brings billions to local economies.

The people who say they want American jobs are trying to block the biggest job creation engine since the interstate highway system.

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

AOC vient d'expliquer qu'on ne peut pas "gagner" un milliard de dollars. Que c'est mathématiquement impossible. Que tout milliardaire est forcément un voleur, un abuseur de lois du travail, un payeur sous-évalué.

Ce niveau d'ignorance économique de la part d'une élue qui légifère sur l'économie devrait nous faire hurler.

Reprenons depuis le début, parce qu'apparemment c'est nécessaire.

Un milliardaire n'est pas quelqu'un qui a un milliard de dollars en cash sur son compte. Un milliardaire est quelqu'un dont le marché évalue les actifs (principalement des parts d'entreprise) à un milliard ou plus.

Elon Musk n'a pas "pris" 800 milliards à quelqu'un. Il a créé Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink, Neuralink, xAI. Le marché évalue ces entreprises à plusieurs trillions cumulés. Il en détient une fraction. C'est ça, sa "fortune".

La question fondamentale qu'AOC ne se pose jamais : d'où vient la valeur ?

La valeur n'est pas un gâteau fixe qu'on se partage. La valeur est créée. Quand SpaceX divise par 10 le coût du lancement orbital, ce n'est pas du vol, c'est de la création pure. Avant Musk, lancer un kilo en orbite coûtait 50K$. Aujourd'hui 1.5K$.

Cette création de valeur est mesurable, vérifiable, et bénéficie à toute l'humanité. L'internet par satellite couvre des zones que les États ont été incapables de connecter en 50 ans. Les voitures électriques ont forcé toute l'industrie auto à se réinventer.

Maintenant, la question centrale qu'AOC évite soigneusement : qui devrait allouer les ressources dans une société ?

Parce que l'argent, fondamentalement, c'est ça. Un signal d'allocation. Décider où va le capital, le travail, l'énergie, le temps humain.

Trois options historiques :

L'État (bureaucrates élus ou nommés)

Les comités citoyens (démocratie directe)
Les entrepreneurs qui ont prouvé leur capacité d'allocation par leurs résultats
L'option 1 a été testée massivement au 20ème siècle. URSS, Chine maoïste, Venezuela, Cuba, Corée du Nord. Résultat : famines, pénuries, effondrement. Des dizaines de millions de morts. L'allocation étatique est un désastre empirique total.

L'option 2 n'a jamais existé à grande échelle pour des raisons mathématiques. Le calcul économique nécessaire pour allouer les ressources d'une économie moderne dépasse les capacités cognitives d'une assemblée. Hayek l'avait démontré dès 1945 (The Use of Knowledge in Society).

L'option 3, c'est le marché. Et le marché récompense ceux qui allouent bien. Ceux qui allouent mal font faillite, perdent leur capital, sortent du jeu. Les survivants sont par sélection darwinienne les meilleurs allocateurs disponibles.

Elon Musk est riche parce qu'il a prouvé, sur 25 ans, qu'il alloue mieux le capital que 99.9999% de l'humanité. PayPal. Tesla. SpaceX. Starlink. Chaque fois, il a pris du capital et l'a transformé en infrastructure civilisationnelle.

La vraie question n'est pas "pourquoi Musk a tant", c'est : "pourquoi n'a-t-il pas plus ?"

Sérieusement. Si on veut maximiser la création de valeur pour l'humanité, on devrait vouloir que les meilleurs allocateurs aient accès à plus de capital, pas moins.

Donner 100 milliards à AOC pour qu'elle les redistribue selon sa vision morale, c'est garantir leur destruction. Donner 100 milliards à Musk, c'est probablement obtenir des bases martiennes, de l'énergie quasi-gratuite, et une révolution robotique.

Le préjugé d'AOC, c'est que la richesse est un péché moral. C'est une vision théologique, pas économique. Elle traite le capital comme un stock à confisquer, pas comme un flux à orienter vers les usages les plus productifs.

Et c'est là que sa thèse devient grotesque : "vous payez les gens moins que ce qu'ils valent."

Définition de "ce qu'ils valent" selon AOC : ce qu'AOC pense qu'ils devraient toucher. Définition selon le marché : ce qu'un autre employeur est prêt à leur offrir.

Si Tesla payait ses ingénieurs en dessous de leur valeur, ces ingénieurs partiraient chez Google, Apple, Meta. Ils restent. Donc la rémunération est compétitive. Mécanisme de base que tout étudiant en L1 d'éco comprend.
Le pattern fondamental : AOC, et toute la classe politique qui pense comme elle, n'a jamais alloué une seule ressource productive de sa vie. Jamais embauché en assumant le risque salarial. Jamais investi son capital dans un projet incertain. Jamais créé une entreprise qui survit.

Et pourtant elle veut décider qui peut posséder quoi.

C'est l'équivalent de quelqu'un qui n'a jamais joué aux échecs voulant arbitrer un tournoi de grands maîtres en réécrivant les règles à mi-partie.

Ce qui est triste, c'est que cette vision a un coût massif. Chaque fois qu'on taxe les meilleurs allocateurs, on détourne du capital de ses usages productifs vers des usages politiques (subventions, clientélisme, projets vanity étatiques).

La France en sait quelque chose. 50 ans de redistribution, ISF, exit tax, taxe à 75%. Résultat : zéro géant tech, fuite des cerveaux, dette à 113% du PIB, croissance atone.

AOC veut nous vendre le même poison en plus grand format.

La conclusion est inconfortable mais nécessaire : nous avons besoin de plus de milliardaires, pas moins. Plus d'allocateurs prouvés. Plus de capital concentré entre les mains de ceux qui ont démontré qu'ils savent le faire fructifier pour l'humanité.

Et nous avons besoin de moins d'AOC. Moins de gens qui n'ont rien construit, qui n'ont rien risqué, qui n'ont rien créé, mais qui veulent décider à la place de ceux qui font.

Le mythe ce n'est pas "le mythe d'avoir mérité son milliard". Le mythe c'est qu'une députée de 36 ans qui n'a jamais géré un budget supérieur à son staff parlementaire ait la moindre légitimité à théoriser sur l'allocation du capital mondial.

[Wes Huff @WesleyLHuff]

So apparently I’m embroiled in some sort of controversy. Let me set a few things strait:

1. I don’t know Sam Allberry personally. We've met in-person a total of once — back in January while I was in Nashville when I did the Shawn Ryan Podcast, where I ran into and took a picture with Sam. When I saw the news initially about his removal from leadership I took that picture down. I had already started to see people commenting that by keeping it up I was implicating myself in his sin. I do not think they were correct. But ironically, said comments were then replaced with ones telling me that by taking it down… I was hiding something and implicating myself in his sin. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

2. I believe the language in the current public statements to be potentially unhelpfully vague. From my (brief though not uninformed) understanding of the details of the situation, what Sam did that disqualified him from leadership was not due to sexual or even a romantic impropriety, but what could best be described as a sinful emotional attachment. This is not to justify it or say that it wasn't disqualifying (I think it probably was). But the lack of clarity has left room for those who desire to gossip, defame, and sinfully speculate online to run wild — which they have.

3. I am genuinely saddened with the internet’s desire to tear down and jump to harsh judgements regarding another Christian’s failing. When someone falls into sin, those who are spiritually mature should work toward their restoration, approaching them with a spirit of gentleness (Gal. 6:1-2). The motivation for restoration carries spiritual weight. Bringing someone back who has wandered from truth saves their soul from death and covers a multitude of sins (James 5:19–20). This isn’t merely about correcting behaviour, it’s about spiritual rescue. The desire to gossip and breed quarrels, which is so obviously warned against in scripture (Proverbs 17:19; 26:17; 2 Timothy 2:14, 23-24; Titus 3:9-11; James 4:1-2) is, to say the least, lamentable and disappointing to see.

4. Sam Allberry is being labelled as “Side B,” this is genuinely confusing to me. To quote Sam in his own words: “Same sex attraction is not a good thing. It is... a consequence of the fall. ...This kind of attraction is not something God designed for us, and it contradicts his design” (Is God Anti Gay, 63). Sam has expressed in multiple places throughout his written work and public talks that he holds to the biblical position of marriage, that homosexual relationships are sinful, and that identifying as a “gay Christian” is incompatible with scripture. To be clear, I don't agree with Sam on all the nuances of how he discusses the issue. But I can only conclude that this attempt to make him into an LBGT advocate comes from either shear ignorance of his public work or some sort of internet-level frothing of the mouth to jump on whoever “we don’t like this week.”

But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. - Heb 3:13.

[Carter Elliott, IV @CarterElliottIV]

BREAKING NEWS: Baltimore records the fewest homicides in a month EVER RECORDED! https://t.co/IlIVv8T2Wc

[Barstool Sports @barstoolsports]

Pizza Hut is Bringing Back the 'BOOK IT!' Summer Reading Program

[Dear Self. @Dearme2_]

Every time I see old couples, I always wonder how many times they’ve forgiven each other.

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

Don't waste your time on this yet. I just gave it a simple plan for processing my email to inbox zero following a GTD method. Connected it to @NotionHQ. It is about as dumb as a rock and useless.

[Google Cloud @googlecloud]

Introducing Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform—our new platform to build, scale, govern, and optimize agents.

[Ryan Carson @ryancarson]

SpaceX secured an option to buy Cursor for $60B in 2026, or pay $10B for their joint AI coding work using Colossus (if acq doesn’t happen)

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

@peterthekid @gregisenberg @davemorin Path! Such great memories

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

I hear you. It can be very frustrating. I have been using it for two months on Kimi 2.5 and Sonnet 4.6 as my backup model. I designed my agent to handle logistics for https://t.co/o6Mq9wgpWx. My agent is slowly taking over the role of being a router for our truck and handle relationship management for 155 pantries. It has been a slow build with very tight parameters.

One of the surprising things that has happened along the way was that I vibe coded an operational web site to manage our network of pantries but specifically designed the system to be agent friendly. From the very beginning we were thinking about an agent-friendly web app system where the openclaw could manage via API. My claw has API access, Notion access to that teamspace, a email account and Twilio access.

As of today my agent is handling 75% of day-to-day operations with me shadowing his work. The goal is to go on vacation for a week in May and have him run 95% of that week. We'll see if it works next month.

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

Old: How do I make this user friendly?

New: How do I make this agent friendly?

[MERICA MEMED @Mericamemed]

This is the stuff my dad did. He’s gonna believe this for years 😂

[Josh Turansky @JoshTuransky]

This morning spent time looking at the expanding ecosystems in Western Christianity and asked the question "Who does each ecosystem appeal to as an authority (other than Jesus)"?
https://t.co/qSoyQ80s23

[SightBringer @_The_Prophet__]

⚡️The professional middle is entering a slow liquidation.

That is what is coming.

A lot of six figure workers still think they own scarce cognition. They do not. What they actually own is a seat inside an organizational diagram that is about to be rewritten. For twenty years, companies paid armies of people to summarize, coordinate, package, analyze, report, reassure, sell, recruit, and administratively maintain complexity. AI is about to reveal how much of that layer was never true scarcity. It was overhead wearing prestige.

That is why this gets dangerous. The people in that layer built expensive lives around the illusion that their salaries were durable. Big mortgages. daycare. two income households. private schools. lifestyle debt. identity fused to title. So when the compression starts, it does not feel like a normal labor shock. It feels like your class position is being revoked. A person loses the job and suddenly realizes the house was never a fortress. It was a fixed-cost trap financed by continuity.

The next 12 to 18 months are likely to be ugly because companies have finally been handed a believable excuse to thin the white collar herd. They can say AI. They can say efficiency. They can say macro caution. They can say market conditions. The language does not matter. The result does. Fewer seats. Longer hiring cycles. More ghosting. Lower offers. Higher bars. More people with impressive resumes chasing jobs beneath prior status. The market will keep telling itself this is temporary. A lot of it is structural.

And the cruelest part is that this probably will not arrive as one cinematic crash. It will arrive as social downgrading. The title gets softer. The comp gets cut. The search takes longer. The savings get chewed through. The role accepted is smaller than the last one. The family says it is fine. The person knows something has broken. That kind of decline is much more psychologically destructive than one violent break because it makes people live inside the decay of their own ranking.

Housing is where this becomes visible. The professional class was supposed to be the stable bid under the market. If enough of them lose income security while carrying large mortgages, the house stops being optionality and becomes a restraint device. People stop moving. Listings freeze. Spending contracts. Families become geographically trapped because leaving means crystallizing loss or taking a much worse payment elsewhere. The labor shock and the housing shock start feeding each other.

Society is about to discover how much of the tax base, consumption base, and institutional calm sat on a white collar class whose value was inflated by a pre-AI information economy. That class thought it had made it because it was paid well. A lot of them were just being temporarily overcompensated to keep the administrative machine running. When the machine needs fewer humans, the paycheck premium gets repriced hard.

Bottom line:

A lot of six figure jobs are going away.

A lot of the people in them will not get equivalent replacements.

The pain will concentrate in the salaried professional class with high fixed costs and no ownership cushion.

The official data will lag the lived reality.

The social mood will get darker long before the statistics fully admit why.

The real truth is simple:

The next phase is the collapse of professional security.

The middle is about to learn that income is not the same thing as safety.