Adrian Camilleri

blue check

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@thomaschattwill How can someone be post-economic yet work in tech? Are there any tech employers who don't pay their staff?

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@katrosenfield Good Lord! Your husband looks (or looked) like George Lazenby.

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@jessesingal It's called Democratic Frustration (as opposed to Democratic Fatigue). The definition is "the cognitive and emotional response that occurs when citizens perceive a sustained and significant disparity between democratic expectations and political outcomes."

[Dami-Defi @DamiDefi]

Realising Apple went public at under $2 billion and 15 times revenue in 1980.

SpaceX wants you to buy at $2 trillion and 100 times revenue in 2026.

That is not getting in early. That is being the exit for venture capitalists who have held this equity for years at a fraction of what you are being asked to pay.

Almost none of the retail investors buying this IPO will read the 300 pages before the book closes on June 11.

That is your entire competitive advantage right there.

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@Jediwolf @SHL0MS This smells of a double-fake. Post an AI Monet, then post the critiques of the Monet while telling everyone else that it's fake. Those who are 'in-the-know' laugh at the poor rubes for falling for your joke, only to then discover that it was a real Monet and the joke's on them.

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@MTGSecretLair Checks date.................
Nope. It's April 30th.
Guess this is real.

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@0xgaut Weight? 37g.

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@Tesla_GTownTX @ChrisChavez

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@VladTheInflator Thots and prayers

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@ShivamHere_56 This...(and the Indiana Jones scene where he shoots the sword juggler)...is the greatest scene in movie history.

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@Matt_Pinner

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@robkhenderson Only seen this photo on X. None of the reputable news sites seem to have released it as part of the recent batch.

[Jon F (jonnycatx) @jonfiorucci]

after centuries of women clawing their way to the right to vote, own property, get an education, escape being legal chattel, and finally—finally—carve out a tiny corner of elite sport where raw biology didn’t automatically hand every medal to males, we’ve reached peak progress:
Just put on some lipstick, drop your testosterone to whatever the current arbitrary number is (still five to ten times higher than any female competitor has ever naturally produced), and congratulations! You now get to swagger into the women’s division and collect the titles, prize money, records, and sponsorships that actual women spent their entire lives bleeding for.
Because nothing screams “equality” like watching a 6′4″ athlete who went through full male puberty deadlift 800 lb like it’s a warm-up set, while the woman who’s trained since she was twelve and sacrificed everything gets bumped off the podium by someone whose only real disadvantage was having to wait a year or two before being allowed to dominate her.
And when women dare to point out that this feels an awful lot like the same old story—males taking whatever they want from females—the chorus immediately shouts “bigot!” Apparently caring whether female athletes get to experience a single category on earth where male physiology doesn’t reign supreme is now proof you secretly hate women.
Yes, women fought for generations to escape male oppression… only to be told in 2025 that the ultimate form of liberation is handing the fruits of that struggle straight back to males who say the magic words “I’m a woman now.”
If that isn’t the most humiliating plot twist in the history of so-called feminism, I don’t know what is.

[Roadman Podcast @Roadman_Podcast]

This guy tried to convince he doping is good for sport.
It's the first time i've lost my cool on the podcast.
Aron D'Souza, president of the Enhanced Games, just spent an hour trying to convince me that doping should be legal in sport.
He's polished, he's persuasive, and he's got answers for everything.
As someone who lives and breathes cycling – a sport that's watched people die from this exact vision – I should have been able to dismantle his arguments immediately.
The problem is, he sounds reasonable. And that terrifies me.
Because D'Souza isn't some fringe lunatic. He's an Oxford-educated lawyer who's raised serious money and has elite athletes already signed up.
He asks compelling questions about fairness, about athlete welfare, about why we accept some technologies but not others.
And if you're not paying close attention, you might actually believe him.
He's really selling a sanitised version of the same underground doping culture that's destroyed careers, ended lives, and corrupted sport for decades. He calls it "medical supervision" and "transparency," but it's still asking young athletes to chemically modify their bodies to compete.
He talks about "choice," but once the Enhanced Games exists, every athlete who wants to see their full potential will face impossible pressure to participate.
His economic argument sounds good on paper. Elite swimmers making $30,000 a year is shameful, and he's right about that.
But the solution isn't to create a pharmaceutical arms race with million-dollar prizes for whoever's willing to push their body furthest.
That's not fixing the problem – it's exploiting it.
D'Souza kept comparing performance enhancement to other technological advances. We don't limit surgeons to 1950s techniques, he said. We don't cap engineering progress.
But sport isn't surgery or engineering.
The entire point of athletic competition is testing human limits within agreed constraints.
Remove those constraints and you're not watching sport anymore – you're watching a biochemistry experiment with human subjects.
He promised comprehensive health monitoring, professional medical teams, elimination of dangerous self-experimentation.
But who's monitoring the monitors?
What happens when an athlete's health markers start declining but they're three weeks from a million-dollar payday?
What happens when the medical team is employed by the same organisation that profits from record-breaking performances?
We've seen this movie before in cycling, and it ended with body bags.
The most insidious part of his argument is how he frames the current anti-doping system as bureaucratic and hypocritical.
Sure, anti-doping has problems. Yes, there's hypocrisy in what we allow versus what we ban.
But the answer to an imperfect system isn't to abandon all limits – it's to fix the system.
D'Souza isn't interested in reform. He's interested in profit.
And make no mistake, this is about money.
He talks about athlete welfare, but he's creating a product for spectators who want to see superhuman performances without caring about the cost.
He's banking on our collective inability to look away from a car crash. Faster times, bigger performances, world records tumbling – all while athletes mortgage their long-term health for short-term glory and financial survival.
What really bothers me is his vision of "different tiers" of competition coexisting. That's not choice – that's segregation.
Within a generation, you'd have "natural" sport as the minor leagues and enhanced sport as the real competition. Every young athlete with Olympic dreams would face a simple calculation: stay clean and stay poor, or enhance and maybe make a living.
That's not freedom. That's coercion with extra steps.
D'Souza kept asking what we're protecting.
Here's my answer: we're protecting the kid who discovers they're talented at cycling and wants to see how far that talent can take them without having to become a chemistry experiment.
We're protecting the fundamental idea that sport should test what your body can do, not what your pharmacology team can do.
We're protecting athletes from having to choose between their dreams and their health.
I left that conversation more convinced than ever that the Enhanced Games is exactly what it sounds like: a game.
But the stakes are real athletes' lives, and the house always wins.
D'Souza is charismatic and his arguments sound sophisticated.
That's what makes this dangerous. Because somewhere, a young athlete is going to hear his pitch and think it sounds reasonable.
And that might be the decision that destroys their life.
So no, I'm not convinced. I'm alarmed.
We need to share this and push back against this worrying trend.
Don't watch it, support it or celebrate it.
These aren't our champions!

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@IonaItalia Ok. I'm genuinely jealous of that view and the serenity you've found there 😉.

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@IonaItalia The unfortunate assumption behind that poorly-chosen headline is that there is zero emotional effort being made by the male partner. That is, I more-than-suspect, far from the truth.

[Ari Drennen @AriDrennen]

GOP in 2022: what is a woman?

GOP in 2025: what is a child?

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@MsMelChen @listen2tish Sounds like you're on your.......

[Adrian Camilleri @OrdMandrell]

@IonaItalia Touché 😉