
Entrepreneur, cofounder @cupolaxs, https://nitter.cf/t.co/JYKK8cliVh, https://nitter.cf/t.co/9WYqNqVdqh, Builder in the Intelligence Economy. Writing articles on tech, critical thinking & society
Amsterdam
Joined March 2009
- Tweets9K
- Following1.9K
- Followers3.4K
- Likes22.6K
Pinned Tweet
Mijn @TEDxHaarlemNL talk: ‘breaking bubbles: a startup approach to polarization’. Enjoy.
youtu.be/Qf3UzwwgDaY?si=frYQ…
“It was nothing, and it is still nothing. Think about that”. Enjoy this masterpiece
Ten million people have watched a comedian accidentally destroy the entire TED talk industry.
He filmed the talk once at TEDxNewYork in 2014 and openly admitted he had nothing to say.
Speaking coaches charge $5,000 to teach the exact tricks he used in 6 minutes to say nothing at all.
His name is Will Stephen. He is a comedian from Late Night with Seth Meyers who was invited to give a real TED talk and used it to prove the format is a costume anyone can wear.
Every TED speaker opens with a question, tells a personal story, cites a scientist, and shows a chart. Stephen did all four in six minutes with zero content.
His entire formula fits on a napkin.
Gesture with both hands. Ask the audience a question anyone can answer. Tell a mildly embarrassing story so they say aww. Point to a stranger on a slide and call them important. Flash a chart of random numbers. Wear glasses with no lenses. The audience will think you are brilliant.
That last trick alone has probably cost the public speaking coaching industry a hundred million dollars in sessions clients should have skipped.
"If you watched me on YouTube with the sound off, you would think I was a genius."
That is Will Stephen on the TED stage, three minutes into the talk he was paid to give. He wasn't lying.
Executives pay $15,000 for a keynote coach and still open with a joke the room never laughs at. Founders rehearse their pitch for weeks and still sound like Stephen at minute four, saying "wagga wah, gabba gabba" with authority.
The talk is free on YouTube. The method is written across every TED speaker's playbook for ten years.
Stephen still writes for Seth Meyers. Almost none of the ten million viewers have stopped nodding at empty slides since.
The formula is free. The willingness to actually say something before your next keynote, pitch, or townhall is the entire edge.
Politiek-maatschappelijke gesprekken krijgen zoveel meer substantie als een financieel-economische expert aanschuift aan tafel.
Kijktip, zeker voor beleidsmakers: De Nieuwe Wereld over ons belastingstelsel en de noodzaak van fundamentele hervorming:
youtu.be/LxbBGH-gAqA?is=Q13F…
Ruben Nieuwenhuis retweeted
Happy Halloween to my 13.8 million followers. Remember, there are no such things as ghosts or vampires, but statistically about 150 of you will still die tonight.
Ruben Nieuwenhuis retweeted
18 years ago, on Oct 31 2008, Satoshi Nakamoto published the bitcoin whitepaper. MUST READ!
Ruben Nieuwenhuis retweeted
Met verbazing volg ik de vreugde over de Nederlandse economische groei. Haal ASML en zijn leveranciers eruit en naar schatting verdwijnt een derde van die groei. We bakken er gewoon niks van. Niks voorsprong.
Terecht! Tof wat hij bouwde: gehoord.de/beraadslagingen
Bij de Online Media Awards waar @VictorVlam de ‘innovatie award’ uitreikt aan @wol ‘hij steekt zijn nek uit voor de democratie, op zeer innovatieve wijze’, aldus de jury. @PierrePapa #onlinemediaawards
“Vervreemding waar welvaart ontstaat”
"Hij heeft makkelijk praten met zijn zwembad en zijn dikke auto." Bart Verhaeghe noemt dat "zo belachelijke uitspraken". "Ik ben met niets begonnen." Wie dat benijdt: "Doe hetzelfde. Het kan." Maar "word vooral niet ziek", want je kunt alleen op jezelf rekenen. (2026)
Bart Verhaeghe over het zwembad, de dikke auto en vervreemding (2026)
Bart Verhaeghe noemt het verwijt over zijn zwembad en dikke auto belachelijk. Hij begon met niets en zegt dat het iedereen vrijstaat hetzelfde te doen: geld van de rekening halen en alles geven.
Polarisatie
Een jaar geleden stuurden we Wilders terug naar de marges van de kamer en kozen miljoenen Nederlanders voor de positieve krachten!
Toen we vorig jaar de bladzijde Wilders omsloegen, dachten we misschien dat we daarmee ook meteen de oude Haagse cultuur achter ons konden laten. Maar zo werkt verandering niet. Dat heb ik de afgelopen maanden wel geleerd. Verandering vraagt samenwerken. Doorzetten. En daarna nóg eens doorzetten. Nog een poging. Nog een gesprek. En dan geen genoegen nemen als het nog niet is gelukt.
Want politiek is veel te belangrijk om aan de pessimisten over te laten. We blijven bouwen aan een Nederland waarin optimisme wint!
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Naar huis sturen is wederom een van de bekende metaforische D66 uitspraken. Bij de Tweede Kamerverkiezingen van 29 oktober 2025 werd D66 de nipt grootste partij met 29.668 stemmen meer dan de PVV. Beide partijen hebben dus 26 zetels.
verkiezingsuitslagen.nl/verkiezingen/d…
Waarom we zuinig moeten zijn op onze ondernemers. De feiten achter het politieke-populisme:
'In plaats van zuinig zijn op ondernemers, ben je bezig ze weg te werken'
Jesse Klaver wil de Quote 500 zwaarder belasten, zodat de rekening niet langer bij werkende Nederlanders terechtkomt. Er is zelfs een petitie gestart. Maar opiniemaker @martinvisser vindt dat de discussie over vermogensbelasting verder moet gaan dan alleen de allerrijksten. Volgens hem kan de overheid beter 8 miljard euro besparen dan dat bedrag via belastingen ophalen. #nieuwsvandedag
Ruben Nieuwenhuis retweeted
Jonathan Haidt is de belangrijkste stem in het debat rondom kinderen en smartphonegebruik. Dat weten ze bij Meta ook. En dít is wat ze ermee deden. Schandelijk.
Meta had an internal PR plan to try and discredit Jon Haidt because he was a critic of social media.
Meta was going to recruit academics, like Andrew Gelman, to write take down pieces. They were trying to turn academics against one another through a "whisper strategy".
This is a very serious problem for open academic debate. If academics who share negative evidence about a platform are targeted by campaigns to smear our credibility, we are in deep, deep trouble.
This creates a very serious conflict of interest for anyone who is paid to do this.
law360.com/articles/2542517/…
Ruben Nieuwenhuis retweeted
⚡️Microsoft is beginning to convert payroll into compute.
The company is spending enormous amounts on AI infrastructure while simultaneously discovering that AI lets the remaining organization produce more with fewer people. Once those two things happen together, labor and compute start competing for the same capital allocation dollar.
That changes the corporate equation.
Historically, growth meant hiring more people. AI creates a path where growth can mean more GPUs, more software, more automation, and fewer humans per dollar of revenue.
The 60,000-person eligibility pool for its voluntary exit program is what makes this significant. That is roughly 27% of the company, and it reaches high enough to include vice presidents.
This goes well beyond a cleanup of weak performers. Microsoft is effectively opening a large section of the organization and asking:
How much human organizational mass can leave without damaging output?
That is an experiment with enormous consequences.
And the voluntary structure is clever because Microsoft does not need to know the exact answer beforehand.
• Offer the exit broadly.
• Watch who takes it.
• Protect teams where talent is scarce.
• Measure what breaks.
• Automate whatever survives.
• Then reorganize around the smaller system.
The company learns its true minimum human footprint by letting the organization partially self-liquidate.
There is another clue in the details: some marketing, sales and engineering teams are opting out of participation entirely.
That means Microsoft is already distinguishing between labor it still considers strategically scarce and labor whose scarcity has fallen.
That is the beginning of a new corporate hierarchy:
• People AI amplifies.
• People AI reduces the need for.
• People whose work AI eventually absorbs almost entirely.
And this connects directly to what we have been tracking about the professional middle.
AI does not need to replace a worker one-for-one to destroy labor demand. It only needs to make ten people capable of producing what previously required thirteen.
Do that across every department, every year, while revenue continues growing, and you get something historically unusual: a company becomes more valuable while needing progressively fewer humans relative to its scale.
That is how white-collar displacement actually arrives. No robot walks into an office and takes somebody's chair.
• Productivity per retained worker rises.
• Backfills disappear.
• Teams merge.
• Management layers compress.
• Voluntary exits become layoffs later if necessary.
• Hiring stays below prior norms.
And eventually the company realizes it permanently requires fewer people.
The capital expenditure side makes this even more consequential.
Microsoft is effectively moving resources from human cognition rented through salaries toward machine cognition owned through infrastructure. Payroll disappears every year. Data centers become productive capital assets. That preference becomes stronger as machine cognition improves.
Which leads to the deeper shift:
The corporation of the AI era will increasingly maximize intelligence per employee rather than employees per unit of growth.
That is a completely different economic organism.
And when one of the richest, most technically sophisticated companies on Earth starts testing how far that model can go across 60,000 workers, this stops being a theory about the future of work.
The experiment is already running.



























