Chuck, this one landed. The way you framed “terminal velocity” hit like a mirror — not just physics but the feeling of living too fast for our own bearings. That line about cognitive dust? That’s it. We’re choking on headlines that don’t even have time to become memories.
I see the same pattern you called out: new jobs with no ancestry, new threats before we’ve even named the last one, trust in systems cracking not because of change itself but because adaptation lags. It’s the coal dust of our time, just invisible.
What you’re pointing at feels less like theory and more like daily survival. Reinforcing the airframe while it rattles — yeah. That’s where we are.
Chuck, this one landed. The way you framed “terminal velocity” hit like a mirror — not just physics but the feeling of living too fast for our own bearings. That line about cognitive dust? That’s it. We’re choking on headlines that don’t even have time to become memories.
I see the same pattern you called out: new jobs with no ancestry, new threats before we’ve even named the last one, trust in systems cracking not because of change itself but because adaptation lags. It’s the coal dust of our time, just invisible.
What you’re pointing at feels less like theory and more like daily survival. Reinforcing the airframe while it rattles — yeah. That’s where we are.
Mark — I try not to lean alarmist with this stuff, but yeah… if you know, you know.
We’re already mid-flight.
You are right the acceleration isn’t hypothetical, it’s lived — the airframe’s rattling now, not later.
That’s why I frame it as reinforcing while in motion.
It’s not about resisting change, it’s about building the struts fast enough that we don’t shear apart.
The choice isn’t slow down or crash — it’s adapt while moving or break under the load.
Thanks for reading, much obliged my friend!