FBA Programs Nomenclature: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
(→Intent) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''We train civilization engineers, form new enterprises, and upgrade existing ones to build open, regenerative infrastructure at planetary scale.''' | '''We train civilization engineers, form new enterprises, and upgrade existing ones to build open, regenerative infrastructure at planetary scale.''' | ||
=Sequencing= | |||
Nothing launches that requires MJ to be the bottleneck. | |||
=Diagnose Why “Civilization Design (CD)” Is Not Correct = | =Diagnose Why “Civilization Design (CD)” Is Not Correct = | ||
Revision as of 08:36, 20 January 2026
Intent
We train civilization engineers, form new enterprises, and upgrade existing ones to build open, regenerative infrastructure at planetary scale.
Sequencing
Nothing launches that requires MJ to be the bottleneck.
Diagnose Why “Civilization Design (CD)” Is Not Correct
Your instincts are correct. “Civilization Design” name fails in three ways:
- “Design” is culturally corrupted
- Implies aesthetics, UX, CAD, architecture-as-style
- Suggests low consequence, subjective output
- Attracts people optimized for slides, not systems
- It undersignals rigor
- Does not clearly imply engineering discipline
- Does not imply accountability to reality
- Sounds adjacent to speculative futurism
- It undersignals economic seriousness
- Not obvious that outputs feed enterprise
- Sounds “pre-business” rather than “proto-industry”