FUN Calibrate your output.

Presented live or sent ahead and read cold.

Nine decks from the Fun files: a council briefing, a pilot pitch, a market read, a sales deck, a class, a case study and the thinking behind them.

Four follow El Paso’s incentive deals and the Meta campus, from who builds the data center to why a public-records request cost $1,500. One reads Meta’s new AI agent the week it went big. One sells a first step in B2B analysis, one runs an afternoon class that ends with a film, and two set out the ideas underneath.

Every slide is on this page.

Press the F to see a deck.

  1. Council briefing

    Who builds the data center?

    Aug 2026 · 12 slides

    See every slide ↓

    A readiness audit built for one council member. The Meta campus needs 53–71% of El Paso’s entire electrical-contracting workforce at once, and the county trains 32 electricians a year.

    Built to survive forwarding: every figure sourced, no one cast as a villain, and the two questions the record couldn’t answer reported as unanswered.

  2. Market read

    Is Muse fun?

    Sep 2026 · 12 slides

    See every slide ↓

    Meta’s new AI agent, read the week it went big: what’s fun, what isn’t, what 2.5 million downloads mean for AI adoption, and whether it’ll be out for the holidays.

    Every claim carries its source on the slide. The not-fun list comes from the reviewers, not from us.

  3. Sales deck

    Some vs. none

    Sep 2026 · 10 slides

    See every slide ↓

    Where AI in B2B actually starts: not good vs. great analysis, but some vs. none. The competitor is inertia, and the offer is one question, one dataset, one answer, one week.

    Written to be left behind after the meeting. It says what we won’t sell as plainly as what we will.

  4. Class deck

    Make a film with AI

    Sep 2026 · 16 slides

    See every slide ↓

    The run of show for a hands-on AI video class: story, character, a shot plan with Claude, permission, and a lineup where everyone’s character meets. Everyone leaves with a film.

    Every example is from a real film on the reel. The frames on the slides are the frames the method made.

  5. Case study

    Broken by Design

    Jun 2026 · 11 slides

    See every slide ↓

    One public-records request, followed through five failures: a $1,440 fee, a waiver never ruled on, a request closed by silence, and two justifications for the same 80 hours.

    Each failure is tied to the statute it tests, and it ends in seven reforms the city can adopt without waiting on Austin.

  6. Pilot pitch

    380 Governance Audit Pilot

    Jul 2026 · 7 slides

    See every slide ↓

    A 30-minute briefing for city management. The city’s own auditors found five control gaps, and the reform stops at the data-center door. The ask is a ten-agreement pilot.

    The first line of the pitch is that no one broke a law. What’s proven is stated flatly, and the dollar figure is the smaller, defensible one.

  7. Thesis carousel

    Governance as Antagonist

    Jul 2026 · 9 slides

    See every slide ↓

    Governance isn’t the problem; the absence of it is. A nine-frame argument for the person willing to make the system visible.

    Built as a LinkedIn carousel: one idea per frame, one question at the foot of each.

  8. House thesis

    Compounding Gains

    Jul 2026 · 6 slides

    See every slide ↓

    Why work should be built as assets that compound instead of expenses that evaporate, and why only shipped assets count.

    Six slides, one engine, five fronts: the operating thesis behind the rest of this page.

  9. Policy timeline

    Economic Governance Evolution

    Jul 2026 · 10 slides

    See every slide ↓

    El Paso’s path from the 2024 audit findings to the 2026 data-center framework: what changed, what didn’t, and why the Meta agreement stayed.

    Reads as a timeline an aide can brief from: one year per slide, then the standards, the mechanisms and the outlook.

List ↑123456789

1 · Council briefing

Who builds the data center?

Aug 2026 · 12 slides

El Paso · August 2026

Who builds the
data center?

A readiness audit of El Paso’s skilled-trades workforce and contracting capacity, measured against the announced Meta / BlackRock campus.

Prepared by Luis Ruiz · Fun

Findings only. No engagement is being proposed and no fee is attached to any of it.

The announcement

What has been committed publicly

1 GW

final capacity

operational 2028

$10B

Meta investment

$12B bond, BlackRock-led

4,000+

construction workers

at peak

300

permanent jobs

once operational

The load ramp is on the regulatory record

2026 · approved

220 MW

2027 · projected

440 MW

2029 · projected

1,000 MW

Bridge generation

McCloud Generation — 366 MW across 813 modular gas generators, adjacent to the site, exclusive to the campus for an initial five-year bridge period from 2027 and separate from El Paso Electric’s transmission system.

Sources: Meta newsroom announcement, 21 July 2026 · El Paso Electric filing with the Public Utility Commission of Texas.

Fun · Who builds the data center?02

The question

This audit does not ask whether the campus is good for El Paso.
It asks a narrower question that has an answer:

Can El Paso staff and contract
what has already been announced?

Two things follow from the announcement itself: the peak workforce is a published number, and the dates are filed. That makes readiness measurable rather than a matter of opinion.

Fun · Who builds the data center?03

Method

How this was measured

Four design choices, made so the findings can be checked rather than taken on trust.

01

Rules fixed before the data was pulled

Every threshold was written down and dated before collection ran. The rules file is checksummed into each report, so a reader can confirm the test was not fitted to the result.

02

A control case, not a benchmark

Findings are measured against Abilene, where a comparable buildout already happened and the outcome is documented — not against an abstract standard.

03

“Insufficient” is a real answer

Where the public record cannot answer a question, the audit says so. Missing evidence is never counted toward the conclusion and never treated as zero.

04

Every figure traceable

All findings come from federal sources — the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the federal education data system — each carrying its source and retrieval date.

Fun · Who builds the data center?04

Finding one · The arithmetic

The project needs most of the sector at once

Electricians are roughly 30–40% of data centre construction craft. Against a published peak of 4,000 workers, that is 1,200–1,600 electricians at the same time.

2,263

people employed in electrical and wiring contracting in El Paso County

173

establishments — an average of 13 employees each

An average establishment of 13 employees is a residential and light commercial firm. Data centre electrical scope is self-performed by contractors an order of magnitude larger — which is a separate question from whether the workers exist.

Share of the county’s entire electrical contracting workforce required by one project

53%

at 30% trade share

71%

at 40% trade share

The denominator is the whole sector, including everyone already committed to residential and commercial work. It is a ceiling on available local labour, not a pool of idle workers.

Source: BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, El Paso County, NAICS 23821, 2025 Q4.

Fun · Who builds the data center?05

Finding two · The pipeline

El Paso trains 32 electricians a year.

32completers a year across the county

vs

1,200–1,600electricians required at peak

Spread generously over the three years from announcement to operation, the annual requirement is 400–533. Local programmes cover 6–8% of it.

This is a floor, not a ceiling: it counts degree-granting institutions only and excludes union and merit-shop apprenticeships.

Source: IPEDS completions, El Paso County institutions, CIP 46.0302, 2023–24 award year.

Fun · Who builds the data center?06

Finding three · The control case

Abilene is not a comparison. It is a preview.

Abilene · before the Stargate ramp

1.36%

of all private employment was in electrical contracting

What followed:

  • local electrician pool depleted
  • contractors imported out-of-state labour
  • Texas opened licence reciprocity with three states
  • site wages ran to roughly double local subcontractor scale
  • housing costs spiked

El Paso · today, before its ramp

0.83%

of all private employment is in electrical contracting

0.61×

El Paso enters the same curve with roughly six-tenths the trade density of the metro where the labour market was documented as breaking.

Source: BLS QCEW, Taylor County (2023 Q4) and El Paso County (2025 Q4), NAICS 23821, as a share of total private employment.

Fun · Who builds the data center?07

The limits of the public record

Two questions the audit could not answer

Both concern whether any of this is enforceable. Neither could be answered, because the records are not public.

Insufficient evidence

Can local firms capture the work?

Prime and subcontract awards for the campus are not published, so local participation cannot be measured. The firm-size distribution needed to judge whether local contractors could hold the scope is also unavailable.

Insufficient evidence

Is there any binding local-hire commitment?

The operative incentive agreement text is not in the public record reviewed, so it cannot be tested for local-hire terms, apprenticeship requirements, wage floors, reporting duties, or clawbacks.

The audit does not treat a gap in the record as evidence for its own conclusion. Both questions are reported as unanswered, and both are now the subject of records requests.

Fun · Who builds the data center?08

Why the gap matters

The three questions that could be answered from public data all point the same way.

The two that could not are precisely the two about whether anything is enforceable.

AnsweredIs the demand real, dated and sized?Yes — filed with the PUC
AnsweredIs the local trades workforce large enough?No — 53–71% of the sector
AnsweredIs the training pipeline scaled to it?No — 6–8% of annual need
UnansweredCan local firms capture the work?Awards not published
UnansweredIs there binding local-hire language?Agreement text not public

Fun · Who builds the data center?09

Filed

Two records requests, one clock

Both were filed with the City through the Public Information Center on 13 August 2026 and acknowledged the same afternoon.

W211728-081326

Contracting and award records

The incentive agreement and amendments; contractor and subcontractor lists; local participation requirements and reporting; permits with contractor of record; economic impact assumptions.

W211732-081326

Community benefits and workforce provisions

The executed agreement and exhibits; any local-hire, apprenticeship, or wage terms; compliance reports filed to date; clawback provisions; the department responsible for monitoring.

Statutory response

27

August 2026

The tenth business day after filing, under Chapter 552 of the Texas Government Code.

A third request went to Workforce Solutions Borderplex for apprenticeship registrations — the data most likely to revise the training-pipeline finding upward.

Fun · Who builds the data center?10

What would close the gap

Six elements that make a commitment enforceable

The Community Benefits Agreement is where workforce terms either get written or don’t. These are the elements the audit tests for — offered as drafting considerations, not as proposed final text.

1 Local hire percentage

A stated share, with a defined geographic hiring area.

2 Apprenticeship utilisation

A required share of hours worked by registered apprentices.

3 Wage floor

Prevailing wage or a stated floor, named explicitly.

4 Reporting cadence

How often, in what form, and by whom — named in the agreement.

5 Independent verification

A verifier independent of both the City and the recipient.

6 Clawback on non-performance

A defined consequence — recapture, reduction, or termination.

A commitment with no reporting duty and no consequence attached counts as absent for this test, however it is worded.

Fun · Who builds the data center?11

Verification

Everything here is reproducible.

Every figure carries its source, its identifier, and the date it was retrieved. The thresholds were fixed and dated before collection. Anyone can re-run the analysis and obtain the same result, or apply different thresholds and see what changes.

1 Workforce and firm counts

BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, El Paso and Taylor Counties, NAICS 23821, 2019–2025

2 Training completions

IPEDS completions, El Paso County institutions, CIP 46.0302, 2019–20 to 2023–24

3 Demand figures

Meta newsroom announcement, 21 July 2026; El Paso Electric filing with the Public Utility Commission of Texas

4 Abilene outcomes

Contemporaneous reporting on the Stargate campus, Taylor County, 2024–26

Luis Ruiz · Fun · luis@funistheproduct.com  |  Findings only. No engagement is being proposed and no fee is attached to any of it. This is governance-audit analysis, not legal advice.

Fun · Who builds the data center?12

1 / 12
Back to the list ↑2 · Is Muse fun? →

2 · Market read

Is Muse fun?

Sep 2026 · 12 slides

Fun · Release notes · September 2026

Is Muse fun?

What’s fun, what isn’t, and what Meta’s new AI agent means for AI adoption.

Luis Ruiz · Fun · luis@funistheproduct.com

The release

Meta’s new agent runs your errands

Sept 8 · Launch

Muse arrives

A personal AI agent you text or talk to. It works in the background across your email, calendar, browser and shopping, then reports back.

iPhone, Android, web, Mac and WhatsApp. U.S. only, 18 and up. Free to start, with paid plans for heavier use.

Sept 23 · Meta Connect

Muse gets a voice and a body

  • Voice mode that keeps working while you talk
  • Realtime Avatar, a face for that voice
  • New connectors: Walmart, Best Buy, Sephora, Instacart, PayPal, Notion, GitHub and more
  • Muse Charm, a pocket device made for talking to Muse

Sources: Meta Newsroom, Sept 2026 · Meta, Everything We Announced at Connect 2026

Fun · Is Muse fun?02

Downloads in about two weeks

2.5 million

902,000 in the first six days. The No. 1 free app on the U.S. App Store, ahead of ChatGPT and Claude.

Sources: Sensor Tower via Bloomberg, Sept 21 · CNBC, Sept 21, 2026

Fun · Is Muse fun?03

What’s fun

Less chatbot.
More capable friend.

The fun is in how it feels. You hand off an errand the way you’d text a friend who’s good at this stuff.

Fun · Is Muse fun?04

What’s fun

Four things Muse gets right

01

It talks while it works

Voice mode holds a long conversation while Muse does the task in the background.

02

It runs the errand

Say what needs doing. It works across your email, calendar, browser and stores, then reports back.

03

It lives where you text

The Muse app, WhatsApp, the web or a Mac. No new habit to learn first.

04

You pick its voice

Describe the voice you want: faster, slower, even a specific accent.

Sources: Meta Newsroom · Meta, Everything We Announced at Connect 2026

Fun · Is Muse fun?05

What’s not fun

A friend who keeps
asking for more keys.

The catch: Muse works better the more of your life it can reach, and reviewers say it keeps asking for more.

Fun · Is Muse fun?06

What’s not fun

Four places the fun stops

It keeps asking

Wired’s reviewer was pushed, again and again, to connect an email inbox and banking.

Training is opt-out

Your chats can help train Meta’s AI unless you switch that setting off.

It reads past the ask

An Inc. reviewer found Muse reading private messages nobody asked it to read.

The errand comes second

Wired’s verdict: it put learning about the user ahead of finishing the task.

Sources: Wired (Reece Rogers) · Inc. (Jason Aten) · Meta Newsroom

Fun · Is Muse fun?07

Meta’s answer

Meta built real locks

Secure VM

Muse runs in its own isolated machine, with your data stored apart.

Sentinel

A second agent has to approve anything Muse sends to the internet.

A vault

Your logins sit where Muse can use them but never read them.

Audit trail

A running record of everything it did and plans to do.

Coming later

Confidential VM, encrypted with keys only you hold.

The open question

This is serious engineering. The question left is trust: you’re still giving Meta the run of your email, calendar and browser.

Sources: Meta Newsroom · Meta Help Center · eesel AI, Muse review

Fun · Is Muse fun?08

The Fun take

Fun has rules

Play needs a boundary. Here are three that keep Muse fun.

01

Start with one errand

Give it one job this week, not your whole life. Add access when a task needs it.

02

Check the training switch

Decide whether your chats help train Meta’s AI before you connect anything.

03

Read the receipt

The audit trail shows what it did and what it plans to do. Read it like a bank statement.

Fun · Is Muse fun?09

What it means for AI adoption

Muse sells a friend

How AI is usually soldHow Muse is sold
Do more with fewer peopleA friend who handles things
Learn to write promptsText it like a person
Another app to masterLives in WhatsApp
Productivity softwareSomething to talk to

That’s the Fun thesis out in the wild. AI adoption stalls when it’s sold as subtraction. It takes off when life gets more interesting.

Fun · Is Muse fun?10

What it means for AI adoption

Downloads are curiosity.
Adoption is January.

2.5 million people tried Muse. The number that matters is how many still let it into their inbox, calendar and wallet after the holidays. Every item on the not-fun list is a reason to disconnect.

Fun · Is Muse fun?11

The question everyone’s asking

Will it be out for the holidays?

The app, yes. The Charm, maybe. Muse on glasses, not yet.

ProductWhat Meta has saidOur read
Muse appOut since Sept 8 on phone, web, Mac and WhatsApp. U.S. only, 18 and up.Yes. It’s already here.
Muse CharmZuckerberg wants it ready to ship for the holidays. No price yet. Not in mass production; only a few units built.Maybe. A target, not a date.
Muse on Meta glassesComing in the next few months, with no date given.Not yet. Don’t gift glasses expecting Muse.

Sources: Meta Connect 2026 recap · iThinkDiff · CNBC · checked Sept 24, 2026

Fun · Is Muse fun?12

1 / 12
← 1 · Who builds the data center?Back to the list ↑3 · Some vs. none →

3 · Sales deck

Some vs. none

Sep 2026 · 10 slides

Fun · AI for B2B

Some
beats none.

Where AI in B2B actually starts: not good vs. great analysis, but some vs. none.

Luis Ruiz · Fun · luis@funistheproduct.com · September 2026

Most decisions get no analysis at all

Gut feel

The call gets made by whoever is most confident in the meeting.

Stale dashboards

Built once for a question nobody asks anymore. Still on the wall.

Nobody looked

The data exists. The question was never asked of it.

Fun · Some vs. none02

The comparison is wrong

What vendors pitch

Good vs. great

“Our model is more accurate than theirs.” Assumes you already have analysis to improve.

What buyers actually face

Some vs. none

Any honest look at the data beats the decision made without one.

Fun · Some vs. none03

You don’t have to beat an analyst.
You have to beat nobody looking.

Directionally right in ten minutes is a win over never done.

Fun · Some vs. none04

The competitor is inertia

Why buyers stallWhat we do about it
Starting feels expensiveMake the first step small and fixed-fee
Nobody knows where to beginWe pick the one question worth asking first
“Our data isn’t ready”Start with the dataset you already have
AI projects never seem to endOne answer, one week, then decide

Fun · Some vs. none05

The first step: one of each

1

Question

The decision you’re about to make without data.

1

Dataset

Whatever you already have. No migration, no cleanup project.

1

Answer

A written finding you can act on or argue with.

1

Week

Fixed scope, fixed fee. Credited if you continue.

Fun · Some vs. none06

Value is what you would have missed

Not “your analysts got 30% faster.” Instead: here’s what you couldn’t see before.

The churn signal

Accounts drifting before they cancel.

The pricing gap

Where you’re leaving money, or customers, on the table.

The wasted spend

Budget going to things nobody checked.

Fun · Some vs. none07

No baseline means we show the work

With nothing to compare against, you can’t tell if the answer is right. So every finding comes with its receipts.

Sources

Exactly which data it came from.

Assumptions

What we took as given, written down.

Confidence

How sure we are, and what would change our mind.

Fun · Some vs. none08

What we won’t sell

No guaranteed lift.
No magic dashboard.

We sell the finding and the method behind it. What you do with it is yours. That’s not a hedge. It’s why you can trust the answer.

Fun · Some vs. none09

Next step

Bring one question.

We’ll bring back one answer, with the work shown, in a week.

Luis Ruiz · Fun
luis@funistheproduct.com

1 / 10
← 2 · Is Muse fun?Back to the list ↑4 · Make a film with AI →

4 · Class deck

Make a film with AI

Sep 2026 · 16 slides

Anise Baca, a woman in her sixties, running as a white medical exoskeleton assembles around her. A frame from the film Legs.

Fun · AI video class · El Paso

Make a film with AI.

Plan it before you render it.

A hands-on class in five parts. Everyone leaves with a finished short film.

Luis Ruiz · Fun · luis@funistheproduct.com

Why this class

Sound familiar?

The first image was great. In the second shot, it was a different person.

You spent your credits finding out what the tool can’t do.

It looks like AI because nothing in it was decided.

This class fixes all three by deciding before anyone presses render.

Fun · AI video class02

The class

Five parts, one afternoon.

0:00

Story

One sentence, three beats, no images yet.

0:20

Character

A card, a turnaround sheet, a lock.

1:00

Plan with Claude

A timed shot plan. Then render.

1:45

Permission

Whose face, whose place, whose idea.

2:05

Collaboration

Trade characters. Share a scene. Join the lineup.

2:45

Screening

Everything made in the room, on the big screen.

Fun · AI video class03

Part 01 · Story

Start with one sentence.

A grandmother’s exoskeleton comes online, piece by piece.

Legs · suit-up reveal

He didn’t ask for it. He hasn’t taken it off.

Still in Office · character reveal

Ten characters at one casting call. The judge looks up once.

The Audition · lineup

A chimpanzee in a small costume crown sits in an inflatable flamingo pool float, arms folded, in a concrete room. A frame from Still in Office.

Still in Office · 15 seconds

A chimp mugging in a crown is a greeting card. A chimp putting up with one is a portrait.

Fun · AI video class04

Part 02 · Character design

Lock the character before you shoot.

Turnaround sheet for Natalia as a mime: red hair under a black beret, white face paint, striped shirt, suspenders, skateboard. Front, three-quarter, profile, close-up.

Natalia

Controlled and precise. Four angles, one face.

Turnaround sheet for Bertha as a mime: same costume, rounder build, a chipped front tooth visible in the close-up.

Bertha

The chipped tooth is the detail the model holds on to.

Turnaround sheet for Beto Salinas from Legs: striped polo, khakis, sunglasses with a red cybernetic lens, a chrome mechanical hand.

Beto Salinas

The chrome hand and the red lens carry him from shot to shot.

Fun · AI video class05

Part 02 · Character design

Say the same details every time.

Anise Baca's character reference: a Mexican-American woman in her sixties, silver-white hair in a low chignon, cream cardigan and blouse, camel trousers, on a grey studio backdrop.

Anise Baca · reference

Models drift, even with a reference image attached. So every card ends in a lock: a short paragraph pasted into every prompt with that character in it.

From the card · Anise Baca, Legs

ANISE BACA (CIVILIAN) — LOCK: Mexican-American woman, mid-60s, trim and upright posture, deep-set dark eyes, dark brown hair silver-white at the temples in a low chignon, small chemical-burn scar inside left forearm, cream/camel/soft-grey tailoring. Use the attached reference sheet as strict visual anchor. No redesigns.

Vague words get generic pictures. Anise’s first suit came back with a spiked helmet and blade fins. The next three suits each got one specific anchor, a single crest or fin from a named animal, and came back clean.

Fun · AI video class06

Part 03 · Plan with Claude

Plan it with Claude. Then render.

From the plan · Legs, the running take

0.00–1.00s  Static hold. Civilian Anise.
1.00–11.00s  One continuous take: running + full assembly.
11.00–13.00s  Hero hold on the final frame.
13.00–15.00s  LEGS title card.

Step 2 of 5: “Leg struts snap into place along the outer thigh and shin mid-stride, locking at hip, knee and ankle with a flash of pale-blue light. Real rehabilitation hardware, never wing-like or blade-like.”

Anise mid-stride as the exoskeleton finishes assembling. A frame from Legs.

Legs · 15 seconds

The film that plan made.

Fun · AI video class07

Part 03 · Plan with Claude

Caught on paper, where it’s free.

Too long for one take

The Legs run is one ten-second take. Most tools stop at 8 to 10 seconds. Plan: render at the maximum, extend from the last frame.

Too short to render

An earlier cut had three beats under two seconds. Plan: render at the minimum, trim from the front so the pose still matches.

Too much in one shot

An Amigo Man teaser packed a voiceover, a power cut and a spoken line into two seconds. The establishing shot gave up a second.

Two faces, one close-up

Two locked characters sharing a close-up blur together. Test that on a cheap shot before you build a scene on it.

Fun · AI video class08

Part 04 · Permission

Whose face is it?

Every card opens with one line: real person, yes or no. The answer sends the character down one of two roads.

A real person

Face-lock tools learn from 20 or more photos of one person, so that person is now in your film. Your own face is fine. Anyone else needs a written yes that says where it will be shown. Famous faces are off the table.

Someone who doesn’t exist

Built from words, not photos. A reference photo can set a style, a wardrobe or a neighborhood. It can’t be one real person with the name changed. Invented means invented.

Fun · AI video class09

Part 04 · Permission

It isn’t only faces.

Brands

Amigo Man is El Paso’s real civic mascot, and he has an owner. My Amigo Man films stay parody. A paid version starts with a license.

Places

The Audition’s wall is a real building with real artists’ murals. The frames invent their own art, with no readable words.

Credit

Each project keeps a ledger: the author’s idea, or an AI proposal waiting to be picked. Nothing goes in until a person chooses.

The class teaches good practice, not law. Anything headed for commercial use gets a lawyer’s read first.

Fun · AI video class10

Part 05 · Collaboration

The fun part.

Your character meets mine.

Fun · AI video class11

Part 05 · Collaboration

Two cards, one scene.

Natalia and Bertha, two mimes, face off on skates in front of a graffiti wall. A frame from their showdown.

Natalia and Bertha · showdown

Beto, from Legs, challenges Natalia to a game of HORSE under the interstate. Natalia and Bertha play tug-of-war with a rope that isn’t there.

The rules of the trade

You keep your lock

Nobody redesigns your character but you.

The plan names every card

Whose character is whose, in every shared shot.

The ledger keeps the credit

Who came up with the scene, the gag, the ending.

Fun · AI video class12

Part 05 · The finale

The lineup.

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

In The Audition

Ten characters from different projects stand against one wall, paper numbers pinned to their chests. A chimp in a costume crown walks the line while each performs one trick. He looks up only once.

In class

The class ends the same way. Every character in the room gets one beat in the lineup, and we screen it together before anyone goes home.

Fun · AI video class13

What everyone leaves with

Proof, not a certificate.

01

A character

The card, the turnaround sheet and the lock.

02

A shot plan

Written with Claude, beat by beat.

03

A short film

10 to 15 seconds, made in the room.

04

A shared scene

Made with a partner, both characters intact.

05

The lineup

The class film, with everyone in it.

06

A permissions page

Whose face, whose place, whose brand, who made what.

Fun · AI video class14

Format

The details to settle.

Group and date

Set with whoever hosts: the group, the venue, the day

Headcount

Up to 12–16, so every character gets a beat in the lineup

Length

One 3-hour session, or two 90-minute sessions

Price

Quoted per group

Render credits

Their own free tiers, or a class account per head

Bring

A laptop. No experience required.

Fun · AI video class15

Everyone leaves
with a film.

luis@funistheproduct.com

Fun · El Paso

1 / 16
← 3 · Some vs. noneBack to the list ↑5 · Broken by Design →

5 · Case study

Broken by Design

Jun 2026 · 11 slides

A case study in public records failure

Broken by Design

A Case Study in Public Records Failure

Luis Ruiz · Fun · June 9, 2026

Broken by Design

Executive summary

On April 29, 2026, the Borderplex Ledger filed a six-part TPIA request seeking records on how El Paso approved a $10 billion Meta data center under the name of a shell entity, Wurldwide LLC.

What followed illustrates a records process that fails at every point where the law leaves the city discretion — and fails in one direction: against disclosure.

The city priced access at $1,500. It never ruled on the fee-waiver request. It closed the request as “withdrawn” without confirming the requestor received the cost estimate. And it offered two inconsistent justifications for the largest line item — contradicting its own cost rules.

Fun · Broken by Design02

Background

The deal in question

December 2023

Council approves Chapter 380 agreement with Wurldwide LLC. Meta connection not disclosed.

October 2025

Groundbreaking held. Project announced at fraction of eventual scope.

April 2026

Full scope becomes public: ~$10 billion across five phases.

June 9, 2026

After nearly 200 comments, Council votes to keep agreement. Attendees chant “vote them out.”

Deal terms: 80% city tax break for 35 years · $12.5M in public improvements · 7-year completion deadline

Fun · Broken by Design03

Filed: April 29, 2026

The TPIA request: what was sought

  • (1) Complete Wurldwide LLC incentive approval record
  • (2) City communications with Borderplex Alliance about Meta / Wurldwide
  • (3) Borderplex Alliance contracts and compensation
  • (4) Economic impact studies and funding sources
  • (5) Records on scope expansion to $10 billion
  • (6) City Attorney’s Office records about prior requestor requests

City cost estimate

$1,440 (80 hrs attorney)
$45 (IT locate/copy)
$16.50 (computer)

Requestor report

Never received estimate

Requested

Fee waiver (public benefit)

Fun · Broken by Design04

Failure 1

Fee waiver never adjudicated

Texas Government Code § 552.267 requires a governmental body to provide copies without charge if disclosure primarily benefits the general public.

The request invoked this provision explicitly. Records concern use of public tax incentives on the largest private development in city history.

The city never issued a determination — not a denial, not a grant, nothing.

A waiver provision that is never ruled on is functionally repealed.

Fun · Broken by Design05

Failure 2

Closure by silence

Early May

City generates estimate. Requestor reports never receiving it.

Mid-May

Request closed as “withdrawn.” No delivery confirmation. No second notice.

May 21

Requestor learns of charge. Request already dead.

The statute keys to sending, not receipt. The city closed based on assumed receipt with no safeguard for distinguishing whether the estimate was emailed-and-missed or never sent. The requestor first learned of the charge after the request was already dead.

Fun · Broken by Design06

Failure 3

Shifting justification for $1,440

May 26: First justification

Charge is to “make sure they correspond in regard to your request” — filtering for responsiveness.

Chargeability: allowed (locate & compile)

May 27: Second justification

Same 80 hours needed “to know which ones need to go to the AG’s office” — determining which require AG ruling.

Chargeability: prohibited (legal review)

The estimate commingles chargeable and non-chargeable labor — making audit impossible.

Fun · Broken by Design07

Failure 4

Conflicted gatekeeper

Request 6 seeks City Attorney records about prior requestor activity.

The office whose conduct is the subject is the same office that charges and reviews withholding.

El Paso has no recusal protocol for self-referential requests.

Failure 5

Reactive-only disclosure

Every document sought concerns public money and resources.

None was published proactively.

To access: know “Wurldwide LLC,” file request, navigate fees, front $1,500.

Fun · Broken by Design08

The pattern

Why “Broken by Design”

Each step is defensible in isolation. That is precisely the point.

  • Fees default to on; waivers default to unadjudicated
  • Requestor silence defaults to closure, not follow-up
  • Ambiguous labor defaults to chargeable framing
  • Conflict review defaults to conflicted office
  • Disclosure defaults to reactive

A process whose every default favors opacity does not need bad actors to produce cover-up outcomes.

Fun · Broken by Design09

Reform recommendations

At the city level

R1

Proactive disclosure — publish Chapter 380 agreements within 10 business days

R2

Beneficial-ownership disclosure — no vote on undisclosed shells

R3

Independent records function — move administration out of City Attorney’s Office

R4

Written fee-waiver determinations — all requests decided in writing within 10 days

R5

No closure without confirmation — delivery-confirmed estimates + second notice

R6

Auditable estimates — itemize chargeable vs. non-chargeable labor by activity

R7

Public records dashboard — quarterly publication of requests, fees, waivers, closures

Fun · Broken by Design10

The process failed at every
discretionary point

And failed in one direction: against disclosure.

These reforms are adoptable by the city without waiting on Austin.

Fun · Broken by Design11

1 / 11
← 4 · Make a film with AIBack to the list ↑6 · 380 Governance Audit Pilot →

6 · Pilot pitch

380 Governance Audit Pilot

Jul 2026 · 7 slides

Briefing for El Paso City Management & Audit

380 Governance
Audit Pilot

Luis Ruiz · Fun · July 8, 2026

Who I am, why this room

  • Journalist/publisher, Borderplex Ledger. Built an independent governance-audit instrument.
  • Published three-part analysis of A2023-07 — reached decision-makers across government, economic development, and procurement.
  • No one broke a law. The City’s own auditors found five control gaps. Reform stops at the data-center door.

The ask

A scoped pilot that verifies whether the October 2025 fixes closed gaps.

Your documents, no system access.

30 minutes now.

Fun · 380 Governance Audit Pilot02

Five significant findings, April 17, 2024 (City’s own audit)

What A2023-07 actually found

FindingThe number
Financial-stability verification weakened from “must include evidence” to “upon request”; mandatory annual Council report removedPolicy, 2021
Files lacking documented financial analysis6 of 7 sampled (85.72%)
Fee waivers + TIRZ omitted from Council reporting~$1.22M unreported (~22%)
Reimbursements processed late, no documented authorization3 of 5 (60%), 2–5 months
Incentives unrecoverable$1.35M, no recapture clause

Fun · 380 Governance Audit Pilot03

The Hunt Metro 31 case

Why structure beats blame

The clause

Recapture triggered ONLY on failure to ‘substantially complete any component’

The outcome

Completed horizontal infrastructure ($1.43M paid). Terminated before retail/civic/residential. Completed ‘any component’ = foreclosed clawback. Legal.

This is not a bribe. It’s a clause that produced the outcome of a bribe with nobody breaking a rule.

That’s a design problem. Design problems get fixed by rewriting the design — a governance job, not a prosecution.

Fun · 380 Governance Audit Pilot04

Reform stopped at the data-center door

Being reformed

Future hyperscale data centers. Draft framework, no future incentives, Meta CBA.

What A2023-07 examined

Hotels, retail, logistics, manufacturing, telecom, office towers, mixed-use. NOT data centers.

The gap

85.72%, ~22%, 60%, $1.35M all came from ordinary 380 agreements — outside reform scope.

Fun · 380 Governance Audit Pilot05

What I’m proposing

Outcomes Accounting

Promised vs. delivered

Information Independence

Reporting that reconciles to reality

Anti-Capture Guardrails

Who drafts the accountability clause

10 agreements. 5 pre-reform (re-audit), 5 post-October-2025 (test fixes). Three weeks. Findings in A2023-07 format.

Fun · 380 Governance Audit Pilot06

The ask

1

Green-light the 10-agreement pilot

2

Name a point of contact for document requests

3

Three weeks: pilot findings report + read-out

4

Discuss standing independent-audit function for all 380 agreements

luis@funistheproduct.com

Fun · 380 Governance Audit Pilot07

1 / 7
← 5 · Broken by DesignBack to the list ↑7 · Governance as Antagonist →

7 · Thesis carousel

Governance as Antagonist

Jul 2026 · 9 slides

Fig. 01 — The setup

Governance isn’t the problem.

The absence of governance is.

“Most organizations have a villain. It’s not a person. It’s a system designed so no single person can be held accountable. The benevolent asshole is the only character willing to make the system visible.”

Swipe through if you think governance is boring. It’s not. →

Fun · Governance as Antagonist01 / 09

Fig. 02 — The antagonist

Governance is what stops your capture.

Without governance

  • Deals get written by the people who benefit from them
  • “Binding contract” means nothing if no one can enforce it
  • Everyone operates within a system they don’t see
  • Power flows to whoever can hide it best

With governance

  • Decisions become visible
  • Accountability has teeth
  • Power flows to whoever can justify it
  • The benevolent asshole can actually enforce what was promised

Which sounds more like your organization right now?

Fun · Governance as Antagonist02 / 09

Fig. 03 — The archetype

The person no one likes is usually right.

The benevolent asshole is defined by a contradiction: outward behavior abrasive, core actions decent, protective, right.

In governance, they’re the one who:

  • Asks the question no one wants asked
  • Won’t let bad deals pass because “everyone agreed”
  • Points out that “binding contract” is theater if it’s not enforced
  • Makes the system visible when everyone wants to hide it

Nobody likes them. Everyone needs them.

Does your organization have a benevolent asshole? If not, who’s making your system visible?

Fun · Governance as Antagonist03 / 09

Fig. 04 — Real example

El Paso: what happens when governance is missing.

01 · The deal

  • $10B Meta data center
  • City approved it quickly (“by-right”)
  • Contract had enforcement clauses

02 · The problem

  • Enforcement clause said: “Company must complete ANY component”
  • Company built the cheapest component, collected $1.43M, walked away
  • “Binding contract” meant nothing without a benevolent asshole to enforce it

03 · The lesson

“The contract wasn’t weak because the city forgot to tighten it. The contract was weak because the developer’s lawyer drafted it, and nobody with real power said ‘no.’”

Your contracts — who writes them? The person who benefits most from loopholes, or someone accountable for the outcome?

Fun · Governance as Antagonist04 / 09

Fig. 05 — The pattern

Governance capture: how systems protect themselves.

1 · Capture

→

2 · Theater

→

3 · Invisibility

→

4 · Repeat

↺

The benevolent asshole who won’t participate in the theater — questions the contract, asks who enforces it, makes visible what everyone wanted hidden. Stops the cycle. At least once.

What makes your governance theater vs. real? Who decides?

Fun · Governance as Antagonist05 / 09

Fig. 06 — Governance ≠ accountability

Here’s why that distinction matters.

Governance

  • Rules, committees, documented processes
  • Can exist without teeth
  • Looks impressive in reports
  • Can be pure theater

Accountability

  • Someone named owns the outcome
  • Consequences exist if things go wrong
  • Enforced by a benevolent asshole willing to say “no”
  • Makes governance real

The trap

Organizations build governance (looks good) without accountability (costs authority). Then they hire consultants to add “more governance.” What they actually need: someone empowered to enforce what was promised.

Does your organization have governance? Sure. Does it have accountability? That’s the question.

Fun · Governance as Antagonist06 / 09

Fig. 07 — The toolkit

How governance actually works, when it works.

The benevolent asshole

  • Documents everything — makes invisible systems visible
  • Won’t let “everyone agreed” substitute for enforcement
  • Names power when others hide it
  • Enforces what was promised, even when inconvenient
  • Stays accountable — their name is on it

The system they build

  • Clear decision-making — who decides, when, how
  • Real enforcement — consequences if broken
  • Visible power flows — no hidden incentives
  • Sustainable — people can predict outcomes

Which of these does your organization actually have?

Fun · Governance as Antagonist07 / 09

Fig. 08 — The cost

Why nobody wants this job.

The reality

  • You’re not popular. People resent being held accountable.
  • You spend political capital on things nobody else sees — until it breaks.
  • You’re expendable. When the system needs to hide, you’re first out.
  • You’re right. And that’s worse than being wrong and liked.

But

  • The organization doesn’t collapse
  • Power doesn’t concentrate invisibly
  • Deals actually deliver what they promised
  • People can predict outcomes

Is your organization paying someone — enough — to be the benevolent asshole? Or hoping nobody notices when governance fails?

Fun · Governance as Antagonist08 / 09

Fig. 09 — Your move

Your move.

A

Build governance that’s theater

  • Committees that don’t decide
  • Contracts that don’t enforce
  • Processes that don’t matter
  • Everyone acts normal until it breaks

B

Hire a benevolent asshole and give them teeth

  • Real decision-making authority
  • Enforcement power
  • Clear accountability
  • Messy in the moment. Stable long-term.

“Which costs more — a benevolent asshole who prevents capture, or a system that captures itself?”

Drop your take in the comments. Which is your organization? And if you’re the benevolent asshole — who’s got your back? Email your take: luis@funistheproduct.com

Fun · Governance as Antagonist09 / 09

1 / 9
← 6 · 380 Governance Audit PilotBack to the list ↑8 · Compounding Gains →

8 · House thesis

Compounding Gains

Jul 2026 · 6 slides

Fun · Brain 2.0 · The house thesis

Compounding Gains

“Compounding assets that never depreciate for a system that’s one; but the fronts are many.”

Contextual provenance //

Establishing a governed operational architecture that freezes legacy processes, converting evaporating efforts into insurable, compoundable corporate assets.

Version: v1.0
Date: July 17, 2026
Author: Luis Ruiz · Fun

Fun · Brain 2.0

The leaky bucket vs. governed capital

Status quo // The leaky bucket

Most marketing is treated strictly as an expense. The campaign runs, money evaporates, and next month starts back at zero.

  • Deliverables are delivered and forgotten immediately.
  • The agency loop relies on raw human effort that exhausts daily.

✕ System resets daily

The titled stack // Governed capital

A governed system with permanent memory translates every work product, quote library, and design record into titled, valuable corporate property.

  • Idempotency: Never build the same core asset twice.
  • Statefulness: The corpus never stops growing.
  • Governance: Provable work becomes insurable, licensable IP.

✓ Active compounding

Author: Luis Ruiz · Fun02

Fun · Brain 2.0

One engine, five fronts

FrontTarget buyerThe compounding move
Provenance FilmsBrokers, financiers, sponsors“Every film we touch becomes the sales demo for the tier it was certified under” — the slate is the GTM.
Writer’s Second BrainWriters, creatorsLiving canon + authorship ledger: drafts become titled, highly certifiable IP.
VesterlyLocal verticals (dental, derm, law)The overarching thesis applied directly to their specific local commerce: pile → asset.
El ConduitSanta Teresa / regional devStrategic connector position won in Year One, compounding institutional memory thereafter.
Training / CurriculumPublic, journalists, city groupsThe conversion engine — buyers experience the productivity of the core within one single hour.

Author: Luis Ruiz · Fun03

Fun · Brain 2.0

Proof of governed memory at three scales

01 / The founder scale

The Portfolio Founder

Running multiple companies forces severe context-switching. A stateful engine makes a decision made once propagate globally.

Collateral defended:

Company valuations rest on documented, transferable records, not founder recall. Context is protected.

02 / Institutional scale

The Trade Association

Trusted broker credibility is compromised by stale data. A sourced corpus turns recruitments and asks into retrievable knowledge.

Collateral defended:

Decades of regional credibility preserved; memory survives any sudden staff or leadership departures.

03 / Compliance scale

Regulated Aerospace

AS9100 and ITAR demand strict traceability. A governed engine allows AI adoption with proven, clean design provenance.

Collateral defended:

Audit-ready revision logs; validation required to acquire and execute highly profitable prime contracts.

Author: Luis Ruiz · Fun04

The 3-act process (Module Zero)

The commercially aligned ladder

1

Your pile is latent capital.

Your existing PDFs, spreadsheets, and legacy databases encode your unclaimed IP.

2

Governance converts it.

Inventory before organizing, mine workflows, and build a customized constitution.

3

Compounding is the deliverable.

Once converted, every subsequent hour worked adds directly to an appreciating system.

Author: Luis Ruiz · Fun05

Only shipped assets compound.

Unshipped material is not capital; it is a liability that depreciates. It accumulates physical and mental friction, sitting idle as a stagnant, static pile.

Unshipped inventory ✕ Depreciation

Compounding is initiated only upon delivery. Showing active, audited ledgers triggers the follow-up heartbeat—the core mechanism the entire thesis depends upon.

Shipped velocity ✓ Accumulation

Author: Luis Ruiz · Fun06

1 / 6
← 7 · Governance as AntagonistBack to the list ↑9 · Economic Governance Evolution →

9 · Policy timeline

Economic Governance Evolution

Jul 2026 · 10 slides

From 2024 audit findings to 2026 transparency reforms

Economic Governance
Evolution

Luis Ruiz · Fun01

2024

Systemic audit findings

Internal control breakdowns

  • 22% of incentives omitted from reports
  • 85% of agreements lacked documented stability checks.
  • $2.7M in incentives at risk due to weak contractual clauses.

Governance legacy

The city’s prior administration favored administrative “shortcuts,” utilizing shell entities and NDAs to bypass mandatory impact disclosures.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution02

2025

The corrective process

Corrective actions

  • Establishment of the FOAC (Financial Oversight and Audit Committee)
  • Rigorous review of active Chapter 380 incentive agreements.

Challenges to reform

Transitioning from “liability management” to “accountability” proved complex, requiring legislative review beyond initial January targets.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution03

2026

Data center policy framework

Following February 2026 mandates, the City Council approved a new comprehensive framework for hyperscale projects, leaving 380 agreements untouched

Public engagement

2,300+

public comments and six community meetings.

Legislative shift

Moving from “by-right” to “Special Permit” requirements for all large-load facilities.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution04

Environmental & utility standards

CategoryNew standard
WaterMandatory impact analysis for all large-load projects.
EnergyStrict demand protections for residential ratepayers.
EnvironmentalFull review of noise, lighting, and wastewater impacts.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution05

Accountability mechanisms

Transparency strategy

Governance now centers on audit-grade logic models, removing the ability to “game” systemic reporting through shell entities.

Enhanced disclosure

Required parent-company commitments. Strict utility cost protections preventing residential rate hikes.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution06

Community benefit agreements

The new framework eliminates future local economic incentives for data centers, replacing them with:

  • Measurable investments in local infrastructure
  • Targeted workforce development partnerships
  • Collaborations with regional education and technical providers.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution07

The Meta agreement context

The 2026 policy framework applies to future projects. The existing Meta data center remains under its original 2023 agreement.

City leaders emphasize that maintaining current commitments is a necessary risk-management decision to protect taxpayer litigation exposure.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution08

Strategic outlook (2026–2028)

Three-phase plan

Year 1

Foundation (Policies)

Year 2

Growth (Implementation)

Year 3

Sustainability

Core values

Collaboration, trust, equality, and radical transparency in all economic development endeavors.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution09

Vision summary & future direction

El Paso has successfully transformed its governance model from opaque legacy systems to a resident-focused, data-driven framework for 2026 and beyond.

Fun · Economic Governance Evolution10

1 / 10
← 8 · Compounding GainsBack to the list ↑

Order

Bring the room.

Email to order a presentation

luis@funistheproduct.com. Tell me who’s in the room, what they need to decide and when you’re presenting.

Fun · El Paso, TX · BEST BY: NOW
0
Skip to Content
Fun, Inc.
Fun, Inc.

Location

El Paso, Texas/Los Angeles, CA

Hours

365/24/7

Contact

Luis@funistheproduct.com