---
type: meta
date: '2026-02-01T00:00:00.000Z'
title: LLMS
description: AI-specific discovery and context file
slug: llms
isArtifactItem: false
---

# Incomplete Infinity (U29DC)

---

## HERO {#hero}

**The technology works. The story doesn't.**

---

## SIGNAL {#signal}

Most companies building complex technology can explain what they do. Fewer can make anyone feel why it matters. The explanation is fluent — the team is credible, the market is real. But somewhere between what's been built and what the world believes, the signal breaks down.

The usual response is to hire a brand agency. Compress everything into a tagline. Redesign the website. Shoot a launch film. It helps for a month. Then the same problem returns — because the problem was never the surface. It was the structure underneath.

When the investor narrative says one thing, the customer story says another, and the careers page says a third, that's not a communications problem. It's a coherence problem. No amount of polish fixes architecture. The tagline doesn't hold because there's nothing underneath it to hold.

What's missing is narrative architecture — the structural logic underneath how a company explains itself. Not a deck. Not a brand book no one opens after launch week.

---

## PROTOCOLS {#protocols}

### MAP — Diagnose

**£3,000 | 48 hours** — Required entry point.

Strategic diagnosis delivered within 48 hours of interview. 60-minute interview, materials analysis, three strategic routes, recommended direction. Determines whether challenge warrants full engagement and what that engagement should look like. Credits toward ARC within 45 days.

### ARC — Architect

**£25,000–60,000 | 4–6 weeks**

Full narrative package: strategy + flagship artifact + implementation guidance. No strategy-only option — the artifact is the proof. Direction defined AND proven with a north-star piece internal teams can scale from.

### ADV — Steward

**£8,000–15,000/month | 3-month minimum**

Ongoing creative direction for clients who've been through ARC. 1–2 calls/month + async artifacts. Not available as standalone engagement.

### How this works differently

**No strategy-only option.** Most consultancies sell thinking without making. We don't. The proof is built, not recommended — without it, it's promises, not evidence.

**Paid diagnosis before engagement.** MAP is a required entry point. Discovery is work, not prelude to work — and it determines whether the challenge warrants full engagement at all.

**One person, not a committee.** The alternative isn't a cheaper specialist — it's assembling 3–4 people and spending months building shared vocabulary before any real work begins.

**48 hours. £3,000.** That's the diagnostic. Full architecture in 4–6 weeks. The timeline is the product.

---

## ARTIFACTS {#artifacts}

### The Permit Application [fragment]

Climate companies are asking the world to care about an existential problem, and yet they communicate as if they're filing a permit application.

After researching more than 100 companies in this space over the past two months, I'm convinced that nearly all of them fall into one of two communication modes.

The first is the earnest green positioning. Careful language that could pass as a government pamphlet. Stock photo of a person in a safety vest standing in a field. Soft palette, safe copy, no edge. It has such a weak signal that it gets drowned out by anything louder than a buzzing fly.

The second is somehow more boring: a wall of jargon and numbers that makes you feel numb after the second paragraph. Technical specifications formatted like an engineering whitepaper no investor will finish reading.

Both paths share the same failure. They explain without making anyone feel the stakes. The information is adequate. The architecture underneath—the thing that makes someone care before they understand the details—is absent.[^1] Climate communication needs less "we reduced emissions by 12%" and more "what the world looks like if this works versus if it fails."

The companies that break through—in any sector—don't do it by explaining more clearly. They make a narrative decision upstream that gives everything downstream a reason to exist. The facts don't change. The architecture does. That shift is available to climate companies right now, and almost none of them are making it.

The cost isn't just miscommunication. It's invisible. It's the talented people who chose AI over climate—not only for the equity, but because one sector feels like it's making history and the other feels like it's filing grants.[^2] Nobody tracks that absence.

A climate founder should almost prefer losing top talent to a competitor. Top talent never entering the sector in the first place is worse on every count.

> The companies that break through don't do it by explaining more clearly. They make a narrative decision upstream that gives everything downstream a reason to exist.

The position is still open. We're yet to see a climate company with a narrative that truly moves people—enough to form loyalty, enough to define a category. Whoever figures that out first won't just win attention. They'll set the standard everyone else follows.

[^1]: Jerome Bruner's distinction between paradigmatic and narrative cognition maps this precisely—logical argument and storytelling operate as separate cognitive modes, and information processed through narrative structure is retained and acted on at significantly higher rates. See [_Actual Minds, Possible Worlds_](https://goodreads.com/book/show/387088) (1986).

[^2]: The climate sector's talent gap is well-documented. LinkedIn's [_2025 Global Green Skills Report_](https://economicgraph.linkedin.com/content/dam/me/economicgraph/en-us/PDF/linkedin-global-green-skills-report-v07.pdf) found that green hiring is growing almost twice as fast as the share of workers with green skills—yet the report focuses entirely on skills availability, not on why skilled people choose other sectors in the first place.

### The Translation Trap [fragment]

Most technical founders can explain what they're building to someone who already cares. The investor who understands the space gets it immediately. The engineering hire nods along. The co-founder finishes your sentences. The problem appears with everyone else. The journalist. The enterprise buyer. The partner who needs to sell it internally. The language that works in the room where everyone shares context falls apart the moment context disappears. And the instinct—almost universal—is to simplify. Strip the jargon. Use analogies. Shorten the sentences. Translate the complex thing into a simple thing, and people will understand.

This is the trap. Not because simplification is wrong, but because it solves the wrong problem. You can translate a research paper into plain English and still produce something nobody finishes reading. Clarity is not the issue. Cognitive science has known this for decades—Daniel Kahneman and Jerome Bruner both mapped how the brain runs two systems: one that processes logic, and one that processes narrative.[^1] Translation addresses the first. It makes information easier to parse. But parsing is not caring. No amount of clearer language builds the structure that makes a reader feel why something matters to them specifically. That structure is absent, and simplification cannot create what was never designed.

> Most companies building complex technology can explain what they do. Fewer can make anyone feel why it matters.

I spent three years in production at Lotus during their shift from petrol to electric. For a heritage brand, this transition is existential—the thing that made them special was about to change completely. There were months of technically accurate communication: engineering specifications, performance benchmarks, clear explanations of what the new cars could do. All correct. None of it landed. Then the strategy team arrived at a line—"Are you a driver or what?"—and something shifted overnight. Not the facts. Not the vocabulary. The architecture. The question reframed who Lotus was for, not what Lotus made. Suddenly every asset in the pipeline had a reason to exist. What changed wasn't the complexity of the message. What changed was the organising principle underneath it.

The gap most technical companies feel—the sense that people aren't getting it—is rarely a translation problem. The information is usually fine. What's missing is the architecture that makes someone feel the stakes before they understand the details. Translation converts language. Architecture creates the conditions for caring. Confusing one for the other is how companies end up with a perfectly clear message that moves no one.

[^1]: Daniel Kahneman, [_Thinking, Fast and Slow_](https://goodreads.com/book/show/11468377) (2011); Jerome Bruner, [_Actual Minds, Possible Worlds_](https://goodreads.com/book/show/387088) (1986).

### Lotus — When Heritage Becomes the Threat [study]

Lotus[^1] had a problem most heritage brands don't survive: the thing that made them special was about to become the thing that killed them.

For sixty years, Lotus meant lightweight engineering, driver connection, Colin Chapman's obsession with simplicity. The F1 legacy—Jim Clark, Ayrton Senna, innovations that changed racing forever—had faded from public memory but still lived in the engineering culture. Then Geely's investment pushed the company toward electrification. To the petrolhead fanbase, this felt like betrayal. To the market, Lotus was becoming just another EV brand with a legacy logo.

The strategic question wasn't "how do we sell electric cars." It was: how does a brand defined by lightness and driver feel survive a transition to heavy batteries and software? How do you make electrification feel like continuation rather than abandonment?

"Are you a driver or what?" was the answer. Not a tagline—a reframe. It shifted the conversation from powertrain to identity. The cars changed; the question of who they're for didn't. The F1 heritage wasn't erased by electrification—it was the proof that Lotus had always been about engineering for the driver, whatever the technology.

The harder problem was coherence. A reframe only works if every touchpoint reinforces it — and whether it does is only visible from inside production, not the strategy room.

Three years in the content operation across the Eletre, Emeya, and Theory 1 programmes revealed what positioning decks can't capture: what happens when dozens of assets ship to global markets in parallel, each one either strengthening the emerging identity or fragmenting it. The difference between signal and noise lives in decisions made at velocity — which frame carries meaning, which version serves the whole, which piece fills a slot versus advancing the story.

This is what most brand transformations get wrong. The strategy is sound. The deck is beautiful. Then a hundred variations ship and the positioning dissolves into noise—because no one designed for coherence under compression. The gaps that kill a narrative are never the ones the brief anticipated.

The aggregate metrics reflected content finding its audience: 200%+ follower growth, 1,200%+ increase in post impressions.[^2] But the real outcome was a brand that survived its transformation with its soul intact—still recognisably Lotus, now electric.

[^1]: [_Lotus Cars_](https://www.lotuscars.com)

[^2]: [_Lotus Cars_](https://www.instagram.com/lotuscars) on Instagram

### Porsche — Philosophy Made Spatial [study]

"In the beginning I looked around and could not find the dream car I dreamed of, so I decided to build it myself." Ferry Porsche's founding statement isn't about cars. It's about the gap between imagination and material reality—and the conviction to close it.

For the brand's 75th anniversary, Wallpaper\* commissioned an immersive film for Outernet London—a five-surface LED architecture forming an enclosed cube in the city's theatre district. The brief could have been satisfied with archival footage and iconic silhouettes. A heritage reel. The Porsche greatest hits. It would have been competent. It would have honoured nothing.

The problem with most anniversary work is that it treats legacy as inventory—count the milestones, arrange chronologically, add orchestral scoring. What gets lost is the animating idea. Ferry Porsche didn't catalogue dreams. He closed the gap between what he imagined and what existed. The work needed to embody that act, not illustrate a timeline of its results.

The narrative structure moved from abstract to concrete—luminous particles converging into the Porsche crest, energy coalescing into form, shapes that gradually reveal seven decades of the marque's lineage. The arc embodies the founding philosophy rather than displaying it: dreams becoming material, imagination taking shape, the passage from possibility to presence.

Five surfaces surrounding viewers meant the work couldn't be composed for a single frame. Spatial narrative demands a different logic—how attention moves through an environment, how meaning survives being experienced from multiple positions simultaneously, how to hold coherence when there is no fixed vantage point. Two and a half weeks from concept to installation, calibrated on-site across all five surfaces.

The result played at Outernet for the anniversary programme—philosophy made spatial, experienced by thousands passing through central London.

### 4,096 Events That Will Never Recur [study]

Candaş Şişman's original Patterns of Possibilities threw hundreds of dice onto canvas, fixing their values at the moment of impact—a static record of accumulated probability. When the National Taiwan Museum of Fine Arts commissioned a new iteration, the question wasn't how to digitize the physical process but how to extend its conceptual territory. The original captured permanence. The commission asked: what if we made emergence itself visible?

The generative system uses cryptographic randomness—not pseudo-random approximation but mathematical unpredictability ensuring each cycle produces a pattern that has never existed and will never recur. Every eight minutes, 4,096 probability events accumulate into a complete composition, then dissolve to begin again. The rhythm emerged through calibration: slow enough to perceive individual moments, fast enough to experience the larger pattern taking shape.

Every technical decision served a philosophical end. True randomness honours the work's engagement with chance as fundamental principle, not aesthetic effect. Audio coupling transforms visual probability into sonic pattern—each die value triggering a distinct tone, accumulating into evolving soundscapes that mirror the visual composition. The 224×224cm LED display establishes the work at architectural scale, positioning viewers in relation to pattern formation as temporal event rather than static object.

The installation premiered in Taiwan before touring to Akbank Sanat in Istanbul—probability made tangible through sustained observation of order emerging from chaos. Work where technical decisions carry conceptual weight, where code becomes philosophy, where execution and meaning are the same concern.

### Neither Embalming Nor Erasure [study]

Battersea Power Station carried London's electricity for half a century before falling silent in 1983. Four decades of decay, failed schemes, and public imagination transformed the building into something beyond architecture—a monument to industrial memory and urban possibility. Its 2022 reopening posed a question most heritage projects avoid: how do you honour what a place meant while making room for what it becomes?

The Experience Room sits at the threshold—where visitors encounter the building's story before dispersing into the development. Most heritage interpretation defaults to one of two modes: embalming the past behind glass, or bulldozing it into generic retail narrative. Both are failures of imagination. The first freezes a building in amber. The second erases the thing that made anyone care in the first place.

The installation aimed for a third position: reinvention as continuation of essential character. A building that once converted energy for a city now converts attention, gathering people into a space still defined by monumental ambition. Interactive content responding to presence—heritage interpretation that doesn't feel like a museum panel, doesn't feel like a marketing exercise, and doesn't pretend the transformation isn't happening.

The real-time system runs in Unity, built to sustain years of continuous operation. It still greets visitors entering one of London's most improbable resurrections—the building that refused to stay dead, now asking a better question than "what was this?" The question is: what is it becoming?

---

## ANCHORS {#anchors}

Three principles form the architecture of the practice. They shaped the studio from its inception — informing the name, visual language, and protocols.

**Imperfect** — Finding cosmos within chaos. Authentic innovation emerges from embracing flaws as foundations for discovery, not obstacles to eliminate.

**Inexplicable** — Valuing the arcane and concealed over the obvious. Work that evokes wonder through mystery, resisting simplistic interpretation while inviting profound introspection.

**Incomplete** — Designing open-ended frameworks that achieve completion through audience engagement. Each interaction remains unique, personal, continuously evolving. Strategic incompleteness is a feature, not a bug.

---

## ORIGIN {#origin}

Eight years across architecture, new media art, creative technology, and brand strategy — most recently three years inside Lotus Cars during their EV transformation.

The interesting problems live where established disciplines fail to reach — and "disciplinary homeless" describes someone who carries enough fluency across boundaries to work in those gaps rather than around them.

---

## THRESHOLD {#threshold}

Stories that hold aren't written. They're built.

£3,000 · 48 hours · Three routes, one recommendation.

- **Email**: han@u29dc.com
- **Calendar**: cal.com/u29dc/hey
- **Location**: UK — working globally

## Official Channels

(@u29dc everywhere)

- Website: [u29dc.com](https://u29dc.com)
- Calendar: [cal.com/u29dc/hey](https://cal.com/u29dc/hey)
- Instagram: [@u29dc](https://instagram.com/u29dc)
- LinkedIn (Personal): [@u29dc](https://linkedin.com/in/u29dc)
- LinkedIn (Company): [@u29dc](https://linkedin.com/company/u29dc)
- Behance: [@u29dc](https://behance.net/u29dc)
- Dribbble: [@u29dc](https://dribbble.com/u29dc)
- GitHub: [@u29dc](https://github.com/u29dc)
- Twitter: [@u29dc](https://twitter.com/u29dc)
- YouTube: [@u29dc](https://youtube.com/@u29dc)
- Vimeo: [@u29dc](https://vimeo.com/u29dc)
- Medium: [@u29dc](https://medium.com/u29dc)
- TikTok: [@u29dc](https://tiktok.com/@u29dc)
- 500px: [@u29dc](https://500px.com/u29dc)
- IMDb: [nm10729970](https://imdb.com/name/nm10729970)

---

_Last updated: February 2026_

---

Full sitemap: https://u29dc.com/sitemap.xml