The talk is good but I would avoid using body evolution and understanding as a comparison as many of the statements were incorrect e.g. the reason why longevity is different between elephants and mice due to blood distribution is complete nonsense. A recent study suggests free radicals from mitochondria due to extensive electron leakage in electron chain and anaerobic production of ATP from glucose which is nothing to do with blood, even that knowledge I would strongly avoid that comparison, otherwise, you claim you figure out the longevity and you should get the noble price immediately.
Bit of a yikes here. 1. The direction of causality between size and revenue is not established. The implied causality is that change in employee count is the cause, and change in revenue is the effect. But this is not a self evident proposition. As a company becomes successful, one might expect them to add employees. 2. Almost all mammals are warm blooded. As an animal grows in size, its surface area to volume ratio gets smaller. Ergo, small warm blooded animals lose heat more easily in most climates on earth, and therefore need more calories to maintain their body temperature. This is a thermodynamic fact, whether or not there's any other factors at play. 3. The change in infrastructure required by a city as the city's size changes depends on how the city is planned and zoned, and how close it is to its sources. It is not a "natural law of cities". A City which is perfectly tileable in terms of zoning and roads obviously has linear scaling of roads, whereas if you concentrate, say, commercial zones to one or two points, it will not be. 4. "As you add more hierachy things get slower" - Quicksort has entered the chat. So much here is falls into the "sure, that seems like it might be true" category, but doesn't stand up to much critical thought. And since the premises are dubious, that also makes the conclusions that follow dubious.
