1CndCz…Ymfg

It's ok to learn to walk before starting to run.

Not everyone is happy skip the walking and try to run. Dealing with the bumps and bruises from falling over again and again. 😆🤕🤭😁

(3/3)
down when critical mass of the user base is achieved.

Like the approach to Twitter, this can be used as a tool to grow then discarded. But there needs an alternative solution before widespread adoption. If left too late, adaptation becomes futile.

(1/3) @4
Step 1.
Acknowledge the problem

Twetch needs a decipher to avoid obliteration from status seeking behavior through blind worship & alignment with idols/celebrity at the expense of each individuals pursuit towards becoming an idol. Think Faceberg

(2/3)
memes or Twatter blue badges and their followers.

The current approach is to increase the cost of participation by limiting participation from those seeking parasitic status compared to those seeking earned status

This works crudely now, but melts

(5/6)
-A horrific or angelic encounter with an entity is an exploration, not an indictment on that entity. If we are not currently brave enough to experience this, we do not have to.
--If we aren't happy with our dominant foci of exploration we can alter

(1/6)
Suppositions:
-Everything that can exist, exists in components of existence. Let's call them slides, like a film slide.
-Time as an illusion can be seen as a way to move through & explore these slides of existence.
-We move through uncountable paths

(6/6)
them.

• We experience every act a % of us experiences and may access this wisdom & empathy.
  -- Growing skills towards trusting and effectively utilizing intuition may have exponential benefits.

--- Time is a training wheel to explore the universe.

(2/6)
simultaneously with various %'s of 'ourselves' focusing on each particular slide or path.
-We can communicate with the other %'s of ourselves, exploring these different slides.
-Individually we move, bouncing of each other, strongly controlling our

(4/6)
futures. In some of those paths, I will be perceived as a devil, others an angel. As a whole, I am all.
--Love the sinner as the saint, for they are the same.
--Beware of oracles, for they write their own path and you may not be on it.

(3/6)
(dominant %'s of 'us') individual path and influencing the collective dominant path.

Resulting inferences

-Those reading this will (all but small % of themselves) deviate their paths from the writer & therefore experience different

Interesting, are you free to expand on the concerns?

"one foot before the other
Confident because
I know that everything we are right now is everything that was
That WATT TYLER, Woody Guthrie, Dostoevsky & Davy Jones
Are all dissolved into the ether and have crept into my bones"
https://youtu.be/K1o3byr-xuo

I was thinking something along the lines of Google/fbook's cyber phrenology. My guess is that at the end of the season the moral is that it's about as useful as original phrenology.

1/4
Repeatable interaction games have different optimal strategies than one off interaction games. Altruistic punishment is prohibitively costly if one doesn't take their turn to sacrifice in a repeat interaction game.

Players with asymmetric ability are

2/4
playing with different future expected interactions. The powerful expecting less interactions.

Disdain for sacrifice from a position of strength is strong strategy, assuming one always maintains that strength. Unfortunately, the confidence to

4/4

they all have their assumptions that we must strive to understand if we wish to think and act wisely.

1 + 1 = 2 in the model of math. But not in the real world.

3/4
maintain that strength is infinitely greater than our ability to do so.

All philosophies, theories, beliefs and even facts & Laws are models to help us explain reality. Many are useful in many situations, Rand's objectivity certainly is. However

How sure are we about our assumptions before we consider the risk others choose to morally take?
How accurate is our risk assessment of the threat/risk? How does our 'lack of certainty' and its profile affect our choice in imposition over others decisions?

2/2
is Spence's https://bit.ly/3b62syr

assumption, viz. 'cost of signal MUST be lower for high value info and act as signal to receiver such that they will pay a higher cost'

High cost != honest, must consider individual case cost/benefit of deception

2/2
bitcoins AND have their coins grow in value.

I offer clues to efficiency (and therefore $, prestige & satisfaction) in choosing functions to grow, not by how costly these signals are. But by their content itself. Permanently on ledger.

1/2
Thank you, for those interested in an excellent review and critique:
The Handicap Principle: how an erroneous hypothesis became a scientific principle Penn 2019
https://bit.ly/2y6k52y
IMO, as far as actionable lessons, almost all that can be salvaged

1/2
My goal is to increase the value of bitcoins by growing their functions hence widening types of tools that can be built furthering growth.

This desires valuable developers aligned with that goal. Working efficiently, where they'll also earn the most

1/5

It's less risky to benefit from manipulation when you can influence the information flow than when you can't. When you can set the price and hence the barriers to entry above your competition you have a monopoly.

Boost may increase the risk, but

4/5
to add layers to services that build on the newly aligned interests of user bases that micro transactions bring.

The opportunity to deliver what the user wants. Capitalizing on the untapped efficiency of aligning the user with the product. Away from

2/5
it decreases the RELATIVE risk for those with more capital or following. Allowing a self reinforcing loop where they can use their privileges and grow a network effect to maintain their dominance & stifle their competition.

Why should truth telling

5/5
the traditional method of offering opportunities for groups to profit on the user base.

I hope I'm wrong, sure I'm missing something, don't understand half of it and wish you the best of luck. But if I'm right, I look forward to breaking it.

3/5
cooperators be able to afford more?

I have no problem with attempts to layer profits on services. I feel it's becoming somewhat off track focusing so hard on the signalling effect of transactions.

Instead we can focus on the plethora of opportunities

That looks a little further away to me.
https://bit.ly/2XrsVST

-Price and hence volume needs to 3x in value organically, then will be incentive & pressure on marginal exchanges to cheat. 1st one will break the flood gates.

I don't understand. What am I missing?

It appears to me as an overlay designed to restrict information flow so you can sell the flow to the highest bidder. Designed to control manipulation, rather than prevent it. 🤫🤮🤑