### Conversations

Now, COVID test strips make me think of mosquitoes with bellies that do chromatography.

Fake it until you make it? This reminds me the idea of generative search, which was a thought that we should generate non-existing products to satisfy search needs. It's not bad idea to vote for them (models of products) and even fund them. I'm all for this.

// So this imaginary website is where marketing professionals create beautiful copy and beautiful imaginary products and services and cost it all.

I think, ideally, as mentioned in the previous idea, this work would be highly automated...

For some products (like hardware and mechanical systems), this should work quite well. On the other hand, some products, like mobile phones had become so similar one to another, that all of them look like boxes with round corners, and it would be rather difficult to capture the differences by their basic appearances. People search by features or brands. It's weird how brands become products.

// selectively breeding mosquitoes by giving to bite for blood over a thicker honeycomb-like structure, that prevents the mosquito head from approaching too close to the skin, so that only mosquitoes with relatively longer proboscis could reach the blood for survival //

This has to be doable under home conditions! Just take a bucket of water outside the window to collect mosquito larvae, and make that "honeycomb-like structure" for selecting. However, due to mosquito being a vector for disease transmission, this needs to be checked with local laws and regulations. However, I think this could be a nice YouTube video story.

I suggest that the value of people's money be directly valued based on that person.

So money isn't just a number, and that number has buying power but that there is a recursive function person_x(person_y(society_valuation((f(person_z, numerical amount, person_z_demand_history, person_z_work_or_additions_to_society)))) = buying power.

I think the valuation of money is invisible at this time.

My impression is that money already works like that (e.g., air ticket price fluctuation makes cheap travel more affordable at times, there are also various cheap deal opportunities, called "sell-offs", etc., and the value of money is very contextual and multiple: e.g., a single unit of currency being worth a cup of coffee AND a trip to another side of the country, sometimes at the same price), but it's not visualized, and not focused on making the opportunities apparent to segments of society. Is it that what you're proposing -- is some system to visualize that, and help alleviate the wealth inequality?

In Ireland there's something called the stock market bar, where prices of menu items are displayed on a television display, the prices change over time over the night. You can get a drink or food cheaply if you wait for it.

There's some algorithm which causes the stock market bar to be entertaining to those who visit.

Now, society is composed of many people, and each person is contributing a different thing every second.

Some people (consumers) contribute demand for products: water, electricity, food which generates work for others. This is a good thing. We need to represent that demand as part of a wave function. So we need some way of detecting demand for things, digital accounting systems can solve this problem. Such as an app on a smartphone with a button. Or digital NFC keyed shops and workplaces.

When everyone is watching television, no work is being done and when the kettle is turned on, the use of electricity goes up.

I think some people contribute to a better society than other people. I think essential workers such as delivery drivers, chefs and supermarket logistics are very important people for civilized civilization. They allow the rest of society to function. Unfortunately there is no prestige in these positions and they are not respected by the vast majority of society. Unfortunately, educated people are not willing to do these kinds of jobs due to economic incentives mean they can get more elsewhere.

People who have wealth are lazier than people who are forced into labour everyday, economically they produce more wealth but they also do less actual work in the world. Feeding 1000 people in a local area is more fundamentally essential than generating \$billions in revenues.

I don't want to force everyone to be productive, that's the opposite of my goal.

I want the people who do the most work to be rewarded by what they can afford. So even a poor person should deserve the output of 1000 rich persons he provides for.

The wave function produces a higher number when work is done and a low number when no work is being done.

This is a force multiplier. The demand signal is really valuable, when you're in a restaurant and there is a demand for a certain menu item, you cook more of that kind of item in preparation for the demand.

Likewise, a laptop or phone manufacturer produces more of the kind of item that has high demand. The demand signal itself is valuable but nobody is paid for it.

People should be paid for their demand signal, as it coordinates society and orchestrates best use of resources for mutual profitability.

The wave function is added to what money you do have, and this increases the power of your purchases and acts as additional money in the system.

You didn't specify the how this would work exactly... So how?

When a programmer wants to play a benevolent big brother? Go to a construction site, and look around, then, you find people who may be struggling with their task, and help out. Sure, online, private corporations have made surveillance systems that convert the collective digital work environment into something like a construction site, where they distribute computers with tracking software, so that they can always take a look at how each employee is doing. It may be one of the reasons why companies of certain type (the ones that care about their people), succeed. However, the closest thing to what you're describing in the wider social setting with privacy constraints, is a contacts application with labeling system, where you label all of your contacts by their skills, and then communicate with them based on need. I used to do so in the past. Example: you know a particular skill, say, "chemistry knowledge", so you label your friends who have that knowledge. If you have a problem, then you can write them by filtering whom to write by the label. It's not very efficient though, because you're bothering more people than necessary with a particular task or question. Ideally, you would find the only one perfect contact to bother, who is most likely to know how to solve the problem, and bother others only if bothering the first one resulted in the need for another.

At Google, employees decide what to do and their manager's ratify it. Unfortunately productivity at Google is very low and the CEO of Google, Sundar Pichai has threatened layoffs.

You could have two kinds of equity and dilute every month based on who reinvests what.

Equity from capital and equity from value added.

The equity in issue is diluted every month but equity that wasn't served (i.e equity people are sitting on) is expired.

The idea is that management and workers gain the most equity over time and they become the de facto owners over time.

The original capital gets what they put in

Well my use of the word "exhausting" applies to the nature of work compensation. When the worker is paid for their work, the transaction is over. The work is exhausted in its utility for the worker but not for the capital owner.

Capital is the opposite, it never exhausts in its utility. Even if you are paid back for the capital, you get more of it back.

A worker contributes more work over time than capital did at the beginning. It's kind of a chain reaction that is maintained by workers.

If workers input and causes was valued and treated as capital, they would gain equity over time.

Ownership should be based on who is doing the work.

Or equity should expire.

Yes, I noticed that the term "compensation" meaning pay for cost, is problematic, and therefore, created this equity model to remedy the situation. In essence, if an employer only pays for the cost of making, they paid for your loss, and took your gain, whereas in reality, both of you added equal amount of resources -- one added those resources in terms of labor costs, another (employer) in terms of monetary costs, and got a result, which, if the payment from employer only covered the cost, then, the result should be shared in equal parts between the employer and the employed, and based on this rule, if put in legal practice, we could have a fair distribution of wealth. However, the described equity model actually solves the problem in accounting sense...

Can you explain exactly, how this would "labor as capital" be treated? According to my formula, the labor would automatically become co-ownership of shares generated by work results, and this is what I'm thinking of, when it comes to fully-fledged investment model on the Infinity family.

So we have security services that defend us from evil such as counterterrorism, counterfraud and countercrime. They take access to our private data to keep the institutions safe, such as governments, monarchy and civil society.

They say that those that would give up privacy for security deserve neither. The question also becomes, who watches the watchers.

Any fashion that limits what I need to carry with me every day. Perhaps t shirts that are chipped and have biometric data and a account number to pay for things with, so I can go to a shop or restaurant and pay with the clothes I am wearing. By scanning the tshirt and entering a password on the keypad.

Or some way to carry a USB charger cable with me, that isn't awkward.

Fashion interests me because what we wear works like a trigger in society. Fashion shapes social norms. For example, punk movement was partly expressed through wearing heavy boots and ripped jeans. Through outfit, one can see their tribe member on the street. Within outfit comes behaviours and values attached to that subculture.

In older times, women would wear heavy dresses that are like sculptures put on them. These outfits promoted certain values again.

So, looking ahead, I'm curious what elements will be in outfits of the future? Secondary question is, what values/behaviours will these futuristic outfits will promote?

Ruta

I got a manequin and started fashion course and a map of my inspirations on Miro as well as I have a collection of outfits as materials. I'm a bit overwhelmned now I have to say. Also a purpose of this project has changed a bit. So I'm thinking how to evolve.

Ruta

Since my last update, website was changed 2 more times, 2 client projects started and one more collaborator joined us to co-create a training programme due to launch this August. More soon!

Ruta

Also in User Profiles it'd be useful to have this Feature:

Offers (general) Requests (general)

So that each Infinity member could describe:

• how they would like to help other members and collaborate (=Offers)

• what support/collaboration they would like to get for their problems , ideas or projects

Links between members are key (links make a system) and tech could facilitate collaboration more :)

Ruta

It would be useful if in User Profile page, user's problems/ideas/projects would be grouped under Top Categories (e.g. Education, Tech, Society, etc)

This way it's easier to see common interests between different people

Ruta

How is this different from the idea of "Convertible note"?

[thekhan], Well, that's exactly the problem that we want to solve: to enable people with an idea, that makes logical sense, to start working on it, and get funded for doing it from the moment when it:

• (A) logically makes sense
• (B) someone is willing to put their time and resources to it

In my opinion the cross missing the most critical point, which is time. Time is required to create a basis for every project and sadly it's the most scarce resource of all. Funders will ask for a MVP (minimum viable product) for funding. Unless you have time to create a MVP you will have no chance from the beginning. And only after MVP the cycle can start.

What you're proposing is to get banks, shops, busy postal offices and other such places learn from airports, that had already implemented waiting halls with amenities and conveniences? I think, it would be preferable, of course, better than plain waiting.

Gitlab is archiving dormant GitLab projects. and freshmeat.net was a site I did use for finding new open source projects. Unfortunately they stopped updating the site. And we're replaced by freshcode.club

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32338481

The problem is universal. For someone to keep doing something for someone else, there needs to be some return. The free lunch doesn't last forever.

Ah I forgot I posted that, I shall add a differentiation between this question and that question (commit to buy)

(a) Commit to buy is when you have money and you are willing to pay money for someone to create something based on a description. Multiple people join a commit to buy and add more money to it. The people who do the work decide what to create.

(b) Worker escrow is to command someone to create a piece of work, the worker is told what to do.

This feature is in the queue, I suppose, we talked about it, here before, right?

Actually, i tried to reach him many times. His friend AnnMarie said he has depression after he broke his leg and now cant ski and no happy anymore :(

kriz

Elon Musk: "People are nicer than you think, give people more credit". Definition of "trust" is mathematically equivalent to definition of "expected value" -- i.e., we give credit (as money) as trust, when we expect that what others will do with it, will be in line with our expectations (expected values)... To make more people realize that it would be the case, more efficient information exchange systems are needed... There's a saying "great minds think alike"... Perhaps brightening people's minds would help.

Oh, I would love to see [skihappy]. He's a good physicist and thinker. His username reminds me of [skinflaps].

I think you did a great piece of work and the site is really useable and easy to use. It's a good ontology. I can see it working really well.

As Ruta said, the site attracts a certain kind of personality who want to talk of problems, goals and ideas. Unfortunately not everybody has that personality.

In some ways, using this site is "socialising with Mindey" ;-) There's of course I am grateful for Grounded Stream, Xntoo and Ruta though ;-) Where is skihappy? Where did Stephen go?

Thank you, [chronological], as well, for actually using it! I hope this place becomes more fun in the coming months.

Mindey I send you 1x thankyou token for Infinity Family.

That's actually a great idea. There's really cases, where people don't want to take money for their help, but you do want to thank them, and it's also a kind of way to have a stake in the futures connected to those help-outs, especially, if these tokens are long-lasting, and tied to identities.

@ XMaze

One of my ideas, which I realise could be linked to XMaze is the idea of reducing the complexity of a problem and exposing it as a metaphor and using the metaphor to drive the real thing. Think computer performance. Could we visualize computer processing as a flow and car diagram and allow people to try different car layouts and junctions and roundabouts? And adjust road width and length and customise various attributes to create faster software?

Redesigning UIs for components constructor. https://www.figma.com/file/ZSR514nsHENlbTtKlIRnUB/Treenity?node-id=0%3A1

kriz

I think, there should be a version of nnn for REST APIs. The REST API as a filesystem, and then extending the nnn util to handle .json files would do it. However, I found that FUSE is not very performant, and Linus Torvalds famously says FUSE filesystems are nothing more than toys...

I realised my bug in my logic. Thread 0 is responsible for loop iterations 0-8 Thread 1 is responsible for 8-16 Thread 2 is responsible for 16-24 And so on I'm currently executing loop iterations on the wrong thread due to a mathematical logic of not handling wraparound. I use the modulo operator. Ideally each ticker is only called on the thread for its range.

I have a problem I need to solve. Which isn't related to the parallellism.

Imagine I have a nested loop that looks like this

 For letter In letters:

For number in numbers:

Print(letter + number)

For symbol in symbols:

Print(letter + symbol) 

I want these three loops to run concurrently. One approach is to pick the function to run based on the indexes! And merge the numbers and letters together round robin. So we get

A1

A2

The problem with this approach is that the loops aren't separate. They're one loop that has been merged.

I think I can solve this by causing collections to be a multi collection. [Letters, [numbers, symbols] And picking from each sublist round robin and exposing the loops as separate objects.



While (true) {

For loop in tick pool:

current[loop] = current[loop] + 1

NewTickersOrResult = Loop.tick()

If NewTickersOrResult.isTickers:

For newTicker in NewTickersOrResult.tickers:

Pool.extend(NewTickersOrResult.tickers)


Else:

Print(NewTickersOrResult.result)


}



In ideas 4 #39 Data structure mapping studio I describe a website which shows you the internal representation of data as data structures in open source projects. I would love to know a documented data structure at every stage of a compiler's and browser's pipeline. Godbolt Compiler Explorer is fascinating and gets some of the desired results. But I want an application specific model.

I am thinking of how to use the performance of multiple CPU cores. It requires a drastic rethinking of how we write code!

It occurred to me that loops could be trivially parallelized with my design.

N = 0 .. N = 3×3×3

If you ran the tick method on all threads with every N, you could run the entire loop in one go.

I created a Quora space for Fast, Responsive and Scalable software. https://fastresponsiveandscalablesoftware.quora.com/?invite_code=Z7YJZOmfzkLH8JpHsAvQ

a) immediate mode rendering b) don't block the main thread

I think I'd like to add notifications for targets, because targets are like "I want to do this next", and they are worthy knowing about. However, they should optional or come in the comments channel instead of the main channel, because wants are less substantial and actionable than results: results can be reviewed by others, so they are more worthy of main channel attention.

I need to write a Joinable Ticker that waits for inputs from multiple tickers before sending output along. This lets us create pipelines that split and merge.

I shall add that you only need one while (true) loop per thread. Everything else can be concurrently scheduled within a thread.

That's why I call it virtual concurrency. You would need to use threads to provide IO concurrency Anything that loops forever or blocks cannot be composed. So I shall write all my code going forward to try never block and be reetrant. This is an important lesson I learned while developing my multithreaded scheduler.

Blocking is invisible to the program. The program isn't aware it is blocking. You need to know that a method can block to work around it. My other idea is a parallel while do loop which changes blocking to be non blocking through syntactic sugar. It looks like this

A1 = parallel while { Buf = socket.recv(1024) } Do { Parallel for (Socket socket : sockets) { Socket.send(buf) } } Crossmerge A1

This syntax spins up multiple threads to block on receiving data. And for each one it spins up a thread in a thread pool to handle it and send it to every connection in parallel.

Another idea I have is to change the priority execution order. That scheduler in that code round robins the tickers in the same order every time. There's no reason why we cannot execute the loops some more than others.

Interesting. You did not use any native support for concurrency in Python, and used only basic enumeration, indexing, assignment. I guess, that is what it takes to understand. This has educational value.