Some people really benefit from hearing advice that everyone knows, for the same reason we keep schools open despite every subject in them having been taught before.
In that spirit, here's some quick Things Many People Find Too Obvious To Have Told You Already.
Your idea is not valuable, at all. All value is in the execution. You think you are an exception; you are not. You should not insist on an NDA to talk about it; nobody serious will engage in contract review over an idea, and this will mark you as clueless.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The amount of (plainly illegal) shenanigans between FTX/Alameda and select banking partners discovered by the lawyers for a civil suit subjects there will be an absolute mountain found by the independent examiner.
As is typical, the main avenue for developing low-hanging-fruit evidence has been numerous violations of Stringer Bell’s dictum on keeping notes on a criminal conspiracy.
Specifically, when you put your notes on a common criminal conspiracy in the phones of other conspirators via e.g. a Telegram chat, they now have something to trade with future prosecutors/lawyers to save themselves in a way which doesn’t save you.
I spent years of hobby time writing letters to banks on behalf of people who had difficulty writing letters to banks. It worked much more than most people expect, precisely because they really do* follow the law.
*It's complicated.
"Why is it complicated?"
People assume that every person wearing a bank uniform necessarily speaks with the voice of the bank, and that a verbal indication "No, we can't help you with that." is a) the bank's answer and b) the bank's final answer.
@kendrictonn I'd make independent betting markets on subclaims like "lawyers on standby" here but directionally agree.
There is a huuuuuuuge component here which is class and a component which is degrees of active complicity. When that waveform collapses, people get very, very upset.
@kendrictonn It isn't conspiratorial to observe that e.g. the state can deterministically ruin the lives of criminals, that there is a playbook to do this (it involves corkboard), that participants do not expect this playbook to be brought to bear, that we've seen this movie before, and...
@kendrictonn ... that it takes basically one incident of sufficient magnitude to decisively remind relevant network actors that it doesn't stop being a LARP the moment you decide it stops being a LARP, it stops being a LARP the moment Power decides it stopped being a LARP.
Please note that this is extremely, extremely true, and if you follow that to its logical conclusion, certain blogs are on the org chart of e.g. the U.S. in the same haha but absolutely serious way the NYT editorial page is.
I will also add that there are literally tens of thousands of people whose job is to read the newspaper then repeat what it said. This is a core intelligence gathering capability. You earn some brownie points in some circles for calling it OSINT. (“Open source intelligence”)
Note that awareness and legibility of influence travels at different rates around different networks, and sometimes causes weird sorts of understanding cascades in response to stimuli that are a bit weird.
I have no particular reason to believe or doubt the IQ ranking here, but if I can highlight something: most people who care deeply about user interactions with software systems have not lived life constantly interacting with people 20 points of IQ above them.
There exist many people relevant to many systems who have 80 IQ. Many find those systems very hard to deal with.
It, ahem, matters very much whether systems choose to have those individuals interact with a human or an AI for various tasks, matters how systems present that fact…
… and matters hugely that people architecting systems understand that “I am a computer agent.” contains an important bit of information in a longer paragraph and that people with 80 IQ have difficulty extracting important information from within a larger paragraph.
This is a beautiful example of an engineering decision with a point of view behind it, a UX decision which is historical controversial for no reason, and how both of those decisions are actually also great marketing.
I’ve personally never bothered climbing the vim skill curve because I’ve never found myself rate limited on text manipulation given the somewhat weird path I’ve taken in my career. But I absolutely understand the appeal and that some people actually would be rate limited on that.