For every government form in every country, autosuggest inputs. Or at least show worked examples. Crowdsource new forms from users, SEO for the form name, and make it one-click to submit.
Start with the most popular, then work your way down.
This is a classic schlep business (paulgraham.com/schlep.html). Pieces of this already exist, but no one to my knowledge has done this for all forms across all countries.
It's immediately monetizable, and at scale it's a kind of API to governments. DM me with a link if you do it.
1) this has broad appeal to many demographics 2) you'll attract many professionals too 3) once you put data into one form, the service can autopopulate other forms 4) once you get N submissions on one form, some basic stats will reveal common errors and best practices
Current social networks don't have great tools for dispute resolution. They're a combination of anarchy (people yelling) and tyranny (arbitrary deplatforming).
An alternative approach is a global moderator hierarchy. In the event of dispute, the lowest common ancestor mediates.
The moderator hierarchy: a possible implementation
- founder is moderator 0
- founder sets up initial hierarchy, appoints mods 1-N
- mods recruit new users
- new users choose a mod upon signup
- new users can be promoted to mod
- mods are comp'd via token 1729.com/network-union
Choosing a mod has aspects of both friending & following.
Like following, it's asymmetric: when A moderates B, A has privileges that B does not.
But like friending, it's symmetric: you may require both A *and* B to opt in for A to take on the responsibility of moderating B.
Divide & choose is a procedure for fair division of a continuous resource between two parties. The protocol proceeds as follows: one person cuts the cake into two pieces; the other person selects one of the pieces; the cutter receives the remaining piece. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_an…
The veil of ignorance concept: choose a rule as if you had no knowledge ahead of time as to whether you'd be ruler or ruled. Ideally, this would incentivize participants to select rules impartially and rationally. fs.blog/2017/10/veil-i…
Longevity has the potential to be to traditional medicine what crypto is to traditional finance. It changes the terms of the debate.
Starting with Bitcoin's rejection of central banking & endless inflation, the cryptoeconomy has challenged virtually every premise of the state-controlled, paper-based financial system that we've inherited.
So far? Plenty of risks, plenty of loss — and undeniable progress.
The conventional macroeconomic wisdom is that high inflation is bad, but that deflation is also bad, so a little inflation is good.
But there's bad deflation, often due to contraction of money supply. And then there's good deflation, due to genuine productivity increases.
Proof-of-work is absolute truth, proof-of-stake is relative truth. Both have their role. But for the most important transactions it's better to produce more clean energy than to give up on the undeletable history that accumulated work provides.
It's hard to express this compactly to a non-technical person, but basically: it's harder to fake the results of a massive calculation done over ten years with datacenters full of hardware than it is to convince a fixed set of humans to change their minds and rewrite history.
This is what we get when there is no absolute truth.
Using Merkle trees, we can prove the existence of arbitrary amounts of data using just one tx on the Bitcoin blockchain.
Data availability is nontrivial (IPFS?) but proof that the original photo existed would be feasible.
As the rising third power in the world, India has the potential to be the center of a new Aligned Movement — an upgrade to the Non-Aligned Movement that aligns every neutral country behind Bitcoin and decentralized crypto protocols. balajis.com/add-crypto-to-…
Crucially, Crypto Capital isn't anti-American or anti-Chinese for that matter.
There are Woke Americans & Crypto Americans, Crypto Chinese & Communist Chinese.
The Crypto American is much closer to the average Chinese hodler than to Warren, Trump, or Xi Jinping.
N custodial wallets are hubs and the M citizens are spokes.
If a user of wallet 1 sends a transaction to a user of wallet 2, then the transfer looks instant on their screens.
Bulk settlement happens later on-chain between wallet 1 and 2.
Let’s say there are N=10 popular custodial wallets & they all do bulk settlement with each other every 24 hours. That’s N*(N-1)/2 = 45 pairwise on-chain Bitcoin L1 transactions per day, which is feasible.
Also, add in N daily on-chain transactions with the state’s Bitcoin fund.
If I’m reading this right, all economic agents that are technologically capable of receiving BTC as payment *must* accept it as payment — though instant conversion to USD is made available to anyone who doesn’t want to take price risk.