I avoid grants. grants are how you get regulatory capture. If they arent replaced by other funding soon then the capture will begin.
Many customers = Service Provider
One Customer = Servant, sooner or later
Discussion
Yes, the grant-givers try very hard to prevent this, but it's physics. As soon as there is some filter in place, between producer and consumer, that filter has to make decisions, which concentrates influence upon the producers.
Otherwise, there would be no point to the filter.
right. no blame really just an incentive problem. Incentives are aligned such that the best financial decision for a developer becomes grant life. writing, performing, presenting and defending.
We then find ourselves in the same situation that post secondaries are suffering. They are captured and corrupted. You take the money for long enough and the donors run your institution. Most of the professional designations like P.eng etc are in the same situation.
It doesnt seem like anyone notices or cares. Seems like the doors are open and the grants are invited. It's bound to cause factions to form over time as different devs are tasked with different priorities that wont always align.
There are also celeb devs at the center of nostr community that use too many suit words. They arent very good at it and talk about engagement and customer facing and blah blah basic b.s. but they are there and always angling to control pinch points and messaging.
dunno ...
Well, I notice and care.
My little Nostr neighborhood is not going to turn into another Signal and they can't stop us without destroying the entire protocol.
tldr: Blame it on entropy. Most things are entropy's fault.
In any economy we require specialization of work to provide more value across the entire system. Is this specialization a "filter"?
Or are we supposed to control the means of production and consumption in a 100% self sovereign way?
I ask these questions to challenge your idea about putting "filters" between producers and consumers. Keep in mind that the middle men we see in Bitcoin and Nostr cannot display the same behavior as the middle men in fiat.
No, that's not the filter. The filter is picking and choosing which specialist to invest in.
If you choose directly then you are your own filter.
Price should act as a good signalling mechanism in the long run for these decisions. The reality is that we just aren't at that point right now. Bitcoin and Nostr are bootstrapping a new system, but in a free and open way.
Governance of the grant process for the existing recipients seems to take your issue into account. But if you still disagree with their decisions, you are free to develop your own system. You are free to advocate for your own methods that would be superior.
We are free, we don't need permission.
hahahah. see. here is the issue we were discussing. I dont know this fella but wow.
"You are free to advocate for your own methods that would be superior. " . . . ??
not a productive and if anything an ascerbic statement. I dont know you chum why the attitude? are you offended about something? Or are you part of this grant writing subculture? Your reaction seems odd if there is not part of the grant subculture that we are discussing here.
Governance has the problem in the name chum. I think you are missing the point of a free society which is in part free discourse in order to move the whole forward.
Retreating to "if you dont like it do it yourself" is how people lose the good will of their community.
So be nice and dont try to shut down conversations, so that way we can all move forward without detours for temperment based skirmishes. . . or continue to be mildly dickins and authoritative and I will just take my help elswhere.
Your projects are in need . Be nice
Just fork the protocol, girl. đ
hahahaha. I have no patience for those wanna be sneaky conversation tactics. Clout chasin on the sneak tip with no manners and a desire to "steer" conversations or "frame" things or "give context" or see the integrated phenomena" or any of the other b.s. PMC nonsense phrases.
Sorry for the rant but that attitude is an instant red flag. Those people ruin communities with their sneak words and self insinuation.
I feel as though our understanding of governance, and politics is too far apart to have any constructive conversation around this topic.
Like, if you want to engage with my points and try to make your own points about why they're flawed - do it. But don't stand there and cast aspertions at my motives when you started off your response with "I don't know this fella"
Again. You don't know me or where I have been. stop the weasel words. I dont know your motivations i know your words. Let me explain to you in case you really dont understand.
"our understanding of governance, and politics is too far apart" are an example of PMC double speak.
It is what is called a grouping statement. It creates adhoc us them groupings in conversations based on the desireability of being seen well by whatever class of person you feel yourself to be.
We used to call them "low power techniques". Used when one wants people to assume that they have a level of clout.
Bro I have fired people because I detected the attitude you had on them. You are not unique and you are more arrogant than you should be.
You should probably stop this now. No one will see this interaction and we can move along.
You are a conversation bully who acts like he is smarter than people. You are not. Your desire to be seen as such is the counter indicator. and yes that is the appropriate response to someone talking mess who i dont know.
ffs i read your response again and you actually did what you were accusing me of. You ignored the point of statement. Bro, wth? who taught you how to do this? Did you grow up needy or ugly or outcast or ??? who hurt you. why are you so cloying and insinuatey? If you need frens I can be an internet homie but ... why the attitude? do other people find it cool or acceptable?
truly bro. no one ever told you that this way of communicating does not represent your character well?
Be direct. Don't sneak. Don't guide. Don't frame. Just be a freaking human.
You really dont get it?
Also adds systemic risk by creating a big pot of money that can be confiscated or blocked by government.
Thats the heart of it. The thing is that, in general people will follow the incentives as presented. Right now the incentives are to behave in a grant worthy fashion because a grant is only good money game in town.
Everyone will have their own opinions of what that is at first but over time the grant culture will coalesce into some familiar and low entropy patterns of influence, encouragement and admonishment. Self censorship is the final boss.
Yeah, they say their grants are "no strings", but that's not accurate. It's "thin strings".
The way to give someone money with no strings attached is to just send them money, unasked and without expectation that they react or respond with anything other than a courteous "Thanks!"
Otherwise, you are giving it with the expectation that you are forming a relationship, through which you can exert influence.
Which isn't necessarily a bad deal, but let's call a spade a spade.
Yes if money is the language of value, the speakerâs identity and values inevitably matter to the semiotics
What if we declare some conversations proof of stake. Put up 1k sats if you care enough to be in this one, otherwise go troll and scroll elsewhere.??? too harsh?? I mean they get the money back so not like pay to play. Its more like put your money where your mouth is at least while you talk. when you withdraw your stake, you withdraw your say.
sounds mean now am reading it back but oh well. thoughts?
I am super eager for this sort of model
Staking a bond to join a forum, and losing it for bad behavior? Sounds badass
Also, what about multisig ecash and membership dues, the admins decide what to do with the money
They can spend the groupâs funds paying a famous guest to come lead an AMA
Or commissioning art to celebrate the group
All of this possible without any KYC
The only way to send someone money with no strings (incentives) attached is to send it anonymously.
Yeah, the curiosity would kill me, tho. đ
I'm already sometimes looking at my LN wallet, trying to figure out who sent what, when, and why.
I guess I like knowing who gave me a tip. I do want some interpersonal interaction and feedback.
If a public company did otherwise it would be against its fiduciary responsibility and most boards would catch shit. Sorta how they are forced to buy bitcoin now since their investors are citing fid resp and sayin why dafuq are we not in that.
there are some systemic realities. "I am paying for yield. where the hell is my yield Bob?" is one of them.
Yeah, people trust them with their money because they assume that they're evaluating and tracking how the money is spent. Otherwise, there is no due diligence.
Anything else would be helicopter money.
I am kind in helicopter mode rn ngl. Trust satoshi and anon fling over the walls.
I'm eager to see proof that grant money is more effective.
effective at what though? grant money is easier to attract and to track but channels activities towards the desire of the grantors and leads back to centralized influence / authority. ON the other hand, no one wants to give money to a schmuck so you gotta watch them. projects are tricky. things happen. ppl change. These are the poles we find ourselves between.
The answer is gonna have to be net new revenue from outside the grant ecosystem. Charity wont do it. Love wont sustain it. need to think thunks about this in some organized way soon I think,
I mean, is it a more effective and/or efficient application of the same amount of funds?
If I have âŹ200k sats and I want to give them to devs, is it better to give it to a board or to donate directly? We all assume the board has the most information, which is often the case in a particular case, but is it possible across all donors?
I suspect not. The board has one particular set of information, but not necessarily more than the entire group of donors. Each donor has a particular subset of information and can probably make educated guesses within that sphere, that would add up to more accuracy in aggregate.
Is central planning really more efficient?
Iâd just make a list of all the devs, talk about your intention with them and get to know them (probably a full time jobs worth of time here but very fun) then fund the ones you get along with!
This is actually a solid strategy.
Basic Economics - Thomas Sowell attempts to answer that question
Centralization of resources is more efficient in every measurable way.
But measurable efficiency does not always produce âdesiredâ results⌠esp when whatâs âdesiredâ is unknown.
âshooting from the hipâ to solve problems in a fluid problem space ⌠micro funding from distributed sources may be more effective.
I DO think this model of funding can scale to support for larger and longer duration projects. But this nut wonât be easy to crack, and people gotta want it.
Nostr has to want it.
Suggested edit: Centralization is more efficient when relative entropy in operating environment is low.
Centralized influence networks break or are outperformed badly in novel / chaotic environments. Use less energy per unit of measurable outcome though . . . theres that
Maybe. I think, i mean I could be nuts
Entropy itself is a measure of the âcentralizingâ force. To achieve a state of âlow entropyâ requires a force(s) that centralizes and âcreates orderâ in a fluid system.
So to say that âorder is easier to create in a more ordered systemâ ⌠i mean itâs not nuts ⌠but also maybe kinda obv?
And your second para is already what I said, just different words.
So no. I wonât edit. đ
But I do love that we can discuss this topic, and that you were able to âsuggest an editâ without breaking Nostr. LOL.
thats not what entropy is bro.
The second paragraph is not what you said. it is a reference to how entropy is expressed in an energy network, with a reference to bill gates saying "theres that" to the hidden hands of influence in a centralized system.
Oh yah. no edits on nostr either . . . that was the joke.
I think this mostly succeeds when dev don't "need" the cash.
Unfortunately I have seen plenty of brilliant minds letting foss projects go while life and corporate work (getting paid always wins). I really thing the economy as a late has exacerbated this. The Awesome Lists follow are mostly abandon-ware. Like really abandoned. I have taken time to make PRs in the past to prune these projects, it can take all night, then the maintainers never merge.
It takes real discipline to accept donations, maintain convictions when you also need the money. Thomas Sowell also spends a great deal of time on human psychology of incentives.
Yes, that's why we put so much effort to maintaining a level of effort that doesn't burn us out or preclude sometimes focusing on work or social life.
And finding people we really just like hanging out with. Then we have an additional reason to maintain contact.
This gives us a long-term perspective.
nostr:npub1494rtg3ygq4cqawymgs0q3mcj6hucvu4kmadv03s5ey2sg32df5shtzmp0
We don't have a data analyst, yet. Gaping hole in our skill set.
Just saying.
Think about it.
GN
lol. will think. GM. fun day. Sorry if that dude i snapped at was your fren. momentary lapse. back to civilized frog lol
We need to fill our API with data calls. We're still building it, but at some point, there needs to be something in it. đ
hahaha. lemme think about it. like i said my time is not my own for next few months. but will think.
Wait a minute. đ Are you also a potential Data Analyst? That's so cool. Yeah, get back to us, later.
No stress. We're not going anywhere.
I do have some dev resources in pakistan that i may be able to tap on the cheap as a donation later. just have to get my life resituated.Jamaica went all cbdc and now I have property to sort out before they tokenize it away.
I hate the fiat mafia sooo very much. crooks and thieves.
Oh, yeah, the Caribbean is all shell coin and stuff. It's so weird.