##### 1. What is the ideal future, and how do we get there? I often think about this quote: > The real problem of humanity is the following: We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall. - E.O. Wilson Of these three, our institutions are the easiest to reform. I know of no satisfactory methods for rolling our technology back, or our emotions forward. Can we invent godlike institutions, refactor our world to better address modern challenges? Some starting points: - Many of the most important problems of our age (poverty, climate change and other x-risks, maybe even war?) are probably coordination problems waiting for the right social technology to be invented ([80k hours](https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/vitalik-buterin-new-ways-to-fund-public-goods/) has an excellent introduction to this line of thought). - The [network state](https://thenetworkstate.com/) and [futarchy](https://mason.gmu.edu/~rhanson/futarchy.html) both imagine fairly large changes to the structure of our government. - On a smaller scale: [Reinventing Discovery](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11667578-reinventing-discovery) is an excellent and inspirational short read on collaborative knowledge creation. It seems a bit silly that in most scientific fields the atomic unit of knowledge is the peer-reviewed paper (especially when those [take forever to publish](https://worksinprogress.co/issue/real-peer-review/)). Reinventing Discovery covers the [Polymath Project](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymath_Project). Platforms like [manifold](https://manifold.markets/home?s=score&f=open&ct=ALL&p=0&fy=1&mt=00000&sw=1) are exciting even if true prediction markets would be better. Vernor Vinge wrote [some great fiction on collective sensemaking](https://www.talisman.org/~erlkonig/misc/vernor-vinge%5Erainbows-end.html) (search for "analyst pools" but also just read the whole thing 😉) We can surely discover truths faster, and discover deeper truths, by refactoring how we search for them. What other interesting points exist in the adjacent possible? ##### 2. A meditation on epistemic closure Here's an exercise; sit somewhere (preferably outdoors), observe all the little details around you, and figure out just how much of the rest of the world might be implied by those details. Some examples: - You're sitting at a beach and watching the waves, if you knew enough math could you use wave propagation to infer the topography of the sea floor? (The point of the exercise is to realize this question exists, not to come up with an answer. In this case, though, the answer [seems to be yes](https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/13/22/4628)!!) - Given the motion of the trees around you and a simple model of the mechanical properties of these trees, for how large of a region around those trees can you now derive the airflow? - A bird which sings more loudly than necessary has wasted energy. Too quietly, and it has failed to communicate. So intuitively, a song carries some information about the distance to its intended recipient(s). If you know a certain species is territorial, are a few songs enough to build a decent estimate of the size of its territory?