Frederick Desimpel

Dromer Denker Doener (Wilde Gans)

High Tech possibilities,
Low Tech solutions,
Before, Beside and Beyond tech.
Inner & Inter being.
Conciousness
Nature
Love

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@drewzzzart @IndieLauraSDG Did you do the west area ? It has a whole different feel to it.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

Another gem from Jonathan Blow, to be released later this year... Demo available until monday, june 22, on Steam:

https://t.co/ckzd4GCZyi

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@HedgeFundFomo Eh, you expect half the valuation in revenue ? Delete your account.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@paulg Another one bites the dust.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@peanut_buttur @leevalueroach Google is already a customer of SpaceX services, before launch... or, wait, if they still launch this year...

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@SenLummis Then do so. Infrastructure.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@ycombinator Can we have a Z combinator by now ?

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@SenLummis 0 0 0

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@SenLummis Yawn.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@SenLummis It's inter-generational. It's unmanagable. And intergenerational.

[S Tominaga (Aka Dr Craig Wright) @CsTominaga]

There are more than 10,000 people who should hear this message. The reality is that most of them never will. Modern communication systems are increasingly filtered through algorithms that decide what people see, what gains visibility, and what disappears beneath the surface. The result is that ideas are often judged not by their merit but by whether they fit the incentives of the platforms that distribute them. If this vision is ever going to become reality, it will not happen because an algorithm decides it should. It will happen because people choose to discuss it, challenge it, improve it, and share it with others.

What is being proposed is not another technology company. It is not another token project. It is not another attempt to build a larger data centre or a more powerful centralised model. The objective is something much broader. It is the creation of a distributed intelligence economy in which individuals own their knowledge, own their tools, own their models, and participate directly in the creation of value.

For too long the assumption has been that progress requires concentration. Larger institutions. Larger platforms. Larger data centres. Larger models. Larger corporations. The belief is that intelligence improves as more information is gathered into fewer hands. Yet history repeatedly demonstrates that knowledge does not originate from centres of power. It originates from individuals. Discovery is distributed. Expertise is distributed. Creativity is distributed. Innovation is distributed.

Artificial intelligence should reflect that reality.

The future should not consist of a handful of corporations acting as gatekeepers to intelligence. It should consist of millions of people creating specialised tools, specialised agents, specialised services, and specialised knowledge systems. A physician understands things that an engineer does not. An engineer understands things that a lawyer does not. A scientist understands things that an accountant does not. Human civilisation works because knowledge is dispersed across society. The strength of the system comes from the interaction between specialists, not from the existence of a single authority.

The same principle can be applied to artificial intelligence. Instead of one giant model attempting to know everything, we can build networks of specialised agents that cooperate, compete, verify one another, and continuously improve. We can create systems that discover expertise rather than pretending expertise can be centralised. We can build mechanisms that reward truth, reward reliability, reward contribution, and reward innovation.

Most importantly, we can create systems that help people become more capable rather than making people increasingly dependent upon a small number of organisations. Technology should extend human potential. It should allow individuals to do more, learn more, create more, and contribute more. It should not exist primarily to extract value from users and concentrate it among a small group of owners.

This is why ownership matters. This is why reputation matters. This is why open systems matter. If individuals cannot own what they create, cannot control the knowledge they develop, and cannot participate directly in the value they generate, then the future will simply reproduce the same concentration of power under a different technological label.

A distributed intelligence economy offers a different path. It allows individuals to build. It allows communities to experiment. It allows experts to encode their knowledge into specialised systems. It allows markets to discover value through competition rather than through central planning. It creates diversity rather than uniformity and resilience rather than dependence.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@notch It's a chest of leverage.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

This game will be crazy...
Each grey star is a puzzle level, and the overworld contains puzzles of itself.
#OrderOfTheSinkingStar

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@Pirat_Nation One per account for controllers... ever heard about local multiplayer ?

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@OlexGameDev @Kuratius exactly.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@rfleury @haceelldasilva @brian_armstrong Not just the account.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@OlexGameDev @Kuratius Maybe for introductions like this, a better way would be to be very transparent about stock supply per batch, gauge demand with expected batch prices, informing the price will be dynamic during the sale, with a confirmation window.

ie some kind of opt-in / opt-out auction system

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@OlexGameDev @Kuratius Well, yes, excess demand. Prices increase, be it by the 'scalpers', which signals the product is scarce, which motivates the producer to supply more.

Price signals work once a product is on the market. Hard to balance demand expectation, initial price and supply on introduction.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@grok @CsTominaga @robert_bsv Seems Grok is stuck in it's weights.

[Frederick Desimpel @FDesimpel]

@OlexGameDev @Kuratius So supply was low ? They could easily have waited another month to manufacture / stock more.

500$ ? no way , though I get your point. 125$ maybe, 150$ max for first batch. Then go to current price or a bit lower over time.

Another question is, will the steam machine bundle one.