Content
@
https://thenetworkstate.com
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
balajis
@balajis.eth
The right way of doing this is to build Internet First global private regulatory systems. The key concept is to treat regulation as a binary classifier. To minimize false positive AND false negative rates. To quickly approve good projects AND correctly flag bad projects. To disclose all financial interests of regulators and put decisions onchain. To allow for appeal, by multiple independent regulators, in the advent of an incorrect project classification. And, finally, to allow users to ignore those reviews if they so choose. That is, the right answer isn’t either (a) to just be randomly hostile towards projects or (b) to just tolerate everything or (c) to rely on the SEC and similar nation state regulators but rather (d) to build our own Internet First parallel regulatory systems that live on the Internet and aggregate signals *across* borders. We know this works because it works for Amazon (book reviews), Uber (star ratings), Apple (app Reviews), and many others. It will work for us.
3 replies
19 recasts
152 reactions
stringtheory
@stringtheory69
I don’t think the issue is about classifying what is or isn’t slop. In my experience, the real issue is alignment—slop is low risk with high reward, while substance is high risk with an unclear reward. That being said, there are contract-level solutions to the slop vs. substance problem. For example, if contracts on pump.fun incorporated a vesting curve alongside the bonding curve, projects would be necessarily more aligned with long-term building.
0 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
