Federalist No. 5

Zones of Statement or Radical Separation of Concerns. Basically, it's worth distinguishing two cognitive zones: a zone of discovery and a zone of closure. That is, if a comprehensive set of sources already exists on a given issue, then it's sufficient to consistently present and weigh each piece of evidence. The result will be a dull, safe solution that will close off all attempts to deviate in the wrong direction, leaving a reliable path to the goal. If such a set of data doesn't exist, or a person believes it doesn't, then one should, on the contrary, deviate as much as possible from the facts, constructing the most absurd concepts that barely correspond to the simplest truths. The essence of this zone is to generate as many meme-worthy, funny freaks as possible. Remember how in the 2010s they made homunculi from chicken eggs and sperm? That's the vibe. But this isn't a task for the evening; it's a month of select facts or select madness. There shouldn't be many such zones, because they shouldn't fade away and crumble. Again, you could simply create a "new zones" theme in the discovery zone and then try to implement the most ridiculous chimeras. There may also be a question regarding the right to ideas. If a topic has been explored by many, but only a few have used it for social capital, publication, or business, this can be disappointing. A person can have two shortcomings: an acute information deficit and an acute lack of execution. These are precisely the two needs that the community must satisfy. In an environment where execution is abundant, an intellectual becomes a valuable resource, and without their support, bringing an idea to the "market" is difficult. In an environment where information is abundant, the situation is symmetrical, to the point of "well, someone try it, I'm curious to see how it works in practice." Thus, good alliances increase the average strength in the community, and that's the most important thing. But it's also worth mentioning a few words about life below the surface. There are people for whom the fire that heats the cauldron feels hot, so they evaporate (you can also imagine the cauldron as an aquarium). But there are also people who, on the contrary, can't absorb this warmth, so they can live at the bottom for quite a long time while still contributing to the community. Like Gwern, for example, who spent some time in niche research and seriously talked about earning $40 from silly website banners while working as an IT specialist in the US in 2017. My position is that the community should support this kind of bottom-dwelling life of competent and responsible participants, since they create a different kind of value. A brief word about the division of interests: there are different intellectual landscapes to work on. People usually talk about "low-hanging fruit" and leave it at that, but the metaphor can be expanded. You can try to knock down or build a ladder to the high-hanging fruit. You can take unripe fruit and accelerate its ripening. These are all different tasks, interesting to different people. Author: Light