The truest form of privilege is to be born with a desire for constant change. Most people find change uncomfortable. But in the modern world, becoming wealthy and happy depends on embracing constant change and growth. If you naturally enjoy change, count your blessings!

Episode 13 is live - "Riding Out" with @SuperRareJohn, co-founder of @SuperRare 🌊 A nod to his passion for surfing, the title speaks to the ups and downs of creating one of the best known and most successful platforms for digital art and a core crypto application. We chat about BC (before crypto) times: architecture, civil engineering, a New York ad job and finding his people in the early @ethereum crowd. Pitching SuperRare to 120 VCs. All 120 passed so they built it anyway: "You have to be a little bit crazy..." SuperRare is a family business - John, his brother @SuperRareChar and his cousin @rareperkins...because they already knew how to disagree without it getting personal. Especially when debating about maybe giving up on SuperRare entirely and maybe pivoting into DeFi back in 2019... On the personal side of staying in it through the lows: "This may be pretty horrible, but I know where I'd like to go, and I think it's still worth it to get there. So I'll suck it up and deal with it. Every day isn't a good day, otherwise you wouldn't have good days..." Then October 2020: the first $1M month, the moment it started to feel like this is definitely something. And the honesty of going from the crest of that wave to having to lay off 30% of the team in 2023 - all in public, full ownership of mistakes made while growing. "I think the best learning experiences are always the most difficult." This is the yin and yang of building here. Full episode - piped.video/C04m_9zqtF8 open.spotify.com/episode/0Mw…

It's possible that a killer app of adversarial governance mechanism design theory will end up being AI safety. Compare: vitalik.eth.limo/general/202… aiprospects.substack.com/p/p… There's a deep duality between the two environments. Both are about a less-sophisticated principal trying to get ideal outcomes from a set of more-sophisticated agents: in the first case, the principal is a static algorithm and the agents are humans, in the second case, the principal is humans plus weaker LLMs and the agents are stronger LLMs. A key finding was that you can achieve much better outcomes if you can guarantee limits to how much agents can collude (see: Nash equilibria being abundant, vs. cooperative-game-theory "cores" often being empty). That argument should naturally transfer to this new setting.

We are entering an era where everyone will have everything, including crazy weapons. So, we need two things: 1. To heal the mindset and traumas of humanity, and 2. Extreme deterrence capability in the meantime while we do ‘the work’ as a species . What a crazy exciting time we’re living in - let’s not blow ourselves up before @elonmusk takes us to the stars, please!

My hot take on the AI doomerism: Every time a new technology is introduced to society, there's a lot of doomsday takes. I understand AI is bringing about change of a different order of magnitude than previous new technologies, but ultimately, what happens here is up to humans. Humans can do stupid things with any technology. They can also do brilliant things. While the tech is being built, there are going to be mistakes, and in case you haven't been around on the planet that long: What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Meaning: We will learn from the mistakes, as we've always done with hew developments, and the technology will ultimately prove more beneficial than harmful. I would also add that the AI doomers sound like SBF and many of them are from the same cult in which people appoint themselves god and decide what's best for everyone else. Nobody voted them god. I suggest you don't feed their delusions and give them that power either.