I have always liked eyes, so much so that if I was ever going to get a tattoo, it would be centered around an eye. It isn't the "window to the soul" concept that is attractive, but if there were an observable body part that could "diagnose" a human the best, it would have to be the eyes, right? I also think there is some Pareidolia in paly also, as I do tend to see eyes everywhere, like this:
Do you know what it is?
It is my water bottle - yes, I am still drinking more water daily, which still isn't seeing much of a noticeable result, but perhaps I am feeling a little "clearer" and I think that the whites of my eyes are a little whiter - something that has concerned me for a while.
I like that picture though, as while it does look like an eye, it also has a certain amount of a "tech feel" to it, like a chip with information flowing into it. a window to the soulless in this usecase perhaps. But, this is the new world, one where engineered algorithms decide what we like, what we choose and how we live our lives, through subtle and not so subtle mechanisms.
Is it a better world?
Well, that depends on personal circumstances, as while the wealth gap is growing considerably, we have never seen so many extremely wealthy people and never to the extremes of wealth they currently enjoy, and it isn't just the inflation rate that has ballooned the figures, as the richest in the world have been outstripping the growth of the poorest for decades.
See that line in the middle? That is the median and it is important, because it shows how large the gap is between the top of the bottom 50% and the top of the top 50% - with a much larger gap. There is actually a larger gap between the top and bottom of the one percent, than between the bottom of the 1% and the bottom. That is incredible, is it not? But, these are the algorithms in play and, they aren't all engineered, well at least not by a mathematician, they just leverage it.
For a hypothetical instance, there is about a half quadrillion dollars worth of wealth in the world, which is 500 trillion. If it was distributed to all 8 billion people equally, each would get about 60,000 dollars.
Is that a lot?
Well for billions of people in the world, it is a massive amount, but to put it into perspective, Today Elon Musk is the technical richest, worth $283,000,000,000 (283 billion). What that means is that he alone accounts for the "60,000" of 4,716,666 people. That is the same even distribution allocation to everyone in New Zealand.
And, New Zealanders would be taking a massive wealth cut under this, as they are ranked about 6th in the world as the richest per capita for average wealth:
US$530,240
US$411,060
US$403,970
US$313,050
US$291,100
US$289,800
US$288,260
US$286,710
US$283,260
US$280,580
Feeling wealthy, or poor? This is the average, so assume there are a few people very much higher than the median and, many more well below to create these numbers. But, if everyone on earth was given the same starting point, how long would it be until it was highly uneven again?
How long until the algorithms of who we are kick into play and those who are good at supplying, attract those who are good at consuming what is supplied? How long until what is earned is invested in expansion activities, invested into generative mechanisms, used to own and rent out? How long until people are people and end up doing exactly what they have been programmed to do by genetics, to then create systematic tools that can automate and the process more effectively and efficiently to do it better? Some are programmed to make money, some are programmed to spend money and, this division matters in a world where wealth is directive, as it can be used to control more and more.
It is here that I think crypto is going to be challenged in the future, as no matter what tools are built and what opportunities arise, humans handle available resources differently, even if everyone gets the same education access. Even if we are all individuals, we are highly predictable in so many way as groups, which is why we are so easily manipulated at scale through these algorithmic suggestions. They can identify and group us in a general sense and then target with increased refinement until we are getting just what we want to consume, even though they always had an endgoal in mind - which is what makes them the most income.
Crypto doesn't change core human behaviors and a consumer mindset is unlikely to become an investor mindset any time soon. But over time, there is the possibility that as more people get involved and demonstrate capabilities, group dynamics change through social conformity practices. Just like how some groups encourage getting fit, while others encourage getting fat, financial behavior is going to be peer group affected also.
This is why the transparency and social layers of crypto are so important, because they give practical experience as well as peer group demonstration of possibility. The algorithms are uncovered and available to all, instead of like now, being coveted and leveraged by the few.
We are all "coded" prior to birth through our genetics, and then coded by our environment and experiences after birth. I guess life is finding a way to understand our own coding and find the best ways to exploit our strengths and weaknesses in order to get the results we are after. The challenge with the social animal practice of social proofing however is, just because everyone is doing it, it doesn't mean it is right for us, right now, or perhaps ever.
Just like our eyes, none of us are identical and therefore, the averages might not work for us. But, who's job is it to find what does?
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
