31 chunks · 25 episodes
Capping downside but leaving upside gives momentum, due to something like the third law of motion. Third law of motion: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Put a solid surface and then explode something on the other side, it pushes the surface away. A rocket! A physical asymmet
Agents will optimize for the thing they get evaluated on. For any collective (of more than one agent) that must be different than the goal of the collective. In small, high-trust teams, the agent will be evaluated on the collective's output. In large, low-trust teams, the agent will be evaluated on
People who know how to do abundance can maximize upside. People who know how to manage scarcity can cap downside. They're different skillsets and orientations.
When you have the right set of conditions, you can do a low-risk alpha rollout that possibly scales smoothly to a full rollout if the product turns out to be ready. Instead of having to get the product quality perfect, you can go to market early and be exposed to upside while capping downside. The f
Technocrats love optimization. Instrument, measure, codify best practices. It creates obvious value by capping downside. But there is a significant cost—it's just that it's diffuse and hidden. So optimization ratchets up, unchecked, unbalanced with any countervailing force.
A culture of permissionless innovation requires capped downside to the commons. One bad actor shouldn't be able to ruin it for everyone.
...on't get called on it you get to stay at the bailey. This gives you upside with capped downside. If you do this repeatedly, you can inchworm the argument forward bit by bit, moving the Overton window. One example: making a crass or offensive sta...
Will LLMs lead to compounding ambiguity in communication? There's value in shrouding a potentially controversial statement in load-bearing ambiguity to keep the upside while capping downside. LLMs are great at taking a statement and expanding and making it more ambiguous. "Take these 5 bullets and e
A corporate politics maneuver classically used with consultants will also be applied to LLMs. You bring in a consultant to come to the conclusion you secretly believe. If your boss agrees with the consultant's conclusion, then you get the benefit as the person who decided to bring them in. If your b
A pattern: use LLMs in tiny tasks where the overall swarm is emergently powerful. LLMs handle small tasks very well. The emergent swarm might lose the plot (e.g. forgetting it's just researching egg prices, not buying them). But if you have ways of capping downside / preventing possible irreversible
...de of possibly discovering a game-changing idea together, now or in the future. Capped downside, uncapped upside.
...rk, with no individual seedling being existential. A recipe for good upside and capped downside if you do it right. But in a startup, the singular project is everything. If it doesn't cohere, the whole thing evaporates.
...t if it's great, it can give recommendations that are game-changing for a user. Capped downside, uncapped upside. Agents, if they're not perfect, can do real damage. Uncapped downside, uncapped upside. Downside can lead to game over. The user ha...
...t better. A good quality pump gives you upside if the new content is great, but capped downside if it's not, because few people will ever see it.
Regulations cap downside. Benchmarks set the terms of how to measure upside and inspire competition by making it measurable. Benchmarks are an emergent schelling point. Someone sets rules and a way to measure quality. No one has to use their rules if they don't find them valuable, but if people do,
Organizations need rules to be efficient and cap downside. But rules ossify. Organizations also need play to be alive, to innovate, to care. Rules seem serious. Space to play seems frivolous. So we tend to do more rules than play. Playful explorations are easier to do in the office, it's harder to d
...l allows much more innovation. What if you could have a software ecosystem that capped downside significantly?
...is means that there are often clever moves you can do that look risky, but have capped downside. Some people would rather have an "obnoxious aggression" culture than a "manipulative insincerity" to navigate. I'm the opposite. In a manipulative i...
...'ll enjoy it and feel fulfilled for its own sake, even if you have few viewers. Capped downside; negative opportunity cost. Because you enjoy it, you're likely to keep going, and apparently some research says the best predictor of influencer suc...
... A downside that won't kill you caps the downside, leaving the uncapped upside. Capped downside, uncapped upside. The more the asymmetry, the more you should just do it, get as many spins of the roulette wheel as possible.