Quote from: cryptovore on August 05, 2017, 11:40:54 AM

I wonder where the "goldilocks" area for such a group is - or if there is such a "goldilocks" area at all. How many people in the group: 100? 1,000,000? 10,000,000?

Hm. It's an interesting question, I agree. It's an issue I'm trying to illuminate for myself.

I distinguish between the technological and the social, e.g. are we talking network size or social group size? If it's maximum number of nodes for the network, then modelling is the only answer, apart from wait-and-see.

Questions of social group size arise in a context. The context here is: this is the first time ever that we've been able to communicate near-instantaneously, directly, arbitrary-person to arbitrary-person privately, arbitrary-person to group of arbitrary-persons. Up until now psych studies of group size have really only testified to the effects of resource availability in the locality and various other real-world mundane constraints on human behaviour. Not a lot of thought has been given to online groups, even less to the likely impact of introducing technology-based support for managing social relationships. We are very definitely in new (social) territory.

We don't even know how to characterise group membership and that will thwart any attempt at enumeration. F'r instance, how would we want to classify a Slimcoin user who only fired up the wallet once a year to collect the PoS reward? Is that a group member? Are people who contribute by promoting the brand but don't run a node not group members? Do those who stand and wait not also serve? What about a number of people who club together and run a node between them?

I'm interested in potential answers to the question of what it means to be a member of the Slimcoin peer-to-peer networked cryptocurrency group, however it is constituted. This also translates, neatly, to: what are the brand values? One is the other and vice versa.

As regards the construction of value systems, I dunno if you caught the story about the Canadian lass who fed the local crows and in return, they brought her gifts - it offers some fascinating insights. It was reported that there didn't seem to be a detectable pattern.

So the key question has to be: do the objects in this image, delivered as gifts by the crows, act to illuminate the corvids' value system or their mental model of the human value system? (If you read the linked article, the lens cap incident suggests that this is perhaps *not* a no-brainer).

The ability to classify is a fundamental feature even of non-sentient cognition, it's hardly a stretch of the imagination to view our readiness to construct value systems as merely the unremarkable exercise of a basic cognitive mechanism.

And, as you observe, it's all about the observer, the object being observed and the process formed between the observer and the object.

Quote from: cryptovore on August 05, 2017, 12:41:13 PM

Quote from: gjhiggins on August 05, 2017, 12:20:03 PM

17m Fuguecoin

Nice hodlings

Yeah, me and the Fuguecoin dev are going to exchange Christmas cards this year.

Cheers

Graham