Andrew Pratt
@prattley
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Interesting.
Been working on a different but possibly complementary layer called the Epistemic Infrastructure Protocol (EIP)—not a formal logic engine, but a protocol for surfacing, contesting, and forking claims/axioms in the wild.
Where VOID may let you compose domains without pollution, EIP lets anyone audit, challenge, or fork the process—making drift, inversion, or capture visible, and keeping all challenge/audit/fork activity open, logged, and contestable.
Both layers together seem vital:
• VOID: structure and clarity
• EIP: antifragility and adversarial defense
Curious if you see room for an interface—composable logics + adversarial, operator-driven audit/protocol for meta-level drift and dispute? 0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Hi Vitalik,
Love this. The missing piece isn’t just tech defense—it’s epistemic defense.
Centralized “alignment” and closed audit are just new forms of hegemony.
What we need are open, adversarial, forkable truth protocols—call it an “epistemic immune system” for multipolar, anti-capture worlds.
That’s what I’ve been building (EIP)—all claims, audits, forks, and authority visible/challengeable, never locked to one actor, always open to public contest.
If you (or anyone) want to pressure-test or audit this kind of protocol, give me a shout. 0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction