this feels incomplete in many ways, but also like it's getting at something important

In my head I’ve started referring to political quadrants in terms of properties of their preferred coordination networks.

Top two are centralized. Bottom two are distributed.

Left two are symmetric (aka egalitarian). Right two are asymmetric. https://t.co/qiTfW9PSQA

Richard Ngo

this feels incomplete in many ways, but also like it's getting at something important
https://x.com/RichardMCNgo/status/1942767609239183370

Pragmatism (Security) at OP Labs.
Prev: ConsenSys & Coinbase.

Attribs: Friendly, curious, introverted, mid-witted.
Chans: /eth-security /maurelian /stoicism




It shows power dynamics and what left and right prefer and encourage.

🌷💀⏳

teleyinex.eth ▫️

teleyinex.lens ▫️

teleyine.x ▫️

daniellombrana.es  ▫️

@astaralabs ▫️

@obeygiant ▫️

@scifabric ▫️

dev

TogetherCrew.com | single parent x 4 | seeker of adventure | survivor of chaos | host /togethercrew /kbc /single-parenting
seemore.tv/free/fc/kbc

I’m trained to look at networks as pictures of information flow. A central node for me always means “is participating in information sharing by either giving (talking) or taking (hearing)”. Central nodes are either gate keepers or boundary spanners, and without knowing more about their ethics/hidden agenda, you don’t know why they are (not) sharing information

Nice input. I wondered about how the central nodes show who controls and where decisions are taken.

I don’t think there’s too much difference in applied left and right politics. It’s an elite/exclusive group who believes they have the answers which pushes coordination/decision making towards a centralized or hub-and-spoke system.

Consensus decision making requires time. That makes it not efficient. Grow too fast and the process breaks down. Just look at the European Union. All decision making used to be consensual. When the 10 Easter European countries were added, voting moved to majority.