any surface-as-a-service that I expose to the unknown (see: "wellll") I balance for approximately this interaction pattern:
* 90% throughput - the exchange happens without me
* self-service on their end; passive service on my end
* this is the path of throughput efficiency
* 9% evolution - the exchange happens *with* me
* disclosure on their end; active discovery on my end
* this is the path of evolution
* either I can help by creating a self-service path, broadening the throughput-optimized channel,
* or I cannot help
* 1% wtf - something strange happens, and it requires me to fully (though temporarily) inhabit this event's frame. "wtf" is an investigation, a rescoping. which means the ratio re-applies:
* 90% throughput - the strange event passes without me interfering
* we get to the other side and move on
* 9% evolution - the strange event and I *engage*
* we get to the other side, but with dancing shoes on
* 1% wtf - we consider our choice of scope again
* at some point in the recursion, the shape starts to look like the original service definition. at that point, I snap back to the original frame. not every stack gets unwound; sometimes they just merge together.
* either that or I walk away. infinite regress is real and it is not my project. I'm familiar with it, I'm on *good terms* with it, and this is me making a home in the middle of it. too much investigative recursion thins out *home*.
this pattern started out by figuring that any service we offer in good faith is just gonna be used mysteriously 10% of the time, in ways that either look like abuse (or creativity indistinguishable from abuse?), or ... or who knows
accepting a kind of recursive strangeness-ratio lets things sort of right-size themselves in my relative experience
I get 90% stability, 9% instability, and 1% wtf, where the 1% has its own 90/9/1 breakdown
having inhabited this expectation, at this point, I've started seeing multiply-nested wtfs as launchpads where the spring tension is preloaded, waiting for me to connect the dots and *leap*
my theory is that the 90/9/1 thing is just how it *feels* to the one inhabiting the surface, and it may have nothing to do with any other observer's tallied figures for what *they* see going on. (9+1)% of the time, I adjust my posture, and usually the adjustment means I won't have to make the same adjustment again. occasionally (but manageably!) things get interesting. good. sustainable inhabitation. ✔️
also, this way, 90% of the time my attention can wander and contribute to powering other people's services/surfaces
feels like a good way to wire a world for reliably responsive consciousness
'scuse me gonna go dick around on my phone for a while, it's structural
---
see also: '10% revolt'