Knowledge comes from practice. Humans always did things first before they gained the knowledge. Think of apprenticeship and the natural sciences for example.

What I have a big issue with is today's notion that application follows knowledge. A top down approach where academia is isolated from the feedback of the real world. What the hell do I mean by that?

A business or an artist goes bust if they do not perform well, they have direct risks attached to their work. While we can produce 'knowledge' (institutional knowledge), new (made up) economic theories, new (un-replicable) psychological explanations and so on, without any apparent problem. The natural selective feedback is missing. Academia is gamified, most researchers know they could be doing more useful research, yet their grants and prospects of publications don't let them.

So when I hear reason and understanding casually thrown around, I smell scientism (the marketing of science, science bullshit if you will) and not actual science. Because no peer review will be able to overrule what time has proven in the real world. And traditions are such things that endured. Usually someone realizes and writes another paper, disproving the previous one, advancing science.

Don't get me wrong, there are and were many unambiguously bad traditions by modern standards, and I'm sure there will be more. But we, the people are the evolutionary filter of traditions. We decide which ones are the fit ones, which ones of the ones we inherited will we pass down and which to banish into history.

Reasons are a human invention to help make sense of the world. If you want to base everything on logical grounds you will run into two things mainly:

1. Limits of knowledge. Knowledge is always incomplete, as more of it opens up more questions. There are things you intuitively know are good, but can't prove why they are.

2. Systemic limits of logical reasoning. A sufficiently powerful and consistent formal system (such as formal logic) is incomplete, it cannot prove its own correctness. (Gödel's incompleteness theorems)

The effect of a tradition is usually not apparent. They aren't created consiously or in a goal oriented way.

They usually emerge naturally as a social behavior.

There are also a lot of vestigial traditions that once served an important purpose. (Eg dowry)

What tradition are you talking about?

For example funeral rites help prevent disease from corpses. Without knowing anything about germs.

Or the taboo of incest can avoid genetic defects, without knowing anything about genes.

Traditions formed for a reason. And that reason is way more ancient and more natural than modern logic. It is simply survival.

The people with traditions that helped them survived more often.

I can come up with worse reasons than tradition.

Like, to satisfy a sadistic urge or to cause suffering.

Traditions can and often do serve some purpose even if we don't see them in such a light.

Just as evolutionary traits, only beneficial ones tend to survive the test of time. (Not necessarily beneficial to the individual, but the group)

Any mention of data collection in the ToS?

Games have been buried in negative reviews for less. We can't tell in advance.

But implying you know, and can speak for all people who play games is just bafflingly ignorant and conceited.

One of my dreams is the internet becoming peer2peer, cutting out the big players.

I translated it to c-suite corporate-speak:

Optimizing Lingo as a Transformational, Value-Add Social Leveraging Mechanism

In the current hyper-dynamic, synergistic landscape, lingo is a critical facilitator of cross-functional knowledge transfer, enabling holistic communication frameworks to be embedded within organizational matrices. Once the stakeholder acquires the bandwidth to proactively surface these paradigm-shifting levers, it becomes apparent that this vernacular is omnipresent across multiple channels of engagement and value streams.

Operational lingo, when fully actualized, becomes a game-changer for driving frictionless workflows and delivering on mission-aligned, results-oriented KPIs. Each ecosystem—whether enterprise-level or bespoke—cultivates a differentiated lexicon of granularized actionables and strategic terminology, enhancing the cross-pollination of intellectual capital. However, this also perpetuates segmentation, as those external to core stakeholder groups often lack the strategic alignment or context to operationalize these linguistic frameworks. Thus, lingo operates as a double-edged value driver: enhancing scalability of communication while concurrently constructing barriers to entry for non-value-aligned players.

Recently, we have seen an inflection point where these outcome-driven segmentation tactics have been scaled by emergent thought leaders to build ecosystem-specific, exclusionary lexicons. Historically, this practice was decentralized to fringe, non-synergistic clusters seeking to optimize internal cohesion while leveraging exclusivity as a differentiator. However, we are now experiencing a shift in the value chain dynamics.

Forward-facing market disruptors and blue-chip entities have identified that iterative pivots in proprietary lingo ecosystems can facilitate two core outcomes: exclusion of non-core, low-engagement stakeholders, and the amplification of influence across in-network human capital. The MBA/business sector provides a best-in-class use case for this kind of transformational buzzword orchestration. For key players aiming to optimize their seat at the table and maintain an upward trajectory within the talent pipeline, maintaining fluency in bleeding-edge terminology is table stakes. Failure to operationalize these linguistic shifts exposes individuals to significant delta in personal brand equity, rendering them non-competitive in the talent marketplace. Conversely, those maintaining a pulse on agile trend-spotting ensure they remain mission-critical, driving bottom-line ROI. Meanwhile, non-core participants with limited value contribution are effectively right-sized through continuous deployment of next-gen verbiage.

This transformative use of weaponized lingo is now a best practice across multiple verticals. Once you architect the mental model to map this strategic framework, its scalable applications can be identified across virtually every touchpoint in the socio-political ecosystem, digital community infrastructures, and high-growth market disruptors. If you encounter a team consistently beta-testing and iterating its buzzword bandwidth, consider this a key risk factor for potential high-barrier entry scenarios. Maintain strategic agility.

Now we're in full-on C-suite bingo territory! How’s that for unintelligibility?

Nah, I won't believe you.

The kernel repo on github is just a mirror. You probably knew, but they use just git.

Wow. So this was probably the first reflection/amplification ddos in history.