This post is meant to capture the attention of the plebs within the ecosystem who produce things other than code.
Naval Ravikant says, if you can’t code, write books and blogs, record videos and podcasts. There’s a strategic reason for this suggestion and it has to do with leverage, the internet, and individuality. It brings a practical framing to my argument: In the current environment, programming is valued higher than anything because it is the most powerful, most efficient. Software has devoured the world, as they say. And if you can’t do that thing, Naval says what is next best in the market is making a product of your unique individuality. Let’s talk about that in a bitcoin context.
Bitcoin is code. That alone is a compelling reason to begin the journey of becoming efficient and competent at coding and programming computers if you’re interested in bitcoin.
I think I could code. I have a high schooler’s exposure to it. I could continue to grow in the skill set and knowledge base; the resources are available, no doubt. I am attracted to the implicit principles of coding, the collaborative, organic nature of FOSS. I think the kind of person you have to become to be good at contributing code is an admirable figure. And I have a desire to contribute to bitcoin because I accept it’s value proposition. I believe the future will be good if bitcoin is widely adopted and used.
But the thing is, after much negotiation with myself and my past, present and future, I choose to listen to the perhaps irrational and elusive, human voice deep within me that lights up when I write words. At the end of the day, I am captured by art. I believe it is useful.
Many in the space have heeded Naval’s advice. In fact, there are so many bitcoin podcasts to listen to, I often opt to listen to none. It’s the ‘finding signal in the noise’ problem. The existence of that problem is evidence of growth in the space. Obviously we want growth, but we want managed growth. We want managed growth because we want to be sure that our efforts are stregthening each other, not weakening. That’s why this conversation is one worth having.
What kind of people are the plebs who produce something other than code?
Optimistically, they are principled individuals who create value out of their inspirations and environment. They understand why sound money means stable culture. They are interested in contributing.
What do developers want from plebs who produce art?
What I want to know is, how can the plebs and the devs (and the pleb devs) best collaborate? What is required for us to trust one another? Because if I decide that I want to show up in this space, but I am not contributing code, there must be a very good reason for me to be there. If I am deciding against the most valuable form of contribution, how do I convince you that my contribution is still valuable?
I guess I am implicitly admitting to a tension that I feel exists between us. But I find evidence of this tension in our meetups and spaces. I mean, why should I be at bitdevs if I’m not coding? Of course, I know there is a perfectly sound reason as to why. We want growth, and everyone has something to contribute. I believe that is true, don’t get me wrong. But, again, I think we want managed growth. We need to talk about it because we’re building in a bear market. We’re all leveling up, and shit is getting real. We’re laying down the tracks, but the train has already left the station, and it’s a high speed train.
In my writing journey, the principles I’ve developed that guide my actions and decisions are a direct result of grappling with the questions that have arisen from encountering bitcoin. In this way, I can credit bitcoin for the accomplishments I’ve made outside of the ecosystem. For example, I wrote a book about my grandpa. Nothing about the subject has anything to do with the bitcoin protocol, network, or token. However, if I had never encountered bitcoin, I never would have written it.
I think this is true for many of us. Am I right?
If you are a bitcoiner artisan of sorts, how do you make the case for the value of your contributions to the bitcoin space? Or is it enough to find meaning in your work outside of this group? Do you feel this tension exists? Can you put into words why you believe beauty has everything to do with bitcoin?