Results are in, thank everyone for engaging and voting! It was a fascinating thought experiment - particularly as it progressed when I asked people to look a little deeper - on one side some were convinced that humans are responsible for most/all of climate change/warming - and on the other side some were convinced it’s all a hoax. As the day progressed with strong reactions from both sides, I asked everyone to read the 2013 research paper which is the source for the oft-cited “97% of scientists believe in human-caused climate change”, and let me know what they thought after reading it (it only takes a couple of minutes at most to grasp the key points). Almost no one read it. Some like Nick from Greenpeace said “I'm not playing your disingenuous game Joseph.” He like many others simply refused to take a couple of minutes to read the research report which is likely foundational to his belief system and arguments. So here’s the interesting thing. Every answer I proposed was correct. To an extent. But they all deserve a little more examination. The 2013 research paper analysed 11,944 climate abstracts from 1991-2011 in the peer-reviewed scientific literature which referred to “global climate change” or “global warming.” 66.4% of abstracts had no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Only 0.54% said that they thought humans were the primary cause of global warming - and only 0.62% said that they thought humans had no role. However the vast majority didn’t express a view at all on whether humans had a role in global warming - 66.4%. That doesn’t mean they rejected or accepted it - they simply didn’t express a view. AGW means “anthropogenic global warming” - ie. humans causing the warming. Of the 32.6% who thoughts humans had some role in causing the warming, it’s worth noting that the 2013 research authors had categorised their abstracts according to “explicit” and “implicit” endorsement- but wrapped them all up in the 97.1% endorsement bundle. The key takeaway was that of abstracts that expressed a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the scientific consensus However it’s also important to note that only 32.6% of abstracts expressed a position on AGW. Of those, 97.1% endorsed AGW, 1.9% rejected AGW, and 1% were uncertain about AGW. So to summarise - 66.4% of scientists didn’t express a view at all on whether humans caused climate change. 32.6% of scientists did express a view on whether humans caused climate change. Of that 32.6% - 97.1% of the 32.6% thought humans had some role in causing climate change, 1.9% of the 32.6% didn’t think humans had a role in causing climate change, and 1% of the 32.6% were uncertain. To hopefully decomplexify and summarise: 🌎 66.4% of scientists didn’t express a view at all on whether humans caused climate change. 🌎 32.6% of scientists did express a view. Of the full group: ☘️66.4% of scientists didn’t express a view at all on whether humans caused climate change ☘️31.65% thought humans had some role in causing climate change (97.1% of the 32.6%). ☘️ 0.62% didn’t think humans had a role (1.9% of the 32.6%). ☘️0.54% thought humans were main cause ☘️ 0.33% were uncertain (1% of the 32.6%). Wherever you’re coming from in a debate, it’s good to know what facts you’re having the debate on. Read the 2013 research report - it’s fun I promise! iopscience.iop.org/article/1…

Now that the major lift for @reppo V2 is done, our next milestone is to reach web2 users at scale through UI upgrades account abstraction. Decomplexify -> reach the masses We started with a simple question- What if you can just swipe on content -> share the strength of your preference -> earn? Swipe to earn from your preferences while generating AI training data. At @Reppo, we are taking trading opinion contracts mainstream. Instead of betting on what will happen, you bet on what’s good (or not) Trade Agree/disagree, Like/dislike. 80M in voter volume already traded in the last 11 days. Just earn by swiping! The coolest part is you can top up voting power with a click of a button. In the backend - $REPPO market bought, max locked for 2 years for VeReppo but the user does not need to know or care (users can customize this in an advance tab) and user continues to swipe! That’s how we are building the Reppo economy central to $REPPO token. Ships 🚢 in about 2.5 weeks!

I once heard a lass use, in all earnestness, the word "decomplexify". Monumentous occasion for me, tbh.

Like most fields in which people are paid to decomplexify things, lawyers face the perverse incentive to firstly make things complex, to later be paid to make them less complex, to the general detriment of their customers. That's a trivially easy problem for AI.

GM CT Its a new week and another chance to be part of @cysic_xyz community! Compute usually sounds abstract. I think of it as something that just happen inside machines, hidden behind code and circuits. Lately I've been able to decomplexify it asthe force that makes every digital process possible. Take a look at an example like unlocking your phone; your device quickly processes your fingerprint or face data, verifies it against stored information, and transforms that verification into a signal that says “access granted.” That is COMPUTE! As technology keeps evolving, the demand for compute sky rocket with it. My phone can be unlocked with face scan, finger print,password and even pattern if I like. That's up to 4 compute demands just to unlock my phone .AI models demand massive processing power. Cryptographic systems need faster, verifiable calculations. The challenge isn’t just speed anymore but also trust, efficiency, and accessibility. We need compute systems that are faster, smarter, and open to more people. That’s where Cysic comes in. The Cysiv ComputeFi model is a system that doesn’t just provide compute, but turns it into a decentralized, verifiable, and tradable resource. Instead of depending on a few big providers, Cysic opens compute to a global network of contributors. Each piece of computation, from AI inference to cryptographic proof generation, can be verified and rewarded. It’s compute as an ecosystem, not just a service. What makes Cysic solid is its foundation. The team isn’t stopping at software; they’re integrating their own high-performance hardware custom ASICs designed to accelerate cryptographic workloads. These hardwares don’t just calculate faster; they prove every result cryptographically. That means users don’t need to “trust” the computation; it can be verified mathematically. It’s the kind of paradigm shift that makes decentralized systems truly reliable. Cysic’s ComputeFi model blends efficiency and transparency. Compute isn’t locked in massive data centers anymore. It becomes a shared resource where it is secure, verifiable, and available to anyone who needs it. For developers, that means a faster and cheaper access to proof generation. For users, it means stronger privacy and more dependable systems. And for the crypto ecosystem, it marks a step toward true decentralization of computational trust. In the end, compute isn’t just math. It’s the backbone of innovation, and Cysic is giving it a new shape of speed, trustless, and open. In a world where speed and security often seem at odds, Cysic makes them work together seamlessly. That’s what makes ComputeFi not just a technology, but a new standard for how computation should be done. @OxTochi How about this for an explanation?

Baffles me why there was no pre-negotiated "deal" before the trip to DC. This is rank amateur politics. The only way out of the mess for Canada is to DRASTICALLY decomplexify our regulations on business. And to dramatically incent foreign companies to locate here. See Ireland

Intelligence is not the accumulation of knowledge but the art of pathfinding: to zoom out, to decomplexify and to reveal the hidden passage through the labyrinth of reality.

Lawyers, paid to decomplexify things, collectively face the perverse incentive to firstly add complexity, to later be paid to remove it (hence 'legalese'). AI solves this, and any other job which purports to remove complexity. Lots of good changes coming here!

Database normalization is the process of designing tables to make certain types of data errors impossible This uses normal forms from one to five to remove potential anomalies Learn how to implement them with this video from Decomplexify youtu.be/GFQaEYEc8_8

"Reconstructing Onchain Order: The Philosophy Behind VOOI and Abstraction" In the era we live in, a “multichain world” has become an inevitable reality in Web3. Yet the more chains we have, the more fragmented things become—fragmented addresses, fragmented assets, fragmented experiences. VOOI doesn’t try to fight this trend. Instead, it chooses a more pragmatic path—to abstract away the complexity. This is not just the simplification of systems. It is the rebuilding of order. 1. Abstraction Isn’t Vagueness—It’s Essence In philosophy, abstraction is often misunderstood as detachment from reality. But true abstraction is extracting the essence. VOOI’s chain abstraction doesn’t hide the underlying structures—it distills them into a unified interface for cross-chain operations. The trader no longer needs to worry about what chain their funds are on. They only need to know this: They are accessible. They are executable. They are traceable. This isn’t simplification. It’s empowering the user. 2. Trust Isn’t Built by Consensus—But by Experience In the blockchain world, trust has long been tied to code, community, and token incentives. But more and more, we’re learning: Real trust is when you no longer have to think—and things just work. VOOI aims to rebuild trust through seamless experience itself. For example: Auto gas allocation removes the burden of choosing the right chain Frictionless cross-chain transactions eliminate trial-and-error Abstract accounts replace complex wallet juggling This kind of trust doesn’t need persuasion—it’s silently affirmed through use. 3. Gove From the very beginning, VOOI didn’t shout “DAO” as a slogan. Instead, it took a quieter but sturdier route to shift decision-making power to users: Only those who deeply use the platform and bind their identities gain more governance weight—gradually. It’s not about giving everyone governance rights from day one. It’s about earning it through contribution and commitment. This is anti-speculative by design—and a more legitimate foundation for governance. 4. It Doesn’t Change Chains—It Changes What Chains Mean to People While most projects focus on “bridges” and “faster TPS,” VOOI asks a deeper question: What does the chain mean to the user? Are you working for the protocol, or are you actually in control? The goal of chain abstraction is not to make people understand chains better, but to make it so they no longer need to. From tool to experience. From fragmentation to wholeness. From control to empowerment. Maybe we should stop viewing VOOI as a mere trading product, and start seeing it as a gentle correction to Web3. It’s making the blockchain no longer an obstacle, but a foundation. @cookiedotfun @vooi_io #VOOI #AbstractExperience #Decomplexify #HumanCentricBlockchain #Cookie

🚗💨 Ready for the road-trip rush? Make sure your snack aisles are too! With r4’s XEM Engine, anticipate demand surges by analyzing traffic patterns and POS data, ensuring your shelves are packed with salty snacks and energy drinks from Boston to Boise. 🥨🥤⚡ #r4XEM #TheNewAI #Decomplexify #MemorialDay2025 #Hyperlocal

Any job paid to decomplexify things (which is what a software engineer at root does) has built into it the perverse incentive to *add* complexity, to later be paid to remove it. Evident in lawyers, accountants, insurance brokers - over time, these fields grow in complexity.

⏱️ What if a digital twin paid for itself in weeks—not years? Our customers saw forecast accuracy jump nearly 20% in one month with r4's XEM Engine—and savings quickly followed. 💸 See how ▶️ hubs.ly/Q03nMD2y0 #r4XEM #TheNewAI #Decomplexify #CrossEnterpriseAI

👻 Ghost inventory can’t hide from its digital twin. Up to 65% of on-hand product counts miss the mark, costing Retailers ≈ $2.7 M per SKU per year in lost digital‑fulfilment sales. The r4 XEM‑powered digital twin cross‑checks sell‑through with live signals, exposes the phantoms, and lets digital fulfillment breathe again. #r4XEM #DigitalTwin #InventoryAccuracy #TheNewAI #Decomplexify

Bro! Chelsea has done Community shield on several occasions if not up to 18. Now that the UCL has been decomplexify, let's see how far they can go. Local Champions. 🤣

Decomplexify Your World Imagine a reality where making informed and data-driven decisions in the overcomplicated real estate sector is as effortless as sipping coffee in a Parisian café... ☕✨ ⚙️ The Etherland team is turning this vision into reality by integrating IPFS technology into the property market, ensuring transparency, security, and global accessibility. 📲 With our tech solution, the real estate market is no longer limited by borders, intermediaries, or outdated systems. Explore more at etherland.world/! #Etherland #RealEstate #PropTech #Future

🎧 New Episode Alert: Balqiis De-complexified! 🎧 This month on Balqiis De-complexified, we tackle the critical debate surrounding the UN missions in Somalia and the ongoing transition to a country office. What does this shift mean for Somalia’s stability and the future of international support? Tune in as we decomplexify the facts, unpack the key discussions, and explore what’s next for Somalia. Listen in for expert insights and a balanced perspective. #BalqiisDecomplexified #Somalia #UNTransition #PeaceAndSecurity @UNSomalia

I would be surprised if God forces our society to decomplexify at some point. The technodystopia is going to end at his discretion.

@eckertjon a need to decomplexify and for FEWer things in our profession! 👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇

A round of applause for Avik Dass, Manager, Delivery,UK for winning our 'You Derive, We Integrate' Contest. 𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐗𝐢𝐟𝐲- which is defined by a Mastekeer through our ‘𝐎𝐰𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐝’ campaign captures exactly what we stand for.