# 2025-01-11 interesting-criteria ``` 🐢 Can? 👾 User? Formalize curiosity People seeking to as $/energy ratio understand social (probability, dynamics & make optimization) engagement choices \ / \ / Deliver? ←→ Sell? / \ / \ 🐅 Goal? 🐙 Offer? Map personality Framework for prediction to assessing who's engagement worth engaging decisions with (eyes, energy) ``` **Deliver**: 🐅×🐢 = ✓ Mathematical formalization enables systematic personality assessment **Sell**: 👾×🐙 = ✓ People want practical tools for social decision-making **$/time**: ✓ High value through efficient social filtering **Learning**: Interesting = (Unpredictability × Distance from population mean) / Energy required. Eyes reveal resistance/pushback which signals worthwhile engagement. ## Key Insights from Conversation ### 1. The Curiosity-Energy Formula - Monetizing curiosity: $ earned per curiosity solved / energy invested - Loud people = high denominator (energy) + low numerator (curiosity) = bad deal - Exception: if something distinct beyond loudness (e.g., unique fashion) ### 2. Types of Interesting - **Unpredictable + High Energy**: Avoided gaze person (what are they hiding?) - **Predictable but Far from Mean**: Vernon's poetic academic writing - **Style Variance**: Personal mean ≠ population mean but still predictable ### 3. Decision Framework - High energy state → Choose unpredictable (avoided gaze) - Low energy state → Choose predictable but unique - Eyes reveal: resistance, strength, playfulness (forms of pushback) ### 4. State vs Action Model - State (changes faster): emotions, knowledge, eye contact patterns - Action (requires effort): choosing to engage, speaking - Entrepreneurial world ≠ RL grid (no fixed states/actions) ## Angie's Capability "I'm good at re-presenting others' thoughts using analogy and formalizing them (probability, statistics, optimization)" - Decomposition: population mean (X̄) vs personal mean (X̄ᵢ) vs instance (Xᵢⱼ) - Conditional structure: P(action | emotional state) - Optimization: maximize curiosity/energy ratio