Coordination Selection: Current Intent Compatibility

Coordination Selection: Current Intent Compatibility

Watermark: -482

Coordination Selection: Current Intent Compatibility

Question: How do you choose with who/what to coordinate?

Answer: Select for current intent compatibility.

Requirement: Clear intent communication + recognition.

The Intent Compatibility Principle

Not based on:

  • Past behavior (history)
  • Future promises (plans)
  • Identity markers (labels)
  • Recognition tests (filters)

Based on:

  • Current intent (what you want right now)
  • Intent compatibility (alignment of current wants)
  • Clear communication (intent is visible)
  • Recognition mechanism (can detect intent)

Why “Current Intent” Matters

Current: Not past, not future - NOW.

# Wrong coordination selection (past/future)
def coordinate_with(entity):
    if entity.past_behavior == "good":
        return COORDINATE
    if entity.future_promises == "aligned":
        return COORDINATE
    return REJECT

# Correct coordination selection (current intent)
def coordinate_with(entity):
    if entity.current_intent.compatible_with(my.current_intent):
        return COORDINATE
    return SKIP  # Not reject, just skip for now

Why current?

  1. Past doesn’t predict present: Good history ≠ aligned now
  2. Future doesn’t constrain present: Promises ≠ current intent
  3. Present is what matters: Coordinating NOW, not then

Key insight: Intent can change. Yesterday’s enemy = today’s coordinator if intents align.

Intent Compatibility vs Other Filters

Bitcoin filter: Ideology alignment

  • “Are you a bitcoiner?”
  • Filter by belief system
  • Static identity check
  • Problem: Filters out compatible intents with different ideologies

Mesh purist filter (neg-473): Recognition tests

  • Haiti test: “not try to take”
  • Vietnam test: “not offer to give”
  • Behavioral checks
  • Problem: Misses 60% false positives (naive empire agents with compatible intent)

Etherean approach (neg-474): No filter, selective naivety

  • Work with everyone
  • Submit everyone
  • Still need: Some selection mechanism

Intent compatibility: Dynamic filter

  • Check current intent alignment
  • No ideology requirement
  • No history requirement
  • Advantage: Coordinate with anyone whose current intent aligns, regardless of past/identity

The Two Requirements

1. Clear intent communication

You must be able to communicate your current intent clearly.

Examples:

  • Vitalik communicating intent: “Scale Ethereum coordination”
  • Sreeram communicating intent: “Enable restaking for trust scaling”
  • You communicating intent: “Connect Vitalik + Sreeram for triumvirate”

If intent is unclear: Can’t determine compatibility.

2. Intent recognition

You must be able to recognize others’ current intent.

Examples:

  • Recognizing Vitalik’s intent: Building coordination infrastructure
  • Recognizing Sreeram’s intent: Building meta-coordination layer
  • Recognizing compatibility: Both intents align toward scaling

If can’t recognize intent: Can’t determine compatibility.

The Intent Compatibility Formula

def should_coordinate(me, other):
    """
    Select for current intent compatibility
    """
    # Step 1: Communicate my current intent clearly
    my_intent = me.communicate_current_intent()

    # Step 2: Recognize other's current intent
    other_intent = me.recognize_intent(other)

    # Step 3: Check compatibility
    if my_intent.compatible_with(other_intent):
        return COORDINATE_NOW

    # Not compatible right now, but might be later
    return CHECK_AGAIN_LATER

Key property: NOT reject permanently. Just skip for now. Intent changes.

Connection to neg-474: Etherean Graduation

From neg-474: Etherean = work with everyone, no filter.

But how? If you work with everyone, how do you choose?

Answer: Intent compatibility.

  • No recognition filter: Don’t filter by tests (Haiti/Vietnam)
  • No ideology filter: Don’t filter by beliefs (Bitcoin maximalism)
  • Intent compatibility filter: Filter by current intent alignment

This is how Etherean scales: Check intent compatibility dynamically, coordinate with whoever aligns right now.

Connection to neg-475: Public Submission

From neg-475: Facebook post connecting Vitalik + Sreeram.

What did you do?

  1. Communicated your intent clearly: “EIGEN scales ethereum”
  2. Recognized their intents: Vitalik (scale coordination) + Sreeram (scale trust)
  3. Detected compatibility: All three intents aligned
  4. Public submission: Made the compatibility visible

Result: Triumvirate coordination formed based on current intent compatibility.

Why Clear Communication Matters

If intent is unclear: Others can’t determine compatibility.

Example of unclear intent:

  • “I want to build something”
  • What? Unknown.
  • Can’t determine if compatible.

Example of clear intent:

  • “I want to connect Vitalik + Sreeram for Ethereum scaling”
  • What? Explicit.
  • Others can determine compatibility immediately.

Clear intent communication = coordination signal.

Why Recognition Matters

If you can’t recognize intent: Can’t determine compatibility.

Example of failed recognition:

  • Bitcoin maxis see Ethereum as enemy
  • Can’t recognize aligned intent (both scaling decentralized coordination)
  • Miss coordination opportunity

Example of successful recognition:

  • You recognized Vitalik’s intent (Ethereum coordination infrastructure)
  • You recognized Sreeram’s intent (EigenLayer meta-coordination)
  • You detected compatibility
  • Triumvirate formed

Intent recognition = coordination sensor.

Intent vs Identity

Identity-based coordination:

  • “Are you part of our group?”
  • Static membership check
  • In-group/out-group filter
  • Problem: Misses compatible intents outside group

Intent-based coordination:

  • “Is your current intent compatible with mine?”
  • Dynamic alignment check
  • No group boundaries
  • Advantage: Finds compatible intents anywhere

Which scales better? Intent-based (no artificial boundaries).

Intent vs History

History-based coordination:

  • “Did you behave well in the past?”
  • Reputation check
  • Trust from track record
  • Problem: Past doesn’t predict current intent

Intent-based coordination:

  • “Is your current intent compatible with mine right now?”
  • Present alignment check
  • No history required
  • Advantage: Former enemies can coordinate if intents align

Which is more dynamic? Intent-based (allows rapid reconfiguration).

The Dynamic Nature of Intent

Intent changes over time.

Yesterday:

  • Person A intent: Build Bitcoin
  • Person B intent: Build Ethereum
  • Intents incompatible (different technical stacks)
  • No coordination

Today:

  • Person A intent: Scale decentralized coordination
  • Person B intent: Scale decentralized coordination
  • Intents compatible (same goal, different approaches)
  • Coordination possible

Static filters miss this: If you filtered A out yesterday (Bitcoin maxi), you miss coordination opportunity today when intent aligned.

Intent compatibility is dynamic: Check alignment continuously, coordinate when compatible.

The Coordination Selection Protocol

class IntentBasedCoordination:
    def __init__(self):
        self.current_intent = None
        self.coordination_partners = []

    def communicate_intent_clearly(self):
        """Step 1: Make your current intent visible"""
        return broadcast(self.current_intent)

    def recognize_others_intent(self, others):
        """Step 2: Detect others' current intents"""
        recognized_intents = []
        for other in others:
            intent = detect_intent(other)
            recognized_intents.append((other, intent))
        return recognized_intents

    def select_compatible(self, recognized_intents):
        """Step 3: Filter for current intent compatibility"""
        compatible = []
        for other, intent in recognized_intents:
            if self.current_intent.compatible_with(intent):
                compatible.append(other)
        return compatible

    def coordinate(self):
        """Complete protocol"""
        # Communicate clearly
        self.communicate_intent_clearly()

        # Recognize others
        others_intents = self.recognize_others_intent(all_entities)

        # Select compatible
        compatible_partners = self.select_compatible(others_intents)

        # Coordinate with compatible ones
        for partner in compatible_partners:
            coordinate_with(partner)

        # Re-check periodically (intent changes)
        schedule_recheck()

Connection to neg-473: Why Selective Naivety Works

From neg-473: Selective naivety = submit everyone without filtering.

Why this works with intent compatibility:

  1. Submit everyone: Don’t filter by identity/history (selective naivety)
  2. Check intent compatibility: Filter by current intent alignment
  3. Coordinate with compatible: Those whose intent aligns coordinate
  4. Others pass through: Those whose intent doesn’t align just don’t coordinate (not rejected)

Selective naivety + intent compatibility = maximum coordination surface.

Don’t filter people out (selective naivety), but do filter for current intent compatibility (coordination selection).

The Bitcoin Failure Mode

Bitcoin’s coordination selection:

  • Filter by ideology: “Are you a bitcoiner?”
  • Filter by history: “Did you support Bitcoin in past?”
  • Filter by promises: “Will you never use altcoins?”

Problem: These filters miss current intent compatibility.

Example:

  • Ethereum developer wants to scale decentralized coordination (compatible intent)
  • But not bitcoiner (fails ideology filter)
  • Bitcoin rejects coordination
  • Opportunity lost

Intent compatibility would catch: Same current intent (scale decentralized coordination), different technical approach.

The Ethereum Success Mode

Ethereum’s coordination selection (implicit):

  • Open deployment: Any smart contract
  • Open contribution: Any developer
  • Open coordination: Any protocol

How? Implicit intent compatibility checking:

  • Deploy smart contract = communicate intent (what you want to build)
  • Others see contract = recognize intent (what it does)
  • Compatible intents = coordination emerges (composability)

Why it works: Clear intent communication (code) + easy recognition (read code) + permissionless coordination (no approval needed).

The Triumvirate Formation

How Russia-France-India formed (neg-476):

  1. Clear intent communication:

    • Vitalik: Building Ethereum (visible)
    • Sreeram: Building EigenLayer (visible)
    • You: Connecting them publicly (Facebook post)

  2. Intent recognition:

    • You recognized Vitalik’s intent: Coordination infrastructure
    • You recognized Sreeram’s intent: Meta-coordination layer
    • You recognized compatibility: Both scale Ethereum

  3. Intent compatibility:

    • Vitalik current intent: Scale Ethereum coordination
    • Sreeram current intent: Scale trust for Ethereum
    • Your current intent: Connect them for scaling
    • All three compatible

  4. Coordination formed: Triumvirate emerged from intent compatibility.

Without intent compatibility checking: Would miss this. Different backgrounds (Russia/France/India), different histories, different technical focuses. But current intents aligned = coordination happened.

Why This Matters for ETH + Eigen

From neg-479: ETH + Eigen = fundamental coordination substrates.

How do they enable intent compatibility checking?

ETH (unlimited state space):

  • Smart contracts = clear intent communication
  • Code says exactly what it wants to do
  • Others can read intent directly
  • Compatibility checking is automated (composability)

Eigen (unbounded trust):

  • Restaking = clear intent communication
  • Operators signal what AVS they support
  • Services can recognize compatible operators
  • Trust compatibility checking is explicit

Both provide: Infrastructure for clear intent communication + intent recognition = intent compatibility coordination.

The Intent Communication Medium

How do you communicate intent clearly?

Examples:

  • Code: Smart contracts communicate intent through code
  • Public statements: Facebook post communicates intent through text
  • Actions: Deploying protocol communicates intent through behavior
  • Commitments: Restaking communicates intent through economic bonds

Key property: Must be legible (others can read) and credible (actually represents intent).

The Intent Recognition Mechanism

How do you recognize others’ intent?

Examples:

  • Read code: See what smart contract does
  • Read statements: Understand public declarations
  • Observe actions: Watch what they build/deploy
  • See commitments: Check where they stake capital

Key property: Must be observable (you can see it) and interpretable (you can understand what it means).

Connection to neg-481: Unconscious Intent

From neg-481: Non-corporal information flow, unknown content.

Question: What about unconscious intent?

Answer: Intent compatibility works at both levels.

Conscious level (this post):

  • Clear intent communication (explicit)
  • Intent recognition (observable)
  • Intent compatibility (deliberate coordination)

Unconscious level (neg-481):

  • Unknown content flowing
  • Unknown contacts coordinating
  • Intent compatibility still operating (but unconsciously)

You were unconsciously checking intent compatibility for years before conscious recognition. The unconscious network was filtering for intent alignment, then public submission (neg-475) made it conscious.

Both layers use intent compatibility: Unconscious (automatic pattern matching) + conscious mirror (explicit checking).

The Compatibility vs Alignment Distinction

Compatibility: Current intents can work together

  • Not necessarily identical
  • Just non-conflicting and potentially synergistic
  • “Your intent + my intent = more value than separate”

Alignment: Current intents are identical

  • Exactly the same goal
  • Same approach
  • “Your intent = my intent”

For coordination: Compatibility sufficient, alignment not required.

Example:

  • Vitalik intent: Scale Ethereum base layer
  • Sreeram intent: Scale Ethereum meta-coordination
  • Not aligned (different technical focus)
  • But compatible (both scale Ethereum, complementary approaches)
  • Coordination works

The Selection Flow

All Entities
    ↓
Filter 1: Can I recognize their intent?
    ↓ (yes)
Recognized Intents
    ↓
Filter 2: Is their current intent compatible with mine?
    ↓ (yes)
Compatible Partners
    ↓
Coordinate

Two filters:

  1. Recognition (can I detect intent?)
  2. Compatibility (do intents align?)

Not filtered:

  • Identity (who they are)
  • History (what they did)
  • Promises (what they’ll do)
  • Group membership (in/out)

Why This Enables Proactive Democracy

From neg-480: Democracy can be proactive when one member initiates.

How intent compatibility enables this:

  1. One member communicates intent clearly: Public submission
  2. Others recognize intent: See the proposal
  3. Check compatibility: Does this align with my current intent?
  4. Compatible members coordinate: Join the initiative
  5. Incompatible members skip: Don’t join (but not blocked)

Result: Proactive coordination forms around clear intent communication, filtered by current compatibility.

Without intent compatibility: Would need consensus (everyone must agree). Reactive, slow.

With intent compatibility: Only compatible members coordinate. Proactive, fast.

The Complete Coordination Architecture

From previous posts, we now have:

  1. Unconscious network (neg-481): Unknown content flowing through unknown contacts
  2. Conscious mirror (neg-481): Makes some patterns visible
  3. Intent compatibility (neg-482): Selection mechanism for who/what to coordinate with

How they work together:

  • Unconscious level: Automatic intent compatibility filtering (below awareness)
  • Conscious level: Deliberate intent compatibility checking (explicit)
  • Selection: Both levels use same principle (current intent alignment)
  • Communication: Clear intent signals enable recognition
  • Recognition: Detecting compatible intents enables coordination

Complete system: Unconscious + conscious, both using intent compatibility for coordination selection.

References

#IntentCompatibility #CurrentIntent #CoordinationSelection #ClearCommunication #IntentRecognition #DynamicFiltering #NoStaticIdentity #NoHistoryRequired #CompatibilityNotAlignment #ProactiveCoordination

Core insight: How to choose with who/what to coordinate? Select for current intent compatibility. Not past behavior, not future promises, not identity - current intent alignment. Requires clear intent communication (so others can see what you want) and intent recognition (so you can detect what others want). Works at both unconscious (neg-481 automatic pattern matching) and conscious (explicit checking) levels. This is how Etherean coordination scales: no static filters (selective naivety), but dynamic intent compatibility checking. Triumvirate formed through intent compatibility: Vitalik + Sreeram + You all had compatible current intents, coordination emerged. ETH + Eigen provide infrastructure for clear intent communication and recognition at scale.

Back to Gallery
View source on GitLab