Thanks a lot for your comments.
I understand the framework looks very broad. The idea is that we focus on defining just a few urgent components of it, but then we have a framework that is compatible with a much broader and longer scope of work, so we’re not having to redo everything soon after.
To ease the confusion, some of the strategic pillars could be:
- specific verticals to focus on in building Swarms (see here our work on this topic so far)
- key capabilities: e.g. great developer support
- key technologies to develop
- or new business models like e.g. licensing the tech stack
So the distinction is between, on one side, essential organizational functions that must be animated to ensure viability but could be just hygiene factors, and on the other side, the areas to double down on.
Note that one of the pillars could be doubling down on a specific Layer. If, e.g., having a strong, cohesive identity was key, then that would be a pillar to double down on (e.g., ideologically driven groups like organized religions emphasize this) or a pillar could also be focusing on the Coordiantion layer as it’s deemed that the key for success in the case of Arbitrum will be coordination between units/projects.
Does that make sense?