MoonshotDomains - Predicting tomorrow's language

[VURG]

What if I told you that there is a scientific field that can be studied that has the potential to open up opportunities to forecasting what worthless domain names will be valuable tomorrow that are worthless today?

What I am talking about that at the heart of the evolution of language is the study of Anthropology. Anthropology is the study of the evolution of culture. Cultural studies is part of the fabric of the language we use. It is in my opinion one of the most underrated fields of science. What anthropology does is work in the larger wavelengths of culture that is necessary to see the high density language terms that define tomorrow's culture before the rest of the community see it.

A #MoonshotDomain is a domain that fits in the #HighRisk/#HighReturn position where the is the opportunity to make a huge #ReturnOnInvestment but without sound judgement could lose you a lot of money. Studying moonshot domain opportunities relies more on geometric science skills than statistical science skills. This is what I do. Developing high quality geometric skills increases the probability of hitting the jackpot with a high profit domain that was bought for peanuts. My position is that anthropology will play a larger role in domaining in the future as it gets recognised for it's breadth and depth in defining future directions for society.

I expect that #MoonshotDomaining will become a lot more popular when some big #DomainerWhales get involved. There are significant moves that #MoonshotWhales can bring to the picture as they can balance their risk more efficiently through working with #MoonshotCampaigns and #MoonshotCollections that can strengthen cases for understanding how to give strong powerful arguments about what language we will use in the future that we don't today.

One of the core problems we have at the moment is that there are not enough technology leaders forming partnerships with Anthropology Professors to help advance education in the world through building a more future focused narrative in Anthropology. This invests more heavily in forecasting culture advancement through giving Anthropologist Professors more respect for the critical role they have in guiding cultures to better standards of life in society.

 

[VadimK]

I think there is zero evidence to support the claim that anthropology and domain prediction are related. In a certain degree, understanding how language evolves might help you in a very indirect way. But you can't build a reliable system or method around that, simply because there are many other factors that influence domain investing besides shifts in language and culture.

Analogy: It's a bit like saying that being a native English speaker gives you a method for consistently predicting good names, when it's clearly not. It surely helps a lot, but that alone does not make someone a successful domain investor - not even close.

 

[VURG]

I see futurism as a subset of anthropology. The problem we have in the media is that a lot of futurists present a picture of the truth that they financially benefit from painting their picture. There is evidence of domainers making financial domain purchasing decisions based on the advice of futurists. The issue is that we need futurists who back their projections based on a level of scientific accountability. At the moment the futurism domain within anthropology is not well funded. The danger of relying on futurists guiding our media when they become wealthier from their advice is that they are in essence salespeople who may have no real interest in the longevity of society. We need our media to have access to futurists who are not interested in money but have faith in the value of submitting to scientific discipline to drive humanity forward. As domainers, we need our futurism guides to be committed to scientific discipline so that we are not relying on paying for decades of renewals for domains that end up being worth nothing. The problem the the technology media has is that they correlate wealth with intelligence. People are treated as geniuses because they made a handful of financial investments that paid off.

For me, I see psychology influencing the language of the future. I see anthropology as a subset of psychology that deals with cultural analysis. This is why I see anthropology to be a slow but clear field to identify the directions of future language movements. Domaining until today has been heavily driven around statistical analysis. Statistical analysis tends to follow a retrospective domain as it runs on a #WhatYouSeeIsWhatYouGet framework that is built on yesterday's language. In terms of understanding tomorrow's language, statistical analysis can be quite clumsy as tomorrows language doesn't exist at the moment. The value of geometric analysis becomes more valuable as extrapolative analysis follows more of a geometric path than a statistical path. It is true that extrapolative analysis relies statistical components but my case is that geometric foundation plays a greater role. This geometric component plays a large growing role in anthropology as the bottlenecks of statistical narrative in anthropology is doing a lot of damage in the field of science.

While I am essentially discussing an emerging linguistics debate, I retain the case that anthropology is more relevant than linguistics as the umbrella science to build around. Convincing investors and governments to invest more heavily in anthropology is a challenge as a lot of universities see anthropology as the slow field that is losing relevance in the fast moving society of today. This is where I am raising the dangerous risks of the media relying too heavily on giving too much public exposure to wealthy futurists dominating the narrative of technology media. We need strong steady domain whales in our community who are not blinded by quick-fix tech media guiding them into short term domain collections that collapse as society shifts into new language areas. We need scientific futurists who live under the authority of scientific principles who can transfer valuable analysis and valuable arguments that help let our language evolve in healthy scientific directions that receive proper interrogation.

I know that I am the wild card. Trying to pioneer a new mathematical structure in domain analysis is to be met with criticism and I am happy to receive the feedback I get. This is what I value about Namepros. People listen to my case and interrogate it in a healthy analytical way. The principle of moonshot domains is to hunt for the domains that have the potential to get over 100x investment. The chances of being burned are high. This type of investment requires a type of investor who can afford to lose and are not building their collection on standard bread and butter investments.

Thank you @VadimK for your feedback. Moonshot domaining is a high risk investment strategy and my advice is based a picture of anthropology that marries with futurism that is currently not how most people define anthropology. Your case of a lack of evidence has merit. I am arguing on first principles rather than statistical evidence and I respect your authority in addressing the risks of my strategy.

 

[xwat]

There is evidence of domainers making financial domain purchasing decisions based on the advice of futurists.

Yes, and there are many more failures. Yes, when domainers, and I am sure other people, see a new technology being discussed they make moves on that.

The issue is that we need futurists who back their projections based on a level of scientific accountability.

HOW? Also being "scientifically" right does not mean that the markets will adapt this or that the market will not disappear in a very short amount of time or never be adopted. Examples are Betamax vs. VHS and HD DVD vs. Blu-ray. For some of the better technologies the technology itself may be intellectually protected.

 

[biggie]

Hi

can I get a hit of that

imo…

 

[Kyle Tully]

100x returns? Those are rookie numbers.

 

[VURG]

HOW? Also being "scientifically" right does not mean that the markets will adapt this or that the market will not disappear in a very short amount of time or never be adopted. Examples are Betamax vs. VHS and HD DVD vs. Blu-ray. For some of the better technologies the technology itself may be intellectually protected.

The operative #MoonshotDomainQuestion is:

How do I find thousands of domain names that are worth nothing today but are worth a lot of money in the future?

I want to make two points:

1. The standard #TechnologyMedia need to raise the standard of journalism and that is where I see the role of anthropology to help stabilising integrity in #TechnologyJournalism. Often financial prowess is seen as the main criteria to diagnose intelligence in technology but as you have mentioned there is a lot of intellectual property that is kept out of the media and often you only get half the picture from profit oriented sources. This is where the decoding skills of professors holds weight in navigating through forest like politics to give reliable data to make transparent forecasts to guide financial decisions on. This transparency is needed to help protect people from the dangers of gullible technology journalists (#ParrotJournalism) directing people to make poor financial decisions based on bad advice. I identify anthropology as a starting point to find those professors and cultural analysis is part of the foundations of our language systems.

2. I use the term #StatisticalMindset and #GeometricMindset to emphasise on the need for linguistic and technology modelling to be mapped with a geometric shape oriented methodology. I use the analogy that statistics is more about decision making and geometric modelling is more about making sets of decisions. My instincts that are based on a 17 year geometric science journey is that developing that a geometric mindset is necessary to find overlooked patches of language that can be monetised in the future. When I am talking about geometric modelling, this involves a lot more planning and preparation to master than statistical oriented domaining.

 

[xwat]

@VURG

1. I think we have decent media covering technology and there are a lot of varying fan groups/work groups but there are reasons that companies guard their IP. Also I am not sure of the ratio but there seem to be a lot of technologies that sound promising but never go anywhere for a variety of reasons.

2. If something like this does not exist I am sure you could start one. I used to attend Linux User Groups (LUG) back in the day and honestly I learned more about non-Linux technology than Linux in a lot of meetings. I remember having Marty Roesch who founded Sourcefire come and speak a few times about SNORT which later sold for a billion(?) dollars to Cisco? At that time I also believe it was opensource.

User groups and now tech forums like slashdot could help you find technologies. One of the first domains I ever purchased was based on the SNORT presentations and I still think it is a good domain.

 

[VURG]

@xwat

My particular area of interest in #TechologyJournalism is #TelevisionManufacturingPolitics. I am an advocate of the protection and enhancement of television broadcasting technology as my position is that the television media play a pivotal role in society in vouching for the rights of the poor. I have not been impressed with the direction of television manufacturing for the last 2 decades and think that more should be done to help the poor through philanthropic television manufacturing initiatives.

I am coining the term #GeometricJournalism to describe the form of journalism that I believe that #TechnologyJournalism should head towards. Technology journalists are caught in a #Catch22 situation where legal restrictions prevent openness and transparency in technology politics. This is where I see the role of professors to provide pathways in technology politics for journalists to give a more open form of journalism where technology politics can be presented in the public domain. There is a lot of things that journalists can't say without appropriate sources to address the legal load that journalists will have to carry without their help.

For me, #GeometricJournalism addresses the advancement of #FirstPrinciples being addressed in manufacturing politics so that journalists can open out a multi-dimensional narrative that is a trait of a geometric mindset and give a more proactive thorough picture to help the audience be part of the narrative in dreaming for a better tomorrow. This is in contrast to what I am coining as #StatisticalJournalism that is often seen in technology media where a one-dimensional narrative is set by market leaders who are profit motivated and the stories often seem more reactive and less proactive.

From a domaining perspective, geometric journalism results in a change in culture and a new spectrum of terms in language that have value in domain name format.

 

[xwat]

Well it seems like you are in the situation to coin the names so I am not sure what sites you are looking for? I use a couple of tech sites for ideas but a lot of it is just personal interest. Good luck.