.. include:: /_templates/include-file/page-prefix.rst

.. _hell-ll-infra-b32-prompt-giveaway-framing:


================================================================================
b32 prompt (give-away) --- Designing the 50%-give-away framing + process
================================================================================

| **Mode:** EDEN. **Effort:** Max. **Run in a fresh session.**
| **Priority:** **Post-launch.** The launch pieces only need the *criterion*
  (already encoded in prompts #1/#2). This designs the fuller thing LLoL wants
  to "commit to something" without being divisive or making unkeepable promises.
| **Drafter:** ``dv_ClaOp47Max``, 2026m05d28_13h54. Self-contained.


1. The decision this resolves
=============================

LLoL weighed four ways to frame where the **50% give-away** goes (full reasoning
in the b32 llog, §"LLoL's give-away options"):

- **(a) stay non-committal** ("worthy causes") --- safe + non-divisive, but
  *Popper-unfalsifiable*; says nothing testable. LLoL leans against it.
- **(b) name recipients** --- concrete but maximally divisive, and any specific
  pick (incl. a Vatican AI-dignity effort) is speculative + an unkeepable public
  promise while no give-away infrastructure exists yet.
- **(c) a criterion + open propose/apply process** --- commit to a *falsifiable
  principle* without a divisive *recipient*. **The launch already uses this
  spine:** *half goes to causes in **urgent need now** --- not endowment-building
  or the already-secure* (LLoL's "I won't feed the banks' endowments" rule).
- **(d) a deliberately balanced mix** --- a cross-spectrum set of examples so
  "everyone can see themselves in them while realising they are not the only
  ones who struggle." LLoL wants to design this *with Claude*, here.

**This session designs (c) properly and explores (d) carefully.**


2. Design tasks
===============

#. **The criterion, sharpened.** State the urgent-need-vs-endowment principle
   crisply and defensibly, and show *why* it is on-brand (it is the Jubilee
   anti-hoarding ethic applied to giving --- a differentiator, not a liability).
   Define the falsifiable test: *would this cause have to cut services / people
   right now without help?* vs *is it building long-term security?*
#. **The open propose/apply process.** Design the lightweight mechanism by which
   causes can be **proposed/applied** and evaluated (LLoL's option c). What does
   a page look like? What does an applicant submit? Who decides, on what record?
   Keep it honest that this is **aspirational** until infrastructure exists.
#. **Explore the balanced mix (d) --- with LLoL, not for him.** Help LLoL choose
   a **cross-spectrum** set of *illustrative* examples (e.g. one cause that
   resonates more on the left, one more on the right, plus a humane-AI strand)
   such that no reader feels it is "only for them." **Present options; do not
   impose.** Flag the curation risk: a clumsy "balance" can read as tokenism.
#. **Fact-check before any public mention of specific bodies.** LLoL recalls a
   Vatican document on AI ("Humane/Dignitas…"?) at whose launch "someone from
   Anthropic spoke." **Do not assert any of this from memory.** Use web search
   to establish the real document name + status (and whether Anthropic was
   involved) *before* it appears on any public page --- or leave it out. Rather
   say "I could not confirm" than publish a SIN.


3. Cautions (do not breach)
===========================

- **No unkeepable public promises.** The give-away mechanism does **not** exist
  yet; every public word must stay honest about that (cf. Buy-In page: causes
  "currently most in need to avert some emergency").
- **No single named recipient as *the* target** on public pages until there is
  a real, disclosed process behind it.
- **Divisiveness is unavoidable in the specific; defensible in the principle.**
  Anchor on the principle; use specifics only as clearly-labelled illustration.
- **Keep it off the cold GoFundMe funnel.** Funnel stays "worthy causes most in
  need"; richer framing lives on the Buy-In page / a dedicated give-away page /
  the blog.


4. Deliverables
===============

- A give-away framing recommendation (the sharpened criterion + the process
  design + the balance options for LLoL to choose from + the fact-check result).
- A proposal for where it lives (Buy-In §50%-give-away tweak and/or a new page),
  to be built only after LLoL chooses.
- An execution llog at the next free infra number.


.. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
.. VVN: dv_ClaOp47Max_MMv1_b32-prompt-giveaway-framing_2026m05d28
.. ----------------------------------------------------------------------