Learning Compression Factor

About

Source - [1]

OSE is predicting a bold, 50-100 learning compression factor (how much faster for a certain amount of knowhow). But also a 10-20 learning compression factor (how much faster) when measured by time to a shorter point - such as to a specified revenue (say $100k) on a shorter time scale. LCF applies to lifetime learning over multiple disciplines

Ie - the factor of speed increase to gain any marketable skill - as measured by the fact that a learner gets paid from this work. We can take the case for OSE vs industry standard.

We simple take the time it take for the OSE apprentice to get to $100k earnings - vs the time it takes in the industry to get to $100k (comparable sectors - builders and General Contractors). $100k is the predicted earnings, and now it is time for data collection to determine how much faster an FBA apprentice takes to get there.

'The Future Builders Enterprise Track is not school. It is market exposure with a safety net.

Actionable Items

• Measure LCF. Since no good data on general contractors exists, we do a survey, or assume something like 7-15 years.
• Measure continuing learning - how any producer reduces time to professional grade plateau. What is the rate to attaining professiona grade? This means a person makes more per hour - they are incentivized to keep improving.
• This is reset every so often - if a radical shift converts the activity to zero marginal cost - that is great. Other work is done elsewhere - other constraints are negotiated for value. Value never ends, pay never ends.
• In other words - In an abundant, collaborative system, being replaced by a robot means you’ve succeeded—and now it’s time to build the next layer. [2]
• So basically - we develop abundance mindsets, learning organizations.

Debate

• For surplus - the responsible party gets it. The responsible party is the one doing the thing.
• Is there a quality bonus, or simply 'meets spec'. Meets spec avoids controversy.
• If you want more surplus - start engaging directly in that activity which has more surplus, don't ask others to share their surplus.
• Agency-first approach: if you wannit, gettit. Don't be asking others to share their work. We collaborate so that everything is open and anyone can gain agency in any aspect/.
• Value should accrue only to agents who directly participate in its creation, and access to participation must be open and low-friction. [3]
• Direct value capture through participation in higher-leverage work. No one gets paid because the system improved. They get paid because they entered the improved system and acted.
• Surplus logic vs Agency logic - [4]:

• Point - Surplus goes into making the next layer easier to enter. Agency replaces entitlement.
• In an agency-first, abundance-oriented system, surplus is not shared—it is dissolved into capability, and only those who act capture value. [5]
• Surplus redistribution is a scarcity-management technique. - not OSE!
• New matrix:

Compensation Architecture

Understand this to avoid freeloading or collectivism (unearned revenue), and understand how the system does not disadvantage latecomers

• Fixed prices for production
• No surplus pooling
• Continuous baseline updates
• Radically low barriers to entry
• Fast learning pathways
• Higher tiers unlocked by action only

Cardinal OSE Rules

• Agency is primary - No one should receive value they did not directly act to create.
• Barriers to entry must be extremely low - Anyone who wants more must be able to step into the higher-value activity quickly.
• Learning Compression is effectively unbounded - (High LCR means access, not allocation, is the lever.)

Note that cooperatives, ESOPS, Toyota-style profit sharing, and many open hardware projects actually operate on redistribution. That model works, but it is not maximally agency-respecting.

• A learning organization must make adaptation so accessible that refusal is clearly a choice, not a consequence. [6]

Discussion

Joshua -

Related to management - we are getting serious here. December was a major success on attendance, though no go on Apprenticeship. So taking it to the next level in the Future Builders Enterprise Track:

• 6 months*cost $10k*Students start their own business, OSE buys complete house module kits from them at $10k each after materials, so in 6 months our peeps are starting at $100k/year. We can sustain 5-10 purchases per month as is, and would need to develop more marketing capacity to achieve 50/month. Now that is a couple a million dollar per month enterprise - around the corner.

This is serious learning, and we can formalize to the Learning Compression Factor of open source (ratio of time to learn in proprietary way / time to learn in open source framework), the type of shit you espouse so dearly. So I am getting rigorous on calculating and documenting.

https://chatgpt.com/share/696bfed2-cd40-8010-9100-2bd4978b401b

Aiming for 50 people in the program, starting May 1. Serious data collection, where we document time to learn, build times, etc. Same old same old, just getting rigorous and framing the Rapid Learning Facility as not an education venue, but a civilization grade production data engine towards the zero marginal cost society.

I was thinking this would make a great organizational theory paper. Does it sound compelling? I'm shaking this down in chatGPT, but initial considerations indicate LCF>>10, and i think we can propose a rigorous thesis and data analysis around this - based on the current ~1000 hour build time of a house with absolutely all of its systems including HVAC and PV modules.

Would you be interested in collaborating on a paper on this? We can provide the data engine - 50 Future Builders Enterprise Track students focusing on build time documentation and validation etc across the whole house. With extreme fire under their ass - because if they don't achieve at the predicted rate, they will not be making $100k/year until they do - so the incentive structure is clear as the outcome is financial independence.

Marcin

Quantification of an Integrated Human

So the thread [7] ended at ICI - an Integrated (Human) Capacity Index - an integrated human distributive capacity index, based on the Learning Compression Factor - which actually correlates with one's pay once enterprise competency is included, and looks like the following. This is entertaining, but ChatGPT suggests that it is actually useful to track this for any integrated human if we are talking about human evolution. Clearly this and 50 cents can get me a can of coke in a soda machine.

Synthesis

edit

Bottom Line Significance

This page discusses how much faster it it to attain financial goals via open learning in construction (FBA program), compared to the industry standards. Our goal is to measure this factor in 2026 with real production data from building homes.

This learning compression factor is also discussed for attaining Integrated Human skillsets.