The first Sequence of xd4

(refer to its implex)

This part of is taken from
It is not officially a part of the current german project.

On this page several drafts and incomplete versions to introduce xd4 and its language are posted. We’re working overtime to release und unleash a highly efficient world-saving strategy. Stay tuned – or ignore incompleteness and errors. Its all work in progress.

We try to release a global update-page early august


Introduction (text)

Our plan carries the name 'xd4' and it consits of a meta-model theory, four artificial languages, a multi-domain strategy framework and models (and systems) to make these strategies accessible for everyone through gamification and abstraction. The strategy xd4 is quiete complex to explain in static words but we try to break it down continually on this page and formulate them in proposals that shall grasp all necessary content and lead to a call to action for anyone. is itself a subsystem of xd4 currently and in case it will gain enough community / team it can be established as a system of xd4 within 2020. The content about xd4 can be found at but it is not trivially accessible. This website ( represents another reduction / abstraction of thinkularity, which itself is a reduction (condensate) description of more then 400 individual models, systems, strategies and around 64 novel theories and research directives (resulting from almost two decades of research).

xd4 in (the first) four steps: 1. Make a science about 'making everything better as fast and efficient as possible'. 2. Simultaneously initiate the formation of a (meta-)community about this approach 1. with the motivation/motive to observe and quality- and version-control the concepts of 'better', 'everything', 'efficiency' and so on of the scientific attempt 1. Through discussion and publication this will explore the scope of 'making' as well as 'possible' as applied parts of this science will release new types of data (which is identical to an approach to collective intelligence). 3. Repeat this process with gamification and other root logics, as well as design and layout variants that increase accessibility and communicatability of the project. The resulting systems span a system we call x4 and by abstraction and error compensation we gain xd4 which is the multiplex of the mentioned three particle stratgies 1, 2 and 3.

xd4 consists by august 2020 of the domains including their landing pages: and at least two more sets of domains which will either be gamification systems, gamified versions or accelerator systems. In case the current strategy-iteration of xd4 (256-dimensions if fully decompiled) is not changed, the gamified xd4 version will be at and a hypergamified xd4-counter at - the former two domains will be mostly managed and decided by scientific community (and/or you) while the latter two domains will mostly be designed and architecturized by spacetimebird and any support to them (you can measure their last calculated status/performance at while no official promotion was yet carried out).

NOTE: It is unlikely that we can protect our entire system for a full public release/review before october 2020 and we humbly ask for careful handing of this domain and its operationality and operator until then. I work on publishing a paper about this content on researchgate as fast as I can.
REQUEST: We need admins, webdesigner, programmer, observer, critics and fans, until august 28th the overall number should be above 40.

Please be aware that proposals below which are below vers. 1.0 are improvised, drafts or contain errors and are PRERELEASE. We're working on the next version right now and if you see more operators then spacetimebird working on but we have no version 1.0 released until 24th of July you should contact us.

Structure of proposal (above v.0.7):


Step wise abstract

Full text version (inconsistent below v.1.0)

All proposals with a version number below 1.0 are not official nor correct! Please process with caution. They are last updated at 16th. July (timestamps below version number)

Proposal vers. 0.7:

[last update 14th]

This is a very simple version of the xd4 multi-domain strategy if approached from the project. We structure the approach to boot science into four steps, while Phases one to three will undergo at least two iterations before Phase four is entered. If can be achieved, xd4 will have two running systems with stb as placeholder for distributed global complexity management system (, also not available in english currently)


  • Phase 1: Preparation
  • Phase 2: Development
  • Phase 3: Architecturization
  • Phase 4: Boot.Science

Phase 1: Assemble a team and provide a way to represent our world in its current state (refer to earth nullschool) with barrier freedom. Provide ideas how we can collectively design and identify the global common goal state — the world we want to approach together as a human team. We propose some self-explaining domains (not online before version 1 of this proposal). Initiate an to coordinate and initiate the in 2020. The hackalympic will be a permanent event that coordinates and associates hackathons globally and will make them transparent and public for anyone without skillset and ability to research a lot. This would greatly improve accessibility of hackathons. We will provide a how the hackalympics could take place. With a clear goal space and a strategy in place we can shift to phase 2.

Phase 2: With a running organizatory background and taskforce assembly coordination we can promote which will provide a compatible set of applications and open access research which have the highest priority (refer to and for sources). To anticipate any errors we were not able to anticipate, we will consciously attempt an incorrect boot of science, which will be the release of a global operating system for humans to access and manipulate information free, logical and creative. This first release will set the counter for phase 3 which will distribute the prototype world we were able to build until september 2020.

Phase 3 first iteration: In order to in 2020, we must establish an open source company (for covering costst of computation, life-protection and work) which will is supposed to be THE open source economic interface for any humane digital activities. [This hence requires a large acceptance of the repsective economization model] This will pose a challenge because any project of this dimension in its description and any ability to support its funding will pose the risk to be misunderstood as scam or esoterics etc. We should base the design for this company to ICANN and have a steady connection to save the children³, the Global priorities Research institute³ and ResearchGate³. As far as we can get them interested to their systems can be encorporated in the overarching software IDE which was central goal of Phase 2. If the resulting software architecture is not sufficient to integrate their systems, at theast three iterations of phases 1 to 3 must be carried out. If none of the mentioned entities/organizations/systems can be motivated for this project, and no equal candidates are identified (the mentioned entities is just an arbitrary excerpt), we will debloy their functionalities within the project (which would spark at least one more iteration of phases 1 to 3. We outlined these systems (or work on their outline) at and any (and more) are ready for usage.
³and/or any similar system/concept/project

Phase 3: is intended to run until we succeeded to build a capacity for which is managed and controlled by a community. This community will govern all economic interactions and provide continuous team / taskforce assembly for problems and projects. Any severe problem in strategy or design will amplify the potential for a next iteration of phases 1 to 3. Hence, phase 4 is the loop break which will only be reached if we developed a first EXA*. in its minimal definition is a project which will make science and education accessible and free and awesome for anyone and which integrates means to continually advance accessibility of itself globally. This implies continually increasing the responsibility of this advancement in terms of sustenance, sustainability, cutting-edge research and undersanding.

Phase 4: Whether phase 4 is reached will be defined by advanced empirical measure across virtual realm of humanity. IFF the model we boot with is sufficiently developed, we can identify this undertaking as the first pragmatic and logically sound attempt to literally save the world.

*EXA – in this context, this refers to any complex functional architecture that can manage and provide IDE for any actions carried out during the (future) project 2020 — i.e. both digital and physical measures to ensure and improve living conditions, education and [community of diversity] equality. All of these measures must be transparent and traced via a trace system of EXA. [in other contexts EXA refers to spacetimebirds version of it]

Proposal vers. 0.6:

[Last update 14th]

The world in science can only be rebooted ethically and ecologically responsible if we base our concept of science on a universal agreement that a positive attitude towards life and a community of diversity are the minimum requirement for our future science.

For this I work on the literal which is yet lacking a team and support. As this project is enormous, this is a preview proposal and you can find the current version and the proposal to reboot the world only at / – we delayed work on a full translation because we are working on too much dependencies for a logically correct submission.

We break down our reboot concept for science: Gather a subset of the scientific community for one very large project – with the intention to develop the representation of the project so that it becomes more accessible to other scientific areas and disciplines. Until a first layout for our future world ξ-1 (ξ-1 is a goal state of the world which is taking into account the voice of every conscious being that knows of this domain and the domain The layout of the world which will be booted should attempt to approach a goal state of the world which is taking into account the voice and opinion of every conscious being and has practical paradigms and projects to increase the number of beings aware of the science reboot project. We will outline shortly our current proposal for reboot the world below.

Phase 1: Assemble a team and provide a way to represent our world in its current state (refer to earth nullschool) with barrier freedom. Provide ideas how we can collectively design and identify the global common goal state — the world we want to approach together as a human team. We propose some self-explaining domains (not online before version 1 of this proposal). Initiate an to coordinate and initiate the in 2020. The hackalympic will be a permanent event that coordinates and associates hackathons globally and will make them transparent and public for anyone without skillset and ability to research a lot. This would greatly improve accessibility of hackathons. We will provide a how the hackalympics could take place. With a clear goal space and a strategy in place we can shift to phase 2. With a running organizatory background and taskforce assembly coordination we can promote which will provide a compatible set of applications and open access research which have the highest priority (refer to and for sources). To anticipate any errors we were not able to anticipate, we will consciously attempt an incorrect boot of science, which will be the release of a global operating system for humans to access and manipulate information free, logical and creative. This first release will set the counter for phase 3 which will distribute the prototype world we were able to build until september 2020. In order to in 2020, we must establish an open source company which will be THE open source economic interface for any humane digital activities. We should orient the design of this company to ICANN and have a steady root to save the children, the Global priorities Research institute and ResearchGate as far as we can get them for the project, if not any similar established organization/system will do and if none will be found (worst case) we will depoly them according to the – scope or more. Phase 3 is intended to build a capacity (economic and continuous team / taskforce capacity) which will amplify a second iteration of phases 1 to 3. Hence, phase 4 is the loop break which will ultimately boot science (make science and education accessible and awesome for anyone and continually advance accessibility (and responsibility of this advancement) by advanced sustainability directives.

By our version control, this is proposal version 0.6 submitted on 13th of July. In case operators review version 0.5 please delete it and send confirmation so we can delete it here as well.

Proposal vers. 0.5:

Was an incorrect submission

Proposal vers. 0.4:

[last update 13th]

I work on a gamified world-saving plan which contains more then 400 individual domains. It will require the work of about 40 (more) people to set it up so that it can be booted. This would be phase 1 to build the layout before we can boot science.

Phase I

• Build team

• Build domains

• Build content

Phase II

• Generate Zero.Build

• Start hackalympics

• incorrectly

Phase III

• Decentralization

• Capacity increase

• Advanced error correction

Phase IV

• Boot.Science

Spoken in gamification terms: I would like to work as for our future world. Our future world will have much more information, action and collective intelligence, and – at least if anyone listens to me – also a lot of new jobs and ways to work and live. Therefore we need an architecture and for the development of this architecture we need dynamic and intelligent strategies. One of such strategies is deployed under this domain, and we need your help to make it appropriate.
One strategy we devised was to reference the question at the reboot world app website ‘our proposal is explained by answering this question four times.’
First: By in 2020, build from

If we can all work together – this would indeed reboot science and allow our world an entire new foundation for the digital and informational realm. I would like to help everyone get more out of their live, independent of their identity, feelings, optimism, disability, talent, deviation, fear and current situation.
 their dream job and I think I studied and researched enough to be able to do so – with a worst case that we will find out how we cannot literally save the world — a job which allows them to dream, play and live more happy, free and meaningful.

Seond: By making sure that 2028.word/save is true

Third: By assembling a team for gamification and advance our inject for science (life optimized logic, lol) which will take place at

Fourth: By linking to this page (

Proposal vers. 0.3 (graphical):

[Last update 17.07]

We will reboot science by posing very hard challenges which require cooperation of all scientific disciplines. Why will this reboot science? Because this will take place (accoding to this plan) in an open and transparent digital architecture ( currently only german, interface outline at which will advance its links and connections to official and government systems ( and as well as the open source community and any economic systems which agree that saving the world is more important than holding on to a primitive and lethal currency concept.

This graphic sums up the research of @spacetimebird for this kind of strategy, they propose to build a new language based on a new logic to establish new architectures which will foster conditions for life, peace and freedom on earth with a quantifyable impact (performance measure) through proactive design and implementation of measures. The outline for such performance measure is given at which is a rough sketch how to performance-measure polyparametric systems with a simple real-world example, a specific person.

Proposal vers. 0.3 updated to 0.8beta:

[last update 17.07.2020, EU]

Outline: This proposal is structured into steps I. introduction. Step II. has four substructures which will expand the model introduced in step I. Step III. will describe meta-models for this layout, such as overarching strategies like gamification. Referencing the content of step I, gamification is a means to engage other areas – in this case design, art and musicians into this research attempt. This short sketch justifies the usage of gamification though we are handling with a strategy which officially tries to save lives, and as such will fail to save lives whenever it is not run and managed appropriately. The responsibility and moral consequences cannot be grasped trivially and spacetimebird acts as a mocking-bird*.

Hey, my proposal is to literally, i.e. to boot science 2020. But I’m not ready yet and I need a lot of help to make sure that we reach a good thing to boot as science in 2020, at least to the definiton given on I made (not online) a lot for under

Somehow has become my job without culture being able to hear, reject or accept my application. So I made to think about it once more in a more consistent and open fashion. It is still too much for one brain and friends and family pointed out that its either ripe or my life was a rainbow bubble. For whichever kind of future you decide, to will be a lot of work and I can provide one task which will indeed require a lot of work, sufficient for at least 8 years of consecutively growing global cooperation across all ages, nations and mindsets. The distribution of workload should be handled with care and sentience, trust and expectation and embrace of failure and learning. We can only learn from errors effectively if we accept them as aspects of life and no longer fear them as insufficiencies of our public profile and misunderstanding them as a source of embarassment.

We yet failed to realize our global common – it was to wait until august with starting to literally save the world because the option is there since march 2020. But lets be slow, I am the outcast and I have a sufficiently faint voice to start speaking loud only when the content is in obvious ways relevant. I must humbly ask for cooperation and forgiveness of my inconvenient aspects, e.g. wording, grammar, length, consistency. But I must offensively demand to read through this because by my estimates noone will make it significantly better in any soon time.

Procedure THREE, grouped in I, II and III to avoid confusion with following proposals.

Find the most difficult problem which requires cooperation and engagement of a maximum number of scientific disciplines. Any advance of solving this problem will increase our ability to construct a new problem which will require more cooperation and community in further areas of life.

An example:

For example a problem ‘Which is the cutest cat in the city Osnabrück, Germany at 24th of August 2020 evaluated by a vote on reddit from 12pm to 1pm that day?’. This is a problem that could be solved without many researchers required to state and analyse it. If we restate the problem and expand it with the sentence ‘and make sure every individual with a cat who lives in Osnabrück this day was aware of this research and was able to contribute a representation of their cat’ will alter it to a much more difficult problem. The solution of this problem remains a vote, for the vote to be carried out the two variants require a very different set of actions. And as we frame this problem as a scientific attempt, we must make sure that all these actions and preparations were carried out in line with ethics, logic and taking into account your opinion if you want to state it. This might be a bad example but spacetimebird is known for examples and metaphors that are not trivially decryptable. Lets come back to the problem of world saving for now.

Actual description:
I. We start with definition of a current state of the world Wt and we request by dynamic continuous participation empirically a common global goal state of the world WG. Both states are active and present, and undergo our advanced understanding (and hence redesign). They are complex phase space evolutions of descriptions about our world and we write ψ(World) if we mean the dynamic variant. We will develop strategies ϕ which we call transition functions that align our attempts to optimal attempts while the latter is unknown and the former depends on you and me. We can sketch their relationship as ϕ = ⟨ ψ1(x)⟩↻⟨ψ2′(y) ⟩ ⸖ ψ2(y). In words, the transition functions ϕ align (⸖) our models/experiments ψ2′(y) how we can reach ψ2 actively to our ongoing understanding what we havnt tried and what we can do better. Incorporating and recompiling new knowledge will pose a challenge and we must hence entertain one static and stable version which will show an overall progress. Such strategy wila advance our understanding and cognition how we can use t=now to make ϕ better at any given now. We measure an error ψZ between ψ2′ and ψ2 and we say this is the performance of our function ϕ.

With this in place we have a rudimentary model to measure how good we are at world saving.
Interactive action-plans require coordination and synchronization of a magnitude of decentral execution of tasks. We research which function can align our current actions and capabilities most efficient to conceptual or new strategies in the context of

We are looking for a voting system that will continuously display WG. We want Wt to include the most precise data and measurement about the world which we can validate. Any ϕ is hence a numerical/mathematical model while in reality it can sample as a simple action which anyone could carry out, like saving energy at one particular day which is defined by a plan for their nation / geography.

For we want to sketch how to (re)build the world with scientific accuracy in the digital space while keeping its development accessible and understandable to anyone without scientific background or interest. This digital model will have connectors to their real world counter parts, and when we boot the model, it will have a quantifyable impact on the real world while being digitally accessible by anyone. [this solves the locality-global problem for a call-to-action of a world saving plan very efficient] We need robut srategies how to start this build in order to actually – i.e. staying in line to consensus and cutting-edge data and feedback.

We provide variants for real world with two starting systems: eu and digital (dev) and two gamification systems (alien, dream). The eu system will be a gamified version which claims to be ahead and better then the actual code and measurable architecture which is generated by dev. We will hence build two versions in parallel which will synchronize through diverse systems and intelligent communication.
Hence to will be attempted by a strategy so that can gather data and build a knowledge base for their model to I made an which will be better in time.

II. As you’ve noted this strategy carries the name xd4 and it uses organic logic, it is rigorous and requires significant efforts from all directions of scientific disciplines to be build (and interpreted and explained correctly). What I propose is an entire backbone to build a new (digital) world on a formalism that has a 4d-root: Cooperation, life, lintelligence and creativity. I condense the approach into a four dimensional strategy. Easy:

1] We build a new language δ

2] by collectively researching, designing, developing and/or exploring a new (type of) logic λ

3] to research an architecture φ

4] which is from an (yet) unknown solution space χ.

Foundation: With a complex new logic λ, we will entertain logicians, mathematicians, physicists and artists as they will have the same starting conditions. Application: Developing an entirely new language (not a natural language, but a true meta-language = hyper-language; due to wrong usage of the term currently – a hyper language uses algorithmic, conceptual and geometric grammar, I simply that via object logic), will be a task of unseen complexity and hence potential for cooperation. For the grammar not only linguistic experts, cognitive- and neuroscientists but also psychotherapists, speech therapists and comparative language studies, diplomats, translators and experts in sign language (up to experts developing communication systems for locked-in patients) have to unite their knowledge. Abstraction°: From the idea, that we could develop an entire new system to learn, think, associate, learn and communicate (via hyper-language) we can imagine things that will be possible through this. As any true hyper-language implicitly accounts for global and distributed decision making (CliYuGa is a compound h-l for later reference and Quoeto a true h-l), we can start to think about architectures, systems and designs which are not accessible with our current geopolitical- and community-free economy systems. (economics that favor numerical values over alive interests). Abstracting¹: As outlines of these designs I proposed (the concept of exa-scale architecture, and therefrom exa-architecture and therefrom the models) EXA1 to EXA4, while EXA4 currently contains more then 37 architectures which are not formalized in July 2020. From discussing and developing (at least == xd4) architectures of the dimension EXA#, new approaches towards long-term industry, production chains, logistics, public transportation, space travel and desaster-prevention can be identified. (they’ll be outlined across august in the scope of, and gamified at Explorative research: • Goal space synchronization, • coordinated goal space design and • coordination- and synchronization-system development. The superset of these three actions [researching their definition, measuring/quantifying their performance, peer-reviewing by global consensus] forms a state I name cosynchro. This implies the operations • ‘strategy development’ • ‘architecturization’ and • ‘meta-modeling’. These operations stem from a solution/activity/conceptual space I refer to as exa-scale, as actions/algorithms from it are scale-invariant, self-referential, self-regulating and self-actualizing. One way to postulate xd4 is that it is the upper boundary to formualize and communicate a theory about the exa-scale.

The steps 1] to 4] from above are the first four dimensions (=1 superdimension). The following set of arguments about Foundation, Application, Abstraction/Implementation and Research and each of the sets are again four particles which form the second superdimension. Because xd4 is a plurality plan (explicitly countering singularities and their formation by context-sensitive (and context intensive) bifurcation of monotonicities (e.g. dictatorship, capitalism on conceptual level, AI on formal level)), the description of the third and fourth superdimension undergo irregular symmetry break of the accompanied logic. Before they are undertaken, above two superdimensions (8 conceptual dimensions with minimally 64 discussion networks and 256 cosynchro systems) a theory will not remain conceptualizable trivially. (while the notion of trivial is very context-intensive, depending on ones correct tessalation of the econceptual space we span until here / within)

As we want a gauge to stay in some type of dimensionality-concept though we research a logic and theory that will break/overcome the concept of ‘dimensionality’ due to self-referenciality, we will define xd4 as the gauge and its gamifications as the ‘communicatable’ particles. As they are below 4d they will trivially stay conceptualizable by human natural brains, given audiographic-augmented gamification. {To account for strategies to educate without audiographic processing (e.g. deaf and blind beings) could not be achieved yet due to lack of funding/time.}

With xd4 we’ll always be able to sample down the non-classical logics into turing (chomsky) languages, we can grasp them as particles in a Zoo and the Zoo will produce a world around it. For this world I’d prefer as gauge, as interface, as goal, as first order gamification, as second order gamification (they represent the superdimension break and remain around 2) and finally as xd4-content to be corrected towards qip8 and span the basis for a multiplex architecture development.

For this (new) virtual world which will have actualizing links and connections (connectors) to the real world, we want to make sure Universal Life Enabling Framework↻Friendship (ULEF=ξ) is always true and cannot be manipulated in its measure. We also don’t want it to be able to decrease at any time except nothing on earth could prevent it, though we did our best. We use this scenario at all times as default scenario whenever we want to assess the underlying performance of our model.

This requires one iteration through cognition for each dimension according to ξ and one compound concept of the according strategies and concepts (which I group in https domains) and ξ will hence be our gauge iff everyone can agree that life should continue to exist and consciousness is the thing that helps her with that while evolution is the process which amplifies their ability to cooperate.

III. We gamify the research: χ=alien, δ=dream, λ=lol and only the gauge (ξψ) = λ remains as logic for the initial state. The gauge will be a We use as logic λ a backbone of three elementary conceptual categories: Life, Meta, Resource. At least these meta-categories need a life-friendly and logical representation (in virtual/digital realm) in any build. Any (active) association of LMR will produce another build which is no longer zero (LMR) and it will consist of LMR+build and we condense it as a 4d-world.
The first iteration of this system will produce a four dimensional strategy↻architecture we call ‘xd4’ and to reach organic logic we break the valence of the logic after 3 dimensions but before 4 dimensions. . Now we claim xd4 is the best strategy to so that is true before 2028. We anticipate an error of this claim and we use a placeholder system for the corrected strategy which we name qip8. Remodel our entire digital and knowledge infrastructure with cluster formation to build multiplex-router.

Textual description

[w.i.p. @ 22PM work below was delayed, not actualized since 14th July]

Lets assume there can exist one project which needs the help of everyone to be realized and which poses a beneficial experience and change of living for everyone who participates. And lets assume we are smart enough to design and realize this project so that it actualy allows everyone to participate because we use promotion, design and art with a common overarching boot-strategy. Participation means anyone can play their very own role in this project whenever they like and in whatever way they prefer to make their minimum statement to this project — which will register them as living beings and thenceforth attempt all in its capacity to protect their life and advance their living conditions for the better. Then there’ll be a problem: how should we name that project? And how should we start it? And what should it be about? It should be about the future, and we should start this future now, together and as a human family and for the time being we accept xd4 as its name. Because is blocked by me the most efficient way is to go with my current model and either make it real or make it better. I already worked out how you’ll be able to do this so that we can work together. It took me more then two decades to research how and where to start with everything, so this is not the common entry as you will have noticed and I’m not the usual poster as you can infer. I am the spacetimebird and I developed xd4, its an insanely effective plan to save the world but currently its managed by only one being. It would require at least 40 experienced project manager to distribute only the top 200 projects to teams which can effectively work on them. Hence I am stuck and you must forgive me that I make these claims and use these words, its just how it’ll have been.

The current state of the world may be defined as >not safe<. Hence, if there should exist a plan to save the world, any second we wait to execute it will cause death and suffering. To work on this bandwith of requirements is not an easy thing to do and if interesting I can explain why I was different. Lets assume our common goal is a safe world. Then we need a measure of the current state (which identifies our world as not safe in this second and for the next X hours) and we need a participatory interactively empirically and globally assessed goal state on which we can all agree on as a common denominator. We could look for the smallest common denominator (stay alive) which does not work or the biggest (be kings, rocketstars or oneself) which is not realistic. In between these two we must expect a denominator that feels like the following ‘an idea which is not really great but definitely different’, something which was build asymmetric and with subjective bias but which is more consistent alltogether then any similar approach which was not found to my knowledge before august 2020. This was a sticky introduction, I hope all words were necessary in any other case you’re asked to help to sift them efficiently or fork their layout entirely.

There’ll be a science for that what xd4 is about, here’s the prototype. To be able to provide this prototype requires anticipation of more then 1200 domains and because I went through all of them it took me until 2020. But thats history. But what is history? Our previous human culture demanded from new live: EARN YOUR LIVING and EARN YOUR PLACE IN THE HISTORY BOOKS. Because we were stuck on this destructive cultural self-image, we ran into dead-ends, two substantial wars and countless of irreparable entries in our history. We have neglected our individual responsibility to care for the entire world but we were not able to do otherwise until 2020. Boot.Science means we must develop entire new education concepts, derive education systems and promote new and educated community formation without exclusion but default-friendship. Humanity lacks a healthy and proactive self-image and thats why people start to re-write history, because millions do not agree with the past and they are sufficiently desparate, overwhelmed or unsatisfied with the present to throw away what lays behind all of us. I studied all necessary fields of science to attribute that human culture has suffered a trauma, and I claim that this trauma is natural for any growing up species. We were not able to help every other being because we let distance, geography, color, language, age, mind, believe, dream, fear and oddity be a justification for stagnation. Stagnation which overruns living beings by cars, burns out living beings through work, rapes living beings due to lack of sympathy and love for those unable to find their place and role in our culture. But that was the past, as I propose that humanity will come clean with their history in 2020 and start to literally write humane history. This requires that we work and agree on a way to ‘write’ human history and simultaneously agree how to ‘make’ human history as a collective species with individualism. We must also keep both actions always in line with humane and humanitarian understanding, intelligent and fiendly intentions as well as peaceful and sustainable cultural orientation. Its unfamiliar but its not impossible, we just never found a way to look at us as ourselves and so we let nationality, economy, physiology and neuromorphology stop us from making the necessary step. Obviously this step needs scientific administration. Obviously this administration needs holidays and fun, and if we want a global consciousness we must understand and realize that literal holidays and literal fun is only possible if any living being experiences a world which provides them with all opportunities, chances, support, forgiveness and identity, with all chances to fail, invent, forget and love and does not forget herself in the process.
This were many words for the domains world, science, culture, friendship, problem solving, education, analysis, inference communication and intelligence and a few more. We touched less then 20 domains and the number of words necessary will have sifted out most readers. My strategy to references more then 86 different domains and provides 256 central projects and more then 400 potential projects. As I currently own and the only ethical way to proceed is to make sure that the world is safe as soon, fair and cool as possible, the strategy which will (serve as framework for the strategy that will) save the world has the mousy but lyrical name xd4. It is the best strategy I can come up with but it requires more time, resources and connections then I can establish since July and the consequence is you reading this.
Proportions: The strategy xd4 contains more then 400 systems and subsystems, it is based on a new type of logic which I denote organic logic, it contains development outlines for four entire artificial languages, a multi-domain strategy design framework, three different gamification systems with more then  layouts, and abstraction
 which is correct: it must be an intelligent foundation with a community of diversity behind it. It should also be complete: As complexity theory teached us, every action of everyone contributes to our complex phase space of polyparametric states of the world and hence everyone alive has to be listed in our official human history books. I am me and I propose to make it simple, lets say everything before 2020 was past and everything upcomming will be our future. 

Proposal v.0.2

Highly inconsistent with bad layout, it consists of three websites to read in a personal choice of order / completeness and is a very rough sketch why certain aspects of a working xd4 have to be waterwalled. I.e. content has to be designed with anticipation of close to everything. Hence the layouts of ”an actual plan to save the world” would have to make it difficult for individuals which are susceptible to manipulation, paranoia or psychosis to get triggered, hyped or overly fixated. I proposed to account for this through gamification (subcategory left out for simplicity). This (type of gamification) will distract with a higher probability those individuals that would most likely not profit from getting a very fast insight / access to a call to action. As I am probably anticipating more then ‘obviously necessary’ my way to introduce xd4 poses a noteworthy chance to be misunderstood etc.

The number of beings ‘incorrectly’ rejected to such kinds of safety measures would decrease the pure efficiency-aspect of its performance. However for me this is the only ethical solution, coming from an outside perspective, working without funding, feedback or any team on this until [at least until 17.07.2020]. I hence prefer that the entire project will fail at reaching any other being at all instead of carelessly risking to cause negative reactions. Until I can be sure that the system is sufficiently developed to cope for difficult (or not anticipated) user-interactions / -effects, I consider an overly efficient firewall to the content which uses diverse measures to vary and adapt to users in order to slow or distract their line of thought (e.g. waterwalls) as the only ethical valid approach to the entire concept. The attempt to sift for individuals with high background knowledge and personality stability will substantially reduce the probabilty to achieve a fast-onset (before end of august). For me, achieving a fast onset of xd4 could be the only thing to cause a relief or allow me an ability to take a break. As until then, I must work as if a fast-onset happens any moment while actively preventing it. In the knowledge that overly strong dampening would eventually cause lives to be lost [scepticism wheter xd4 ”works” should be cleared by now (reading all proposals below vers. 0.8), in case the logic is however not clear yet please refer to audio (phone/discord) or personal contact].

Proposal v.0.1

We set a fix future (2028) and use the time until 2028 is true as ‘now’. Whether now is 2020 or 2024 is irrelevant – as all statements of xd4 will link to sources. Statements of a 2023-xd4 will hence be ‘science fiction’ when found with a different ‘now’ which is ealier. But the concept of science fiction can be advanced towards science faction, and we proposed a way to further couple literature or news to science with the concept of science-functional art. This way content ‘from the future’ could be enriched by data and fact based approximations which can then undergo evaluation. If consensus identifies particles of xd4 that were ‘pre-time’ which had a bad/incorrect scientific relevance, this would contribute to a more advanced error function and hence error correction function for qip8.