@Jon K 100%. I have to remind myself that not everyone even likes using technology in general. I also came upon it in 2023 with a major pain point it was perfect for solving. That was just as you said, the timing.

@Scott Smith Learned a new word today! That describes it perfectly. I don't like to see people struggle unnecessarily, and I'm constantly catching myself thinking about all the ways it could help people if they could shift their mindset and be a little more curious. People have been through a lot though in the last decade+, I try to remember the role that plays as well. The benefits will reach them eventually, even if only indirectly.

@Jake Van Clief Last thing then I need to go study! lol but this feels worth sharing here. I asked claude the other night about the history of the nervous system, reactivity, and our current experience with it. The last paragraph: "For the “solve at scale” instinct: notice that almost every existing intervention is individual — teach people to regulate (breathwork, vagal tone, interoception, CBT, somatic work). But if this is fundamentally a mismatch problem, then the environment is also a lever, and a strangely neglected one. We’ve spent a few hundred years engineering out physical threats while accidentally engineering in a dense field of symbolic ones — feeds designed to trip threat-detection, status legible at planetary scale, ambient precarity that pings survival circuits without any tiger present. The interesting question your framing opens isn’t only “how do individuals regulate a miscalibrated system,” but “what would environments designed around our actual threat-physiology look like.” That second question is wide open."

@Ryan Nagy I think that's a legitimate take!

What a beautiful thread of support. Let’s go Wylder!