Agreed - we (and more generally, embedded agents) have no access to territory.  It's all maps, even our experiences are filtered through interpretation.  Territory is inferred as the thing that makes different maps (at different levels of abstraction or different parts of the universe) consistent with each other and across time. 

That said, some maps are very detailed, repeatable, and can support a lot of other maps.  I tend to think of those as "closer to the territory".  In colloquial discussion and informal thinking, I don't think there's much harm in pretending that the actual territory is the same as the fine-grained maps.  Not technically true - there are more levels of maps, and they're asymptotic to reaching the territory.  But close enough for a lot of things.

A few missing points, which may break the whole plan:

1. For a long long time, it's probably better to increase hedons experienced, then absolute amount of hedonium, and only after there's a whole lot of it do we worry about density.
2. Your description of neural hedonium has no reason to believe it only or primarily experiences POSITIVE hedons.  Your proposal risks creating and maximizing sufferonium.  In fact, this is probably a bigger unsolved problem than identification of substrate.  How do you make something that actually maximizes what you want?
3. it's a bit suspect to go from "play it safe" on the hard problem with artificial neural material, without playing it even safer, and already-solved manufacturing of just making lots of organic brains.  

Probably not for me.  I had a few projects using AWS IoT buttons (no display, but arbitrary code run for click, double-click, or long-click of a small battery-powered wifi button), but the value wasn't really there, and I presume adding a display wouldn't quite be enough to devote the counter space.  Amusingly, it turns out the AWS version was EOL'd today - Learn about AWS IoT legacy services - AWS IoT Core

Go further with this.  Don't map it to a single key, use it as a modifier so other keys have more functionality.  using CL+hjkl as arrow keys is great for VI users, CL+WASD for gamers - either way you don't need to move your fingers as much.

I use and recommend https://ultimatehackingkeyboard.com/, which defaults to putting the mod key in place of caps lock (it's fully programmable, so you can do what you like.  On Windows, https://www.autohotkey.com/ is extremely flexible.

Well, no.  the easy part of a university undergrad education is pretty cheap (to provide) already.  It's bundled with a lot of things that make it expensive to buy traditionally.

GPT 4o prompt: please translate the following into German:
There aren't many (in fact, none that I know of) crisp legible rules on the topic.  If you don't provide a translation, I expect you'll fail to get much engagement, and perhaps see things downvoted more than they otherwise would be.  This is true of topics and content as well - there aren't a lot of rules, but there is a lot of opinion and reaction to non-standard topics or approaches.  The best thing is usually to read quite a bit, and if what you have to say seems to fit well, try it out with a few small-ish posts and see what feedback you get.

Note that LLMs are VERY good at translation of this sort of thing.  Posting in German with English translation might work just fine.  Or it might not - it depends more on the content than anything else, but quality of presentation isn't completely irrelevant.

evaluation:
Es gibt nicht viele (tatsächlich kenne ich überhaupt keine) klaren, gut lesbaren Regeln zu diesem Thema. Wenn du keine Übersetzung bereitstellst, erwarte ich, dass du nur wenig Resonanz erhalten wirst und möglicherweise mehr Downvotes sehen wirst, als es sonst der Fall wäre. Dasselbe gilt für Themen und Inhalte: Es gibt nicht viele Regeln, aber es gibt viele Meinungen und Reaktionen auf unkonventionelle Themen oder Ansätze. Am besten liest du zunächst einiges, und wenn das, was du sagen möchtest, gut passt, probiere es mit ein paar kleineren Beiträgen aus und schau, welches Feedback du bekommst.

Beachte, dass LLMs SEHR gut darin sind, so etwas zu übersetzen. Beiträge auf Deutsch zusammen mit einer englischen Übersetzung könnten durchaus funktionieren. Oder auch nicht – das hängt mehr vom Inhalt ab als von allem anderen, aber auch die Qualität der Präsentation ist nicht völlig irrelevant.

Paying the (ongoing, repeated) pirate-game blackmail ("pay us or we'll impose a wealth tax") IS a form of wealth tax.  You probably need to be more specific about what kinds and levels of wealth tax could happen with various counterfactual assumptions (without those assumptions, there's no reason to believe anything is possible except what actually exists).

Do you have a strategy doc or list of criteria for promotional programs you're considering?  My first question, as an outsider, would be "why give ANY freebies at all"?  My second would be "what dimensions of price discrimination are important" (whether they've tried other dances, what their economic status is, are they seeking to meet people or just to dance, etc.)  And third "what is the budget for promos"?

My mental model is that if it's a financial hardship for someone, they're probably not going to be a regular attendee just because one is free.  For that case, you need some sort of subsidy/discount that goes on longer than one event.

If the main thing is to reduce perceived risk, as opposed to actual cost, you should consider a refund option - for anyone, they can ask for a refund if they didn't get their money's worth.  Limit it to once per attendee - they can come back without penalty, but the risk is now on them.

This also gives a great feedback channel to learn WHY a new attendee didn't find it worth the price.

There hasn't been a large-scale nuclear war, should we be unafraid of proliferation?   More specific to this argument, I don't know any professional software developers who haven't had the experience of being VERY surprised by a supposedly well-known algorithm.