Live data showed block 1 at 6.01 and block 0 at 1.83 against ~0.2-0.35
everywhere else, with block 1's liked/disliked gap (+5.82) as large as
its whole measurement. That is not "the first two blocks do 30x the
work" — ||f_i||/||x_i|| divides by a residual stream that GROWS with
depth, so early blocks score high because the denominator is barely
formed. Ranking on it just sorts the earliest blocks to the top, and a
high-variance early block fakes a large taste correlation at low n.
The hook now stores both norms instead of their ratio, and profile()
adds `share` — each block's raw ||f_i|| over every block's, one
denominator for the whole stack. The panel ranks and displays that
("2.3% of the movement"). The ratio is kept, since it is still the right
answer to "how much did this block move the stream relative to what the
stream was".
Checked against data shaped like the report: ratio ranks 0,1,2 (all
artifact), share ranks the blocks that actually move more.
digital-garbage
be5579f1f9