This is the topic we get the most pushback on, and we completely understand why. But we can test the systems, so anyone who is pushing back we challenge to you play the iterated prisoners dilemma in game theory against us, where we can use high trust system and you have to fly blind not sure if the other players are trustworthy, and we will smoke you. Collective intelligence is to fixing systems what jiu jitsu was to MMA. Thank you for reading and understanding.
This is essentially an inverse version of the FICO score used by credit monitoring and lending institutions to presumably incentivize good spending habits. I suppose your ultimate concept is...the government is already keeping scores on us. What does it take get people interested in keeping scores on our public institutions.
First and foremost this is a place where people can go to solve problems that we trust. No one trusts any institutions anymore where we used to go and solve problems . Congress, Academia, and the Media are all fully corrupted. We need a new place. We can use technology to help us but it MUST keep our ai and bots. This is a decentralized peer-to-peer system for people looking for other high trust humans to work with. In doesn’t need to be intrusive into financial scores. But it could do things like this:
One thousand people all throw in $5000. Now there is $5 million in the middle. And now the group can use collective swarm intelligence to decide how to spend that money to achieve their results or goals they deem important. This new thing - a high trust group of 1000 people - is a force that is hard to match.
But yeah, this could be used back on the politicians. We wrote a separate article about “social credit scores for politicians” out this would be one way to lock them out. More specifically to keep the ai and bots out.
All powerful forces can be dangerous. Look at Electricity, nuclear energy, flight.
Groups of humans solving problems can be amazing, but also dangerous too. Groups can put rockets into space, but we can also turn into groupthink and tyrants. Why does one happen sometimes and the other happen sometimes? What is the explanation?
When it comes to groups of people labels are the enemy. Labels form echo chambers. Echo chambers form groupthink. And groupthink leads to tyranny.
We must solve problems without labels, when we solve in large groups. But we also need to be sure online that the other person isn’t an ai or bot. But the question is how?
We can NOT let a centralized entity be the gatekeeper to that because it will become corrupted. If we don’t do it we will be infiltrated with ai and bots. And if we continue to do nothing our systems will continue to stay corrupted.
A decentralized vouch system would correct this problem. It is testable and not just theoretical. Again, there need not be a “smell test” when we can use game theory to test it.
You cashed in the last of your trust tokens with me by parroting Trump's lies about the 'deep state' that he wants to dismantle with project 2025 (which is really just a plan to replace thousands of federal employees comprised of experts that have no political allegiance from administration to administration with conservative sycophants).
What a shame to have you advocating for collective intelligence and then using it to push the paranoid fringe ideologies you've so thoroughly bought into. You really think that will bring people together?
Isn’t it funny how the thread below yours accuses of us of being far left, and then you the far right? This is how religious zealots act when their beliefs are challenged.
Wish you the best dude.
And yes, collective intelligence is the best solution to stop the colluding Oligarchs from corrupting our systems. And it isn’t fringe. It’s obvious. Just look at Blackrock, State Street and Vanguard and see exactly what they own and how they collude. Or just look at the food supply, have the discipline to stop eating their poisoned foods and you will see. But to get there you will need courage to see it. Hope you find it this time, because you surely didn’t last time. ⚔️❤️
Your smell test told you that this idea was far left. Daniel thought it was far right. In reality it is complete decentralization of a system that keeps ai and bots out and allows people to collaborate and form what Tim Urban calls in his book a Super Genie.
The peaceful, prosperous world we all hope and dream of begins when the responsible Citizens develop a way to evaluate 200 Thousand pages of law speak per day.
This evaluation must be public, transparent and in a form that can be viewed by everyone in order make certain that the Law being enforced is congruent with the will of the people.
In 1992, Presidential Candidate Ross Perot called it The Electronic Townhall. “It is only logical that it will become our Fourth Branch of Government”, he said.
How it works:
Before a new law, tax, or expenditure can be put on the books it must first be Ratified by the Citizens.
Existing laws can be Annulled by the same super majority required to Ratify them.
This program can be applied to every level of government and will ultimately solve every problem we have.
To prevent chaos, the basic law, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, would be exempt from review.
Citizenship is about the Ratification or Annulment of each line of every law, rule, regulation and supreme court decision on the books or that is on the docket waiting to be turned into law, policy and taxes.
Nothing short of this is going to ameliorate the present situation, nor will we get to the Stars without it.
So, who gets to participate in this amplified voting, and how are the votes counted and what specific impact does the sacred vote have at the business end of government?
Right now, the first question is:
# 1. Who gets to vote in the: general election?
a. citizens only - Yes No
b. natural born citizens only - Yes No
c. natural born citizens with four natural born grandparents - Yes No
d. naturalized citizens (legal immigrants) - Yes No
e. legal immigrants not yet naturalized - Yes No
f. anyone with a drivers license not otherwise prohibited by law of the various States – Yes - No
# 2.1 Ages of Voter
g. minimum18 years
h. minimum 21 years
i. minimum 25 years
j. minimum 30 years
k. minimum 33 years
l. minimum 35 years
# 2.2 Sex of Voter
a. Male – Yes - No
b. Female – Yes - No
c. Non – Binanry - Yes - No
d. Transgender - Yes - No
# 2.3 Competence of Voter
e. property owners net value over $50,000 - Yes - No
f. property owners net value over $250,000 - Yes - No
g. tax exempt persons – Yes - No
h. those receiving welfare / food stamps – Yes - No
i. those with unpaid child support obligations - Yes - No
j. those receiving WIC – Yes - No
k. those receiving Section 8 – Yes - No
l. those working for government bureaucracies – Yes - No
m. those that will pay a $5000 poll tax - Yes - No
n. those that have paid a minimum of $5000 per year of tax for their combined jurisdictions in excess of any received via SS, Medicare, Medicaid, ATFWDC - Yes - No
# 2.4 Genetic presence of Voter
a. Male without children – Yes - No
b. Male with children – Yes - No
c. Male with children plural vote – Yes - No
d. Female without children – Yes - No
e. Female with children – Yes - No
f. Female with children plural vote – Yes - No
g. Only married males with children, never divorced can vote. – Yes - No
# 3.0 Who should be trusted with the responsibility and power of Public Office?
a. Only those authorized to vote in the general election - Yes No
b. Male without children – Yes - No
c. Male with children – Yes - No
d. Female without children – Yes - No
e. Female with children – Yes - No
f. Only married males with children, never divorced can hold public office – Yes - No
Electric town hall is X or social media. This isn’t that. This is the glue that will hold together high trust problem solving groups across distance and in large numbers. Until you see it in action it is hard to explain. A simple “vouch” when you have met someone in person creates a digital web that locks ai and bots out. We meet in person and vouch for each other and leave a couple words. That simple act is hard for an ai or bot to overcome.
No doubt this part of the idea gets the most pushback. But it also requires testing it to see how it works.
If we were to play the iterated prisoners dilemma then we will win more than you if our players trust each other. It’s simply about results.
This is gonna backfire on the society of problem solvers because it's like a social credit scoring system. Vetting people because you don't really trust anyone is basically what those cultist on the left and in our polluted government already does. I get your point but there's nothing to trust about politics. And you can't beat a system when the system itself is the problem. Even Obama told everyone that, yet was apparently elected anyway. And we all know the rest of the story because we're living in that reality right now.
This is about creating a new system. First and foremost we advocate that we MUST make a system where we know that ai and bots are not part of it.
Second, Joining a system like this would be voluntary. If you don’t want to, then don’t. But you are not understanding it properly. We addressed your concerns in the article. A social credit score is run by a centralized government. This idea is decentralized- like Amazon and EBay and Etsy ratings. It is the difference between CBDCs and Bitcoin. They are literally opposites.
Have you ever been part of a high trust group? Like navy seals? Trust matters for success of the group. And the ONLY metric that matters in politics is trust. Trust isn’t blind faith. Trust is based on previous iterations, and in game theory we can play a game called the iterated prisoners dilemma and see who wins.
Dude, we don't need to follow military interrogation and spy tactics to trust people. I understand that PTSD is real. But subjecting everyone that has a better idea on how to live to past performance is kinda counterintuitive.
Subjecting everyone? This would be a voluntary system. And do you have a better way to keep Ai and bots out of our systems?
We are not outnumbered, we are out organized. And your fears of centralized control are founded, but it is not this. What is your position on Bitcoin? Do you understand decentralization in systems?
this is well written and a very good idea. I like the gamification of the trust system. Little rewards for being good too.
This is the topic we get the most pushback on, and we completely understand why. But we can test the systems, so anyone who is pushing back we challenge to you play the iterated prisoners dilemma in game theory against us, where we can use high trust system and you have to fly blind not sure if the other players are trustworthy, and we will smoke you. Collective intelligence is to fixing systems what jiu jitsu was to MMA. Thank you for reading and understanding.
This is essentially an inverse version of the FICO score used by credit monitoring and lending institutions to presumably incentivize good spending habits. I suppose your ultimate concept is...the government is already keeping scores on us. What does it take get people interested in keeping scores on our public institutions.
First and foremost this is a place where people can go to solve problems that we trust. No one trusts any institutions anymore where we used to go and solve problems . Congress, Academia, and the Media are all fully corrupted. We need a new place. We can use technology to help us but it MUST keep our ai and bots. This is a decentralized peer-to-peer system for people looking for other high trust humans to work with. In doesn’t need to be intrusive into financial scores. But it could do things like this:
One thousand people all throw in $5000. Now there is $5 million in the middle. And now the group can use collective swarm intelligence to decide how to spend that money to achieve their results or goals they deem important. This new thing - a high trust group of 1000 people - is a force that is hard to match.
But yeah, this could be used back on the politicians. We wrote a separate article about “social credit scores for politicians” out this would be one way to lock them out. More specifically to keep the ai and bots out.
All powerful forces can be dangerous. Look at Electricity, nuclear energy, flight.
Groups of humans solving problems can be amazing, but also dangerous too. Groups can put rockets into space, but we can also turn into groupthink and tyrants. Why does one happen sometimes and the other happen sometimes? What is the explanation?
When it comes to groups of people labels are the enemy. Labels form echo chambers. Echo chambers form groupthink. And groupthink leads to tyranny.
We must solve problems without labels, when we solve in large groups. But we also need to be sure online that the other person isn’t an ai or bot. But the question is how?
We can NOT let a centralized entity be the gatekeeper to that because it will become corrupted. If we don’t do it we will be infiltrated with ai and bots. And if we continue to do nothing our systems will continue to stay corrupted.
A decentralized vouch system would correct this problem. It is testable and not just theoretical. Again, there need not be a “smell test” when we can use game theory to test it.
You cashed in the last of your trust tokens with me by parroting Trump's lies about the 'deep state' that he wants to dismantle with project 2025 (which is really just a plan to replace thousands of federal employees comprised of experts that have no political allegiance from administration to administration with conservative sycophants).
What a shame to have you advocating for collective intelligence and then using it to push the paranoid fringe ideologies you've so thoroughly bought into. You really think that will bring people together?
Unsubscribed.
Hey Dan,
Isn’t it funny how the thread below yours accuses of us of being far left, and then you the far right? This is how religious zealots act when their beliefs are challenged.
Wish you the best dude.
And yes, collective intelligence is the best solution to stop the colluding Oligarchs from corrupting our systems. And it isn’t fringe. It’s obvious. Just look at Blackrock, State Street and Vanguard and see exactly what they own and how they collude. Or just look at the food supply, have the discipline to stop eating their poisoned foods and you will see. But to get there you will need courage to see it. Hope you find it this time, because you surely didn’t last time. ⚔️❤️
Good riddance.
Something isn't passing my smell test either. Reinventing the wheel theory.
Your smell test told you that this idea was far left. Daniel thought it was far right. In reality it is complete decentralization of a system that keeps ai and bots out and allows people to collaborate and form what Tim Urban calls in his book a Super Genie.
Guest Mike Sparks @ 50:20
'Currently no Enforcement Police to secure adherence to constitution'
The Raw Deal With Jim Fetzer 2024.09.02.mp3
Guests Mike Sparks and James Roguski
https://ln5.sync.com/dl/401bb45c0/zx6i3w3t-pkeap8ci-p5d7t2na-qqhyjmd3/view/default/26180910330010
Indeed.
It's the only way to flourish as a civilized society
~°¥°~
The peaceful, prosperous world we all hope and dream of begins when the responsible Citizens develop a way to evaluate 200 Thousand pages of law speak per day.
This evaluation must be public, transparent and in a form that can be viewed by everyone in order make certain that the Law being enforced is congruent with the will of the people.
In 1992, Presidential Candidate Ross Perot called it The Electronic Townhall. “It is only logical that it will become our Fourth Branch of Government”, he said.
How it works:
Before a new law, tax, or expenditure can be put on the books it must first be Ratified by the Citizens.
Existing laws can be Annulled by the same super majority required to Ratify them.
This program can be applied to every level of government and will ultimately solve every problem we have.
To prevent chaos, the basic law, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, would be exempt from review.
Citizenship is about the Ratification or Annulment of each line of every law, rule, regulation and supreme court decision on the books or that is on the docket waiting to be turned into law, policy and taxes.
Nothing short of this is going to ameliorate the present situation, nor will we get to the Stars without it.
So, who gets to participate in this amplified voting, and how are the votes counted and what specific impact does the sacred vote have at the business end of government?
Right now, the first question is:
# 1. Who gets to vote in the: general election?
a. citizens only - Yes No
b. natural born citizens only - Yes No
c. natural born citizens with four natural born grandparents - Yes No
d. naturalized citizens (legal immigrants) - Yes No
e. legal immigrants not yet naturalized - Yes No
f. anyone with a drivers license not otherwise prohibited by law of the various States – Yes - No
# 2.1 Ages of Voter
g. minimum18 years
h. minimum 21 years
i. minimum 25 years
j. minimum 30 years
k. minimum 33 years
l. minimum 35 years
# 2.2 Sex of Voter
a. Male – Yes - No
b. Female – Yes - No
c. Non – Binanry - Yes - No
d. Transgender - Yes - No
# 2.3 Competence of Voter
e. property owners net value over $50,000 - Yes - No
f. property owners net value over $250,000 - Yes - No
g. tax exempt persons – Yes - No
h. those receiving welfare / food stamps – Yes - No
i. those with unpaid child support obligations - Yes - No
j. those receiving WIC – Yes - No
k. those receiving Section 8 – Yes - No
l. those working for government bureaucracies – Yes - No
m. those that will pay a $5000 poll tax - Yes - No
n. those that have paid a minimum of $5000 per year of tax for their combined jurisdictions in excess of any received via SS, Medicare, Medicaid, ATFWDC - Yes - No
# 2.4 Genetic presence of Voter
a. Male without children – Yes - No
b. Male with children – Yes - No
c. Male with children plural vote – Yes - No
d. Female without children – Yes - No
e. Female with children – Yes - No
f. Female with children plural vote – Yes - No
g. Only married males with children, never divorced can vote. – Yes - No
# 3.0 Who should be trusted with the responsibility and power of Public Office?
a. Only those authorized to vote in the general election - Yes No
b. Male without children – Yes - No
c. Male with children – Yes - No
d. Female without children – Yes - No
e. Female with children – Yes - No
f. Only married males with children, never divorced can hold public office – Yes - No
g. Depends on the office - Yes - No
This is a lot of dancing around The Electronic Townhall fire.
Electric town hall is X or social media. This isn’t that. This is the glue that will hold together high trust problem solving groups across distance and in large numbers. Until you see it in action it is hard to explain. A simple “vouch” when you have met someone in person creates a digital web that locks ai and bots out. We meet in person and vouch for each other and leave a couple words. That simple act is hard for an ai or bot to overcome.
No doubt this part of the idea gets the most pushback. But it also requires testing it to see how it works.
If we were to play the iterated prisoners dilemma then we will win more than you if our players trust each other. It’s simply about results.
This is gonna backfire on the society of problem solvers because it's like a social credit scoring system. Vetting people because you don't really trust anyone is basically what those cultist on the left and in our polluted government already does. I get your point but there's nothing to trust about politics. And you can't beat a system when the system itself is the problem. Even Obama told everyone that, yet was apparently elected anyway. And we all know the rest of the story because we're living in that reality right now.
This is about creating a new system. First and foremost we advocate that we MUST make a system where we know that ai and bots are not part of it.
Second, Joining a system like this would be voluntary. If you don’t want to, then don’t. But you are not understanding it properly. We addressed your concerns in the article. A social credit score is run by a centralized government. This idea is decentralized- like Amazon and EBay and Etsy ratings. It is the difference between CBDCs and Bitcoin. They are literally opposites.
Have you ever been part of a high trust group? Like navy seals? Trust matters for success of the group. And the ONLY metric that matters in politics is trust. Trust isn’t blind faith. Trust is based on previous iterations, and in game theory we can play a game called the iterated prisoners dilemma and see who wins.
Dude, we don't need to follow military interrogation and spy tactics to trust people. I understand that PTSD is real. But subjecting everyone that has a better idea on how to live to past performance is kinda counterintuitive.
Subjecting everyone? This would be a voluntary system. And do you have a better way to keep Ai and bots out of our systems?
We are not outnumbered, we are out organized. And your fears of centralized control are founded, but it is not this. What is your position on Bitcoin? Do you understand decentralization in systems?