Network States, Swarm Intelligence, Homeschooling, Bitcoin, Food Systems, Decentralized Science, Decentralized Medicine and more! New Forum and Think Tank for Solutions! Join the discussion!
I will check out the site. I have a fundamental question - is there a moral basis to the structures created? The corruption is within each of us. Human flourishing has occurred when we had a common moral basis. The moral underpinnings have been knocked out. Throughout history this leads to the corruption and failure of societies & culture. Liberty, self-governance and decentralization are actually Biblically supported. Not sure we can get there without acknowledging our corrupt natures - but the effort is worth it.
Humans will always have a percent that wants to be corrupt. We have to account for this. A good system should be able to be run by your enemies and still cannot be corrupted.
Most humans want to do good.
The ultimatum experiments show this, and it is our experience as well.
If you haven’t heard of it, the ultimatum game is a psychological experiment in economics where two participants interact anonymously to split a sum of money. One participant proposes how to divide the sum between them, and the other participant can either accept or reject this proposal. If the second participant rejects, neither of them receives anything. This game tests theories of fairness, reciprocity, and economic decision-making.
The problem with running it is that most people opt to just say “let’s split it 50/50.”
These outcomes teach us that humans usually aim for fairness and reciprocity. Participants often reject unfair offers, even when it means receiving nothing themselves, indicating a preference for fair outcomes over personal greed. This suggests that concepts like fairness and cooperation play a significant role in human decision-making and social interactions.
In other words, most people want to built trust with others. They want to be part of a tribe or team or group that trusts each and has each others’ backs.
The problem is that a corrupt society pushes people to do bad things. If people look around and think the whole system is corrupted and the only way to survive is to also be corrupted, then they will go agaist their natural desire to be trustworthy and vulnerable with each other. This is called moloch, and then it becomes a race to the bottom. That’s where we are stuck right now as a society.
It does not have to be this way.
We can make a world with better systems where people who want to can build high trust relationships with other people. We don’t need anyone’s permission. We can build a place like this. Right now. A place with Think tanks. Idea labs. Collective intelligence centers. A place to debate, conjecture, listen, learn, and solve problems in large groups. And most importantly rebuild trust in both the systems we use, and each other.
We don’t have to live under these corrupted systems anymore. If we can make a new high trust place - transparent, decentralized, if we can build this place and these systems …. we can change everything.
Yes. Ultimately the swarm itself can give itself a moral compass, but to join our system it will start with a base code of conduct. We are trying to build a high trust society. It isn’t for everyone. But once people see how much awesome stuff we can do with high trust problem solving groups, the value will be realized.
I will study the references more but I think any human systems that produce value are subject to corruption. Also, if this is analogous to a nation state with resources and economic value, do you not think the leaderless state will not also be attacked by a conventional state as has happened throughout history? Great idea and trying not to be a pessimist ( I am an optimist by default, actually to a fault) but as you point out trust is the key. Apologies if you are addressing this in your references I have not read yet.
You are 100% correct. There will always be people who want to game and corrupt the system. But that number is small compared to those who just want a fair system. As Naval Ravikant and Balaji Srinivasan have said, the test of a good system is give it to your enemies and see if they can corrupt it. If they cannot then it is a good system.
We must be testing our systems with red teams, constantly upgrading.
We need to be transparent and decentralized. Leaderless systems are very hard to attack. Look at Cortez and the Apache Indians. The Indians had no leader and Cortez could never beat them. Leaderless systems are hard to corrupt. Just like Bitcoin is hard to corrupt. Or how do you corrupt all the podcasts and independent journalists? CNN is easy to corrupt. So is a government with a leader. Or business with a leader.
There are many factors needed for this to work. But so far the results for running systems have been excellent, when certain criteria are met. Trust is one. Transparency. Results. And a good system.
Follow the hyperlinks and we are happy to answer questions here or on the forum!
Great list of resources on your swarm academy site. I must delve into these and understand what you're proposing better. It's intriguing and I'd like to read about some cases where this has worked, which I'm assuming I can find in the resources.
We suggest following the hyperlinks in the story too. And ask questions here or on the forum. And this is newer territory but exciting. You can add new knowledge here too.
Not really in the classic sense. The intelligence formed as a group is a new kind of intelligence. It is a new brain. A brain of brains. So in that sense yes. But it is made of humans with emotions, empathy, love, etc.
I will check out the site. I have a fundamental question - is there a moral basis to the structures created? The corruption is within each of us. Human flourishing has occurred when we had a common moral basis. The moral underpinnings have been knocked out. Throughout history this leads to the corruption and failure of societies & culture. Liberty, self-governance and decentralization are actually Biblically supported. Not sure we can get there without acknowledging our corrupt natures - but the effort is worth it.
Humans will always have a percent that wants to be corrupt. We have to account for this. A good system should be able to be run by your enemies and still cannot be corrupted.
Most humans want to do good.
The ultimatum experiments show this, and it is our experience as well.
If you haven’t heard of it, the ultimatum game is a psychological experiment in economics where two participants interact anonymously to split a sum of money. One participant proposes how to divide the sum between them, and the other participant can either accept or reject this proposal. If the second participant rejects, neither of them receives anything. This game tests theories of fairness, reciprocity, and economic decision-making.
The problem with running it is that most people opt to just say “let’s split it 50/50.”
These outcomes teach us that humans usually aim for fairness and reciprocity. Participants often reject unfair offers, even when it means receiving nothing themselves, indicating a preference for fair outcomes over personal greed. This suggests that concepts like fairness and cooperation play a significant role in human decision-making and social interactions.
In other words, most people want to built trust with others. They want to be part of a tribe or team or group that trusts each and has each others’ backs.
The problem is that a corrupt society pushes people to do bad things. If people look around and think the whole system is corrupted and the only way to survive is to also be corrupted, then they will go agaist their natural desire to be trustworthy and vulnerable with each other. This is called moloch, and then it becomes a race to the bottom. That’s where we are stuck right now as a society.
It does not have to be this way.
We can make a world with better systems where people who want to can build high trust relationships with other people. We don’t need anyone’s permission. We can build a place like this. Right now. A place with Think tanks. Idea labs. Collective intelligence centers. A place to debate, conjecture, listen, learn, and solve problems in large groups. And most importantly rebuild trust in both the systems we use, and each other.
We don’t have to live under these corrupted systems anymore. If we can make a new high trust place - transparent, decentralized, if we can build this place and these systems …. we can change everything.
#SwarmIntelligence #swarmimagination #collectiveintelligence #problemsolving
Yes. Ultimately the swarm itself can give itself a moral compass, but to join our system it will start with a base code of conduct. We are trying to build a high trust society. It isn’t for everyone. But once people see how much awesome stuff we can do with high trust problem solving groups, the value will be realized.
It's never been so clear to me that they're trying to break us..
This is where we start. By properly identifying the problem.
I will study the references more but I think any human systems that produce value are subject to corruption. Also, if this is analogous to a nation state with resources and economic value, do you not think the leaderless state will not also be attacked by a conventional state as has happened throughout history? Great idea and trying not to be a pessimist ( I am an optimist by default, actually to a fault) but as you point out trust is the key. Apologies if you are addressing this in your references I have not read yet.
You are 100% correct. There will always be people who want to game and corrupt the system. But that number is small compared to those who just want a fair system. As Naval Ravikant and Balaji Srinivasan have said, the test of a good system is give it to your enemies and see if they can corrupt it. If they cannot then it is a good system.
We must be testing our systems with red teams, constantly upgrading.
We need to be transparent and decentralized. Leaderless systems are very hard to attack. Look at Cortez and the Apache Indians. The Indians had no leader and Cortez could never beat them. Leaderless systems are hard to corrupt. Just like Bitcoin is hard to corrupt. Or how do you corrupt all the podcasts and independent journalists? CNN is easy to corrupt. So is a government with a leader. Or business with a leader.
There are many factors needed for this to work. But so far the results for running systems have been excellent, when certain criteria are met. Trust is one. Transparency. Results. And a good system.
Follow the hyperlinks and we are happy to answer questions here or on the forum!
Great list of resources on your swarm academy site. I must delve into these and understand what you're proposing better. It's intriguing and I'd like to read about some cases where this has worked, which I'm assuming I can find in the resources.
We suggest following the hyperlinks in the story too. And ask questions here or on the forum. And this is newer territory but exciting. You can add new knowledge here too.
Yes indeed. We have some examples of running systems with swarms as well. The wisdom of the crowd is real and testable.
so, this may seem like a stupid question, is the AI for artificial intelligence?
Not really in the classic sense. The intelligence formed as a group is a new kind of intelligence. It is a new brain. A brain of brains. So in that sense yes. But it is made of humans with emotions, empathy, love, etc.
I wouldn't call em maniacs.
It is the end product of "you can grow up and be anything" mentality.
Which has now transmogrified into "You can do anything you want and noone will stop you if use use a "you are nothing but an XXXist" reply.
We are hesitant. But also if you are willing to drone kids and make viruses more deadly in labs, then you are not the best for society.