Divine works


eng deu рус


Deliberative structure:

Project: Catalog people-views:

 

For effective decentralized voluntary cooperation, it is necessary:

1. Find like-minded people,

2. Know what principles a particular interlocutor adheres to.

 

You can start - with the use of existing questionnaires of socio-political views.

For example, you can use surveys by the Levada Center, - to offer people to leave their alias coordinates in the Catalog is, people-views.

For cooperation, it is not necessary to know the personal data of the interlocutor, it is enough to know the socio-political profile of a person and E - the coordinates that he provided for communication with himself.

 

Questionnaire example:

- Attitude to homeless people, LGBT people, HIV, drug addicts.

( www.levada.ru/2020/04/20/sotsialnaya-distantsiya-2/ )

 

Importance:

The main reason for the success of propaganda is the lack of structure of the people.

- Trolls easily neutralize the discussion of any simple matter with the help of provocation conflicts.

To unite, you must first disconnect.

Among the thousands of online forums there is not one where people could filter their interlocutors - from below.

 

Social network:

To some extent, this opportunity has social networks. However, a big drawback of social networks is the extremely unproductive search for like-minded people - through chains of friends.

- The search through the closest circles is fading - because there are a lot of social views, and friends in the closest circles have coincidences only in certain positions.

 

Site:

It is necessary to create a website with questions, for example, of the Levada Center , on which people could:

1. Answer these questions,

2. Invite participants with similar answers to friends.

 

Catalog of positions :

For effective cooperation also requires a catalog of all kinds of positions, principles of people.

The catalog of positions should be structured, hierarchical.

This directory should be formed freely, spontaneously, and not managed.

The process would be very helpful for AI.

 

Utilitarianism:

It is advisable not to first try to create a catalog of all kinds of positions, but to expand and improve the catalog in the process of use.

 

1783

 

Hybrid forum - Soveschat Yelnia Network - Project:

Idea:

This is a regular Internet Forum with the ability to rate posts.

Default - evaluations and participants hybrid forum and - open.

For this, participants receive information about other participants who have close "profiles" of ratings - potential like-minded people.

Opportunity also :

1. A filtering posts - Available e high scores adherents.

2. Filter out interlocutors - leave only like-minded people.

 

The disadvantage of this filtering is the " Echo- cameras" effect .

However, expanding the available horizon of the worldview, on the contrary, will reduce this effect.

 

The benefits far outweigh, however :

"+" Improving political education. -

Gos. trolls will not be able to make discussions destructive with the help of insults and manipulations.

"+" The atomization of society will sharply decrease .

"+" Users will be able to negotiate and plan joint th watered . d ce.

 

Independence from pro-power journalists:

People will be able to read and watch not what journalists impose on them, but that . h then associates selected.

People and will spend time searching for the right information it is they - not alone - the performance of their search will increase by orders of magnitude.

But it’s precisely the search that is the narrow link, the “last mile”, which allows you to hide from people important social information.

 

Man will not passive consumers of information they provide to the difficulty found them bloggers and active participant in the political process, as it will be known - all bloggers -edinomyshlenniki, ie attention to the "smart" bloggers will cease to be scarce, and they will be able to chat with each person .

 

Decentralization:

A hybrid forum can and should be P 2 P distributed, decentralized.

 

Search "Servants of the people":

The main difference between personal political defender of simple counsel is that "public servants" should not simply just used iratsya in the legislation, but also to be customer minded.

That is again the main bottleneck link, prevent the introduction of th of this very important institution of democracy is - search for the most difficult criteria.

 

The idea of hybrid forum and , therefore, is to turn "likes" into the personal search query.

 

Social networks lack :

- they are focused on people, not problems.

The search for like-minded people - along the chains of "friends" - fades in these chains.

Social networks are suitable for communicating with old friends, but not for searching for new ones .

 

" Discussion groups " - disadvantages:

1. Centralization:

The administration, for example, Facebook G roups can remove a member without warning and in violation of its own rules.

This excludes Facebook G roups from consideration, given their requirements to have only 1 account.

 

2. Inadequate , incomplete moderation "from below."

 

Although, formally, the proposed Hybrid Forum falls into the category of " Discussion group s ".

 

2453

 

People’s Council . Questions:

1. What type of consultation network do you propose ?

What is an advisory network and why is it needed

 

Option: P 2 P (decentralized) -Internet network in which participants can:

- Formulate questions,

- Offer parallel answers.

- Freely group, - choose your interlocutors - by exclusion.

- Attach to your answers - arguments and links to research and stat. data .

 

- Rank:

- questions

- wording of questions,

- Answers - according to different criteria.

- other participants - according to different criteria.

 

2. What is your strategy for creating an Advisory Network?

Option: "Chain Reaction". - Interested people send offers to their friends, who may also be interested.

 

Your suggestion ? :

 

What is an Advisory Network :

The advisory network (Network) is an Internet network similar to a social network, but with the goal of finding solutions to practical issues - primarily social ones.

 

Why Seth s :

1 aspect: The need to find solutions:

There are many solutions that are simply not known to those who are faced with one problem.

People can solve many issues themselves without overloading the authorities.

 

Existential threat:

The improvement of IT technologies for voter manipulation is accelerating.

There may be a complete loss of people's influence on the decisions on which their life depends.

People can simply become a burden, degrade rapidly, and, after a few hundred years, disappear as such.

 

2 aspect: The need for a new Internet service :

There are tons of Internet " Answer " - services in which people ask questions and then choose the best of them.

However, the most important issues are non-trivial and controversial, do not have a simple universally accepted solution, and require structured discussions.

 

Exist so the social network in which people express their positions and get to know like-minded people.

However, social networks are not focused on the development of optimal solutions with the participation of people with different opinions.

In addition , in existing - centralized social networks there is always a risk of account deletion by moderators.

 

There is Wikipedia in which people cite authoritative sources .

However, Wikipedia is focused on presenting the opinions of authorities, including on social issues, on informing them , and not on finding answers to such questions.

 

Other benefits that the Advisory Network would have :

+ Improving people's education on social issues, their lesser exposure to the influence of demagogy and populism.

 

What is more important - brevity, accessibility of the formulation of the need for the Network , or a strategy for its expansion?

 

On the first hand, we must not narrow the problem of the Network, but

With the 2 -th hand, it is necessary to formulate not abstractly, but to show the need for s web - to address specific problems.

 

2360

 

Planation:

2019  https://habr.com/en/post/459898/

POLITECON \ ECONOMY THEORY \ Planning Synopsis.docx

 

While not banned - I’ll ask:

Please name people interested in the following questions:

 

"Public property

For a large group of people to be able to manage, we need a common management information system in which they will be equal users, without privileges for some people. "

 

About liberalism:

The problem of the USSR is extreme protectionism, absolutely non-flexible technological chains, the imposition of the only intermediate suppliers.

The problem of "capitalism" is also protectionism, monopoly, but not extreme.

The problem of the USSR arose due to the prohibition of private property, instead of its liberalization.

The main problem is Intellectual "property".

"Economic liberalization" is a general concept, and not simplified access to all means of production.

 

The idea is not in planning at all, but in a greater participation in governance - from below, in more economic democratization, the development of the Sharing economy

(There are no adequate words in the Russian newspeak . There is no Russian section on the topic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharing_economy ) ,

Social peer-to-peer processes , Collaborative consumption , Co-creation , Co-determination , Direct purchase plans, Stock options, Paritarian Institutions.

These forms are possible with IT , and require IT . Complex forms of organization require coordination - "planning."

 

We need people who are interested in autonomous economic micro-communities, and have close value orientations.

 

The question is not simply the polarization of economic power, AI monopoly, but the non-survival of mankind as a result of this polarization, in the "Great Filter".

 

Justice is subjective, but

Hypothesis: The distribution of wealth by the market does not cause a sense of injustice.

The sense of injustice in people is caused by the actions of people.

Hypothesis: From Market Adjustment by the State, the net threat today. -

In the 1st place, the state creates the appearance of caring for people, but at the same time:

a . In the 2nd place it harms people, invisibly to people.

b . Creates its need.

 

 

 

Here on the Forum mixed "horses, people."

 

Deliberative Framework 1990:

The idea is to structure by value attitudes and positions.

Discussion of issues at the general Forum is inefficient, non-constructive.

It degenerates into a fight between antagonists and representatives of extreme parties.

It is controlled by trolls. - Trolls easily block "harmful" ideas, create an atmosphere of cynicism.

 

Forums are structured by topic, and structuring is needed by opinion.

 

Structuring according to views should proceed - from below, in the form of closed-open fractions:

Closed - with "censorship" - from below, in the absence of censorship from above.

Open - visible - to everyone.

 

 

The reason for the success of Habr :

"Professional" Forums do not work, "because the goal of their participants is not truth, but victory in a dispute.

Acceptable forms of self - assertion are governed by the dependence of "baboons" on social services. Wednesday.

On the Forums, this dependence is weakened by anonymity and a lack of social connections except dispute.

Habr " Self-regulation " - demotion for unacceptable insults - there is a reason for Habr's success

 

" Deliberative structure":

Tell me, please, where and who are discussing the relationship of organizational forms of discussion with its effectiveness, efficiency?

I interested in from 1990, when he made 3 mailing "self-organization " deliberative second structure s ' . "

Unfortunately, the " self-regulation " of Habr is not effective enough , because for most of its users:

- The high level of acceptability of insults, even in a latent form of sarcasm.

- Mental orientation to self-affirmation, not to finding solutions.