Divine works


eng deu рус


"Deliberative network":

The deliberative Network is a flat analytical structure for creating a Flat Democracy.
There are dozens of Think Tanks in the USA. But, unfortunately, everyone cannot adequately dealing with polity-technological threat, since they are dependent on Wall Street and are centralized.
It is necessary the civil analytical structure.

§ Why "amateurish expertise" ?:

Why create a civic (dilettante) analytical structure when there are dozens of Think Tanks in the US?
- Against the threat of psycho-oriented AI - "Brain centers" are useless.

US Think tanks do not warn Americans about the main and mortal threat to them – because:
1. Their sponsors and customers are potential beneficiaries and they will hope to survive;
2. With the new threat, Think Tanks became unnecessary for citizens - in the form in which they are now.

Of the 34 goals and tasks of the "National Security Commission on AI" US, no one are on National Security on AI.
- All 34 goals and tasks of the Commission "focus on maintaining U.S. global leadership in AI" and "AI's role in the future of war and competition".
Thus, the managers of the United States are concerned only with their power, but not with the safety of Americans - already today.
To compete with the Russian rulers under the conditions 2050, for rulers of the United States will be beneficial to use Russian methods too.

§ Example 2 – RAND:

It has hundreds of researchers and experts.
But asks questions and pays for research - mainly the Ministry of Defense.
And the questions and answers are obtained - enough inadequate.

Examples:
«President Donald Trump saying, "We are engaged in a new era of competition.” The United States struggles to internalize what this means in practice».
(from an article by Strategy and Doctrine Program, Project Air Force; Senior [commander?] Political Scientist
www.rand.org/blog/2018/04/political-warfare-is-back-with-a-vengeance.html)
- The USA has surpassed the leading articles of the USSR.

"Reducing the effectiveness of propaganda to suppress insurgents in Afghanistan"
- Is there a need for a Ministry of Defense, which only knows how to suppress and uses propaganda like the Kremlin?

"Improving level of C2 for Information Environment Operations"
- That is, in the 18th century, commanders commanded "One-Two" columns on the field, now they same as want to command trolls.

Researchers at RAND are concerned with careers, not American survival.
Money distorts science. - RAND will not give its customers the best recommendation - self-liquidate.
There is no pure professionalism in politic - the factor of interests is more weighty.

Think tanks have 1 drawback, but a very big one - they all work for governments.
"Non-Governmental" Think Tanks are dependent on government through legislation and tax policy.
All significant Think Tanks fulfill orders - from governments or corporations.
All Think Tanks have a hierarchical structure that allows them to be manipulated through their leadership.
Advertising Think Tanks as "NGOs" is propaganda.

And the leaders of governments, even in "democratic states", have their own interests, which do not coincide with the interests of the people.
- Even today, the mechanisms of democracy poorly convey the interests of people to think tanks through the rulers.
And with the advent of effective AI assistance, rulers will have a great temptation and opportunity to become more independent from the electorate.

Perhaps many American experts are behind the times - the laws of history are changing today. For example, there may be no 4th "Waves of Democratization and "transit" of Russia - in the 21st century and until the End.
Brain centers are indifferent to the main threat, so they are useless.
Many "NGOs" turn out to be "dummy ducks" that pulling over public activities, as in Russia.
- I wrote letters to >500 official e-mails. Nobody answered on the merits.

§ Deliberative democracy:

Further, it is optimal that the civil analytical structure to replace not so much RAND as parliamentary commissions.
- Chain - Voters> Delegates> Commission> Government> Ministry of Defense> RAND> Experts > Government> Laws - does not work. The devil is in the detail
In the 21st century, it is necessary and possible a more direct structure - People> Experts> People> Laws.

§ Equilibrium liberalism is true liberalism:
"The" liberal "social contract is a cheat"
"People who obey the laws must be their authors", (Rousseau)

Example of the Law: Prohibition of the use of psycho-oriented IT.

§ There are 2 sustainable paths:

1. Paternalism:
"All governance reliant on public opinion, mass perception, or citizen participation is at risk".
(www.rand.org/blog/2020/01/artificial-intelligence-and-the-manufacturing-of-reality.html)
- This is the Russian path to doom.
2. Absence of manipulators - managers of the government and corporations.

But closing RAND is not optimal, you just need not interfere with the creation of parallel structures.
- Let RAND help people protect themselves from external manipulators, if only it will not used by internal manipulators.
- US Think tanks are not yet propaganda organizations, and when people begin to understand the extent of the threat, experts from them will help make more accurate threat prediction and ways to reduce it.

§ Monopoly m in science e is the most dangerous :

The low efficiency of science is the reason for its monopolization, expressed in the obstacles associated with positions in its social organization.
Social liberalization should start with the sciences and the organization of science, which is also ineffective now .
- Opportunities to engage nau ary works oh must be equal and free .
Social ( about society) science should be social.

§ Flat financing of social sciences :

Funding should be carried out according to a 100% open scientific and objective rating system associated only with current projects and results .
Funding should not be rent, obtained for a title approved 10 years ago by people who received titles by the same private-estate subjective mechanism.
Accordingly, publication mechanisms, etc., should be decoupled from titles.
Social social science itself is critically important - today for increasing the political literacy of people and their resilience to propaganda.

On the Deliberative Network :
1. There are no hierarchical powers of "associate professor", "professor", but there are only complex numerical AI - automatic ratings, and
2. There are no binding contracts. Contracts breed scientific inefficiency and corruption.

§ " the AI -sovetniki " and "deliberative th set s ":

AI - advisors are distributed informational E- helpers.

§ Benefits of E- advisors:

+ The resistance of people to manipulation will increase, since ordinary people will be able to match the awareness of their bosses:
+ The need for bosses will decrease;
+ " E-Advisors " are the most important factor in " Economics and Gift ". -
Job satisfaction will increase , people will be able to professionally do almost any job.
See: The Economy of the Gift vs. the End of History.docx
One of the most important functions of "deliberative second set and" should be to prevent the use of the AI - Advisor s for propaganda.

§ Purpose I "deliberative network" :

§ 1 - Control of threats by interested citizens :

1. To accurate and prove for people the comparative degrees of different threats,
2. To accurate the comparative reliability of different ways to reduce the greatest threat.
Informing people is the most effective way to reduce the threat.

§ 2nd - Self-organization gr and Zhdan :

The libertarian "Deliberative Network" is needed to organize constructive opposition activists in Russia.
It is impossible to find constructive opposition activists via the Internet - in the usual way in Russia.
Among those living in Russia one can find those who write about politics - either propagandists, either extremists, who are kept as bait and scarecrow.
Perhaps the best way to create the "Deliberative Network" is with the help of Western activists?

§ Navalny answered the question - Who is to blame? -

Now we need to find the answer - What to do?
Navalny th folk th program and is not necessary, because he wants to be a remake of Putin ?
The optimal mechanism for folk generation of the People program have - "deliberative th set s " ?

§ The means of preventing manipulation of the first :

An organized collective mind is needed by the crowd as the most effective means of preventing its manipulation.

The idea of deliberative second set and is to combine analytical centers Civil society - directly, not through the Government .
Politicians make decisions, but they make them - Think Tanks.
Isolation of politicians from people and their ties to corporations is dangerous in the 21st century.

The idea of deliberative second set , and to unite the transparent formulation and decision-making - in a non-hierarchical process, which excludes political intermediaries.

§ Social engineering:

Social engineering is the science of possible sustainable societies, their design, modeling and creation.
There is still no social engineering. There is research and justification for spontaneously emerging societies.
However, Social Engineering is very important - today - for survival. -
Spontaneous societies can be unstable today in the sense of their degeneration due to stratification and the use of psychic AI.

§ 3 - Civil Scientific Order , Civil Science and Development:

See: Project Deliberative Network.docx

§ "Self-organization of the Deliberative Structure":

Very low efficiency of social services . sciences with their corrupt state. financing is natural.
However, the low efficiency of social . sciences - with private donations can only be explained by their bureaucratic hierarchical organization. -
An organization is needed where donors can decide for themselves how their donations are used .
The reason why such an organization has not yet appeared, I see only in the significant inertia of the vicious circle.
AI, however, provides a potential opportunity for each small donor to control the process of using his donations in a detailed and highly qualified horizontal manner .
And in the first place, such a system should work - for its own self-organization - for finding an effective but flat structure .
This was the point of my 3 mailings of the "Self-Organization of the Deliberative Structure" in 1990.
The reason for the failure of "Perestroika" and democracy in the 1990s - the lack of analytical self-organization of citizens ?

 

Who do you know - who might be interested in the question posed here?