Divine works


eng deu рус


Deliberative Network = P2P - (Decentralized) Science:

Our 1st thesis (hypothesis): The instability of democracy:

Our thesis (hypothesis) is that the model of the democratic system that currently exists in Europe and the United States is unstable.
- In conditions of a sharp increase in the effectiveness of mental and other manipulations - due to the use of IT - the traditional democratic system can degenerate into a controlled pseudo- "democracy".

Our 2nd thesis (hypothesis):

Managed pseudo- "democracy" is the main threat to the existence of mankind. We prove this in our other articles.
The clarification of this threat, the forecast and modeling of the development of society in the conditions of the total use of AI -psychic weapons is the 1st goal of the scientific organization we propose.

Our 3rd thesis:

Existing scientific institutions inefficiently analyze this threat and develop proposals for its prevention.

For example, how does social science work in Russia?
Its organizational structure is the same as in the "Western" countries.
However, the conditions under which it exists are different:
1. The saturation of the scientific environment with agents of political centralized special services.
2. Dependence of scientific structures on state
3. The centralized nature of scientific institutions, with the capture of all leading positions by agents of the same special services
4. Total brainwashing of academicians with the help of mental manipulations.
This is about the social sciences. - Precisely those that should provide "immunity" to a potentially literally deadly "disease" of society.

1. Pseudo-independent Attestation Commissions are fully managed.
2. Positions in research and other institutions are provided only to mercantile and duped (loyal) "scientists".
That is, even if the system failed and the scientist received a scientific degree, then this scientist will not be able to get a job with his degree. And this is at best. And at worst, he will be subjected to repression as a warning to other "scientists".

Yes, the social conditions in which social science exists in Russia are different from those in Western countries.
But this is a temporary phenomenon.
Existing scientific institutions are inefficiently analyzing this threat, and are developing proposals for its prevention - in Western states - today too.

Our 4th thesis:

The same IT allows you to create no less effective - decentralized ( P 2 P ) scientific organization.
At the same time, it is most realistic to create it not in the West, but in the same Russian-speaking society. – Because of the resistance of traditional scientific structures to competitive structures.

Distributed intelligence:

2 models:
1. "Russian". - 1 commander-generator of ideas and many performers in the hierarchy.
2. Decentralized. -
1 head "Mask" is good, but a billion is better.
Although the example "Mask" is unsuccessful. – Elon Musk also created a whole community of freelance engineering enthusiasts.
The problem here is "only" to create an IT environment for efficient decentralized collaboration.

Anarchist "Network":

P 2 P -organization is an anarchist organization.
That is, we propose to create an anarchist "Network" in Russia.

Seemingly uncontrolled by the US Congress, like Facebook , P2P networks are more dangerous to US security.
However, it is not. And the reason for this is their unpopularity.
Existing decentralized Social Networks like Fediverse are unpopular because they are harder to " monetize " and more difficult to distribute ads than centralized networks. Advertising is the engine of popularity.
But P 2 P networks will be almost ideal for finding solutions and solving social problems. - They will be elitist, but not in the sense of representing some kind of "aristocracy", but in the sense of narrow working groups.

Why in Russia?

In the 2nd world of controlled "democracies" the most developed science exists in 2 states - in China and in Russia.
However:
1. As long as the quality of life of the population is improving in China, mental and other manipulations are not the basis for the stability of the state system.
2. In China, there is a total penetration of the entire society - the Communist Party, but not the mafia, the secret services.
In Russia, state security agencies are the main threat to national (ethnic) security.

 

There is only one science - as an objective subject.
However, there can be many forms of scientific organization.

A necessary condition for the survival of mankind in the next 300 years is its cultural diversity.
Science is the main part of human culture.

Forms of scientific organization inherited from past centuries are dangerous for the survival of mankind.

Failure of Centralized Science:

Example: European Gas Crisis 2021:

The gas crisis in Europe in 2021 could have been predicted by a schoolboy with sufficient information.
behavior of the Putinists was completely rational and predictable. - Take advantage of the systemic dementia of European academic advisers, due to which contractual supplies of natural gas to Europe did not increase in anticipation of post- COVID growth, but, on the contrary, decreased, and reduce spot supplies - to blackmail Nord Stream 2 certification. And, then, make the classic "Good Cop" propaganda move - Putin should act as a benefactor of the Europeans. At the same time, the Putinists will not only increase political capital, but will also profit from the remaining high gas prices.

Example: Agro-technologies:

Agro-holdings are not profitable:
1. Develop micro agro -technologies focused on a decentralized organization.
2. Food security.
Agro-holdings benefit from unsustainable "global" supply chain schemes.
Micro o- agro -tech can be much more resilient to global disruptions that disrupt supply chains like Covid-19

Example: Covid -19:

US epidemiologists were engaged in Gain of function ostensibly to prevent epidemics.
However, they made fools of US senators in order to get money.
They paid 10% of the money they received to Chinese performers.
The structural imperfection of the organization of science in the USA is to blame for the death of over 10 million people.

Students strive to make a scientific "career" mainly with the aim of achieving personal property well-being, since a "career" in centralized scientific structures is ineffective for achieving scientific results.

Centralized scientific structures have historical reasons, but not scientific ones.
They are rather anti-scientific .

However, scientific structures are the most dangerous - in authoritarian states, since they are direct executors of dictators ' commands, for example, to develop biological and IT weapons.
If in the USA the death of 10 million people is a natural but unintended accident, but in post-authoritarian states the actual death of humanity will already be a deliberate goal, since personal "survival" for rulers is more important than the survival of people.

On the other hand, scientific structures in authoritarian states are inefficient - because of the same rigid hierarchical structure
So, the productivity of labor in hierarchical structures is inversely proportional to the level in them.
For example, academics in authoritarian states manage 99% of the budget allocated to science, create large salaries for themselves, but produce a negligible share of the new scientific product.
- 99% of a new scientific product is produced by young scientists.

Mainly financial decentralized

P 2 P - network:

Idea: Correspondence is open, Participants are anonymous, "Censorship from below".

 

There are numerous P 2 P networks.
Which one is better to use for development in particular CSS -projects - on the following principles:
Development materials are open, that is, they are visible to everyone.
At the same time it will be protection against illegal actions.
However, project participants are anonymous by default.
Network - P 2 P . That is, there is no "leader" who has lists of participants.
"Censorship from below" - means the use of Filters - for myself - I can exclude individual participants from communication, for example - provocateurs and trolls.
I can also use the Filters of other members and content.
These filters are designed not only for censorship, but also carry other numerous standardized information - about the interests of the participant or the tags of the material.

The Gift Economy:

There are also no leaders to prescribe what to do.
Any participant can offer a job. Any member can do it.
Difference from freelance exchange:
- The expediency of the work is discussed, the " terms of reference " are corrected, specified.
- No payment agreements. Instead, there are evaluations of other participants for donors.

Efficiency:

We are more interested not in searching for "Who is to blame?", and not even in discussing the recommendations "What to do?", but in obtaining practical results.
That is, we are interested in the usual scientific process - discussion > experiment > discussion.

 

Target change:

In 1990, I saw the goal of the "Deliberative Structure" as the self-organization of an alternative - folk social science - for an adequate study of social problems and ways to solve them.
Today I see the purpose of CSS ( Community Social Science ) - the survival of mankind.

 

7833