Distributed Autonomous Society

[Dire]

To further this discussion:

Within all modern democratic societies there are essentially three positions, left, right and liberal.

The problem is, as polarizing as these view points have been seen to be, none of them fit each political situation/society perfectly, and neither does the populace have a real say/influence in their views at the precise moment when it would be useful.

Let's be honest, in the onset of war the victors are often those with rightist view points. Take Winston Churchill for example. No one can really deny - with any morals - that a victory against the Nazis  was wrong. Would a liberal government/ideal have worked, doubtful.

Yet, the views of the left are peppered with ideals that individuals should be able to, essentially, do nothing and blame the state should they not be provided with everything they deem to be necessary for their everyday life. This is unfair to those that put forth more effort than others to bring more value and wealth to their lives. Socialism and Communism doesn't work, yet there are precepts that are valuable within each.

Liberalism has its place, but only as a balance between the left and the right, yet polarization enlivens the populace which is why in all democracies it can be seen those parties that represent the liberals win far less of the time.

There is another demographic that is almost never represented or spoken of, that of the 'neutral'. Those that do not disagree with the left, right or the liberals but 'opt out' due to unfavorable choices. These people actually represent an intelligent demographic that present day governments marginalize and ignore due to their own convenience.

Imagine this, the left at one point, then their opposite the right. In the middle of that line you can place the liberals. Now stretch that point out and you end up with a triangle. Yet, this triangle does not take into account the 'neutral'. So, add another point, Now we have a square.

Life and situations do not fit any one of these points of view. Life and situations are ever changing. There's no point to try and put a square 'rightist' peg in a 'leftist' situation hole. Flexibility is key. The right, left, liberal and neutral all have their place in various decisions. To try and have a government that represents just one for four years without the people's input, is patently ridiculous.

The true structure is a pyramid. With the four different general view points at the base with the median as the fifth point of the pyramid at the top, a point which takes into account the four base points through voting. Not once every four years, but as often as decisions become necessary for a country to vote upon.

With viable education as to the ramifications of decisions, the countries' destiny/path becomes part and parcel of the tax paying/owners of the country that reside within it.

Therefore, this finally, equals democracy. The structures of bureaucracy then simply become the mechanisms that carry out the will of the people, as they always should have been, but yet currently are not. 

[1714905769]

1714905769

[1714905769]

1714905769

[1714905769]

1714905769

[2112]

The idea of 'cannot' create a fascist dictatorship if the people of a given country can express their vote and have that vote recorded and not subverted. Does that mean that every person's vote will be an educated vote? No, not necessarily, but that is were education and discourse come in to play.

I'm sorry I don't have time to write a longer expose.

Any voting method that doesn't explicitly preserve privacy of the individual vote and doesn't preserve the requirement that the vote is cast publicly while observers can look will be subverted by forcing voters to cast the votes against their will and conscience.

Fascists (and ultra-nationalists) were already doing this in Europe's history.

Even currently underground white-power/neo-Nazi groups are privately running campaigns to force susceptible voters to use absentee ballots to vote for them. Their ideal voting setup will involve voting with something similar to the TV decryption card, where each voter will be doing the voting publicly in the pubs/bars frequented by their peers or the device will be simply left at the party headquarters where the appropriate functionaries will cast the votes along the party line.

I found it very worrisome that the current public's love affair with electronic gadgets make them completely forget the lessons from the past:

1) voting has to be done in public where anyone can see that the voter isn't forced
2) voting has to be secret in the sense that the observers cannot tell each individual's vote, only the aggregate statistic.

If you really don't understand the above, you are either:

1) in collusion with some vote-rigging organization
2) an idiot in the original Greek meaning of that word: person who isn't concerned with public affairs, only the private ones.

Regretfully the love of gadgetry runs very deeply in some Bitcoiners, here's the thread from 2013 that similarly proposed Trezor to be used in easily rigged voting.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=138174.0

[Seldoon182]

So I started to dig deeper on this subject and I discovered that it exist two kind of school:

- The first one is the classical systems of governance. I call it DAG (Distributed Autonomous Government). The objectif of DAGs is to mimic our current system without intermediaries and with more efficiently through different kind of Apps such as Decentralized Currency, Smart Contracts, Electronic Voting and so on.

- The second is about to build the society from scratch with those new technology. I call it Distributed Autonomous Society. DAS's foundation come from Decentralized Communication in order to talk, write, intercommunicate (confidentially through encryption). Decentralized Collaboration to share ideas, works, patents, designs, datas and such... Decentralized Creation to manifest goods and services. Decentralized Exchange to barter goods, services, and resources  and Decentralized Arbitration to resolve conflicts. If you want to go further you can read this one.

So the first thing when questioning our systems is which school are you in?

I think it's interesting to brainstorm big when talking about DAG/DAS. But if I would do it, my strategy would be: go small and lean as developing a website or an app. Thinking about Google. They started with search, then they moved to the mail service, the cloud, OS and now they manufacture their own device, car and healthcare. There is so much "Plugins" that need to be develop (we know we have the choice for backends/protocols) such as Electronic voting without rigged vote and taking care about UX/UI. That's gonna be thug we have no idea. And there's several "Plugins" to develop:
- Smart Contract for notarization
- Proof of existence
- Crypto Passport for digital identity
- Securities
- Loyalty points
- Prediction markets
- Crowdfunding
- Agents for distributed autonomous transportation
- Pay as you go services with pre-paid minutes
- Energy credits
- Wallet for cryptocurrencies
- Votes
- Messaging/Instant tchat

I would start building a very lightweight browser as an open-source project. Browsing Internet through HTTP(S) and IPFS (watch demo) would be the main feature. Surfing the web without any censorship and offline (thanks to P2P). We would be able to access any musics, movies, books for free (when the Wallet App plugin available thinking about a pay system for artist a la Darkleaks would be interesting/Crowdfunding). Then I would start to implant the first "plugin" (obviously the chat system, then will come the wallet). If enthusiasms start to join, the project might become more than a mere browser instead I would make it an Operating system (thinking about Chromium/Chromium OS).

Unfortunately I'm not a stiff developper as I only do design (my skills goes a little bit beyond) so I can't start this project alone (best would be to join an existing group). Also publishing a whitepaper as PoC to write black on white ideas would be definitely neat.

Made a concept for browsing the content hashed in the Bitcoin blockchain a while ago.

[jdbtracker]

We are Anonymous: Names do not define us, Actions do.

Titles and names are useful tools that represent the truth of who we are, but they do not define us, words define themselves.

The Blockchain changes everything. Who we choose to be is not defined by our physical selves, but by our thoughts, these flow much freer in cyberspace.  Each Personae we create has a value that we associate with a name, even when we know the physical person that manifests a personae we are never sure if that is the only one.

Cryptography allows us to be free to associate ourselves through the internet and leave no doubt for others on who the personae you know is.

Where we are headed we will not need names or faces.

People will not know the totality of ourselves, but they will know what we are worth by the multiple facets of our Personae.

we create value through the networks of people, organisations, groups and projects that we associate with, having a value that cannot be threatened or forced, we will simply scatter and vanish to reform and adapt, providing the same benefits as before to new endeavors. This is Truth.

we live in a society that is obsessed with control, facilitated by the names and characteristics that we associate with.This is done to control us, to define a mold for us to fit. A mold defined by our leaders, governments, alliances, race, religion, all definitions of our individual value to any controlling entity that wishes to unite us for it's own motives. Our hands are not ours, they are our nations; our minds are not our own, they are the corporations; That which we are associated with, we are their slaves.

The world is changing, we know better now than to be manipulated by well chosen words or false information... we can see for ourselves now that the world has become so small and the differences among us dwindling at the speed of light as to allow us true free will.

[jackdowson]

I found this a while ago, it seems to be something along these lines:
http://enforcementnetwork.wordpress.com

[Seldoon182]

I found this a while ago, it seems to be something along these lines:
http://enforcementnetwork.wordpress.com

Hey there ! Thanks for sharing this. Gonna check it out.

Here's another interesting WP about decentralized governance: http://boardroom.to/BoardRoom_WhitePaper.pdf

[catch.me.if.you.can]

I don't like the term "Distributed Autonomous Government" because a dictatorship is also a government. I like the term "Distributed Autonomous Democracy".

[Seldoon182]

I don't like the term "Distributed Autonomous Government" because a dictatorship is also a government. I like the term "Distributed Autonomous Democracy".

I agree DAG doesn't sounds right. But DAD doesn't sounds right to as the Democracy isn't the only interesting form of governance. Holacracy or Heterarchy are too. that's why Distributed Autonomous Society is the best imho.

[miguelmorales85]

There is also this kind of citizenship on blockchain which might be interesting: http://www.blockchainme.com/

Hi, can you confirm this was an scam???
Seems those guys dissapeared

[CryptoRobert]

I am.

Thing is, I believe it's a totally new thing that doesn't really have legs yet. But if the truth be told, I personally think it's the only reasonable way forward for the developed world. Other countries will follow, but much later. I write science fiction so to me it seems perfectly reasonable.

Democracy actually doesn't exist in the sense it was supposed to. We realistically have a choice of just three parties that no matter in the U.S, U.K or western Europe represent the left, right or liberal, these parties pander to the large corporations and must make decisions that are for their benefit after they get into office. These large corporations aren't stupid, they bankroll all of the top three, which is why our nations end up at the wrong end of wars and corps.

the top three then (due to propaganda) are seen as the only viable choices and so therefore receive the lions share of the votes.

I don't think that's great but I also don't see it as the end of the world. Western nations still have a multitude of human rights laws in place that make our lives vastly better than many people living under dictatorships. If you don't believe that's the case, try living in those countries. You'll soon change your mind.

But...

Let's be honest. We don't have any choices after they are elected into office. They do what they want for three years and six months and then suddenly, they are all super nice and useful in the lead up to the election... and we all get collective amnesia about all the crap they did before.

Twenty plus years ago there was no alternative, now, there is. There is no reason why every country's citizen can't have an app or visit a website that gives them a choice as to which areas their tax dollars go to (connected to their ID/NI number/passport), or which major decisions are made with a click of a button. The block chain makes this entirely possible, Counterparty already has this voting system in place with tokens.

There is an arrogance to politics that says the populace are too stupid to make decisions for their own country, but the education level of most developed nations actually speaks of a different reality. We know what we want, it's just no one listens to us.

DAG is not only fair, it is perhaps the only 'truly' democratic decision/development that should be the next step forward for humanity as a whole.

Let's be realistic, we don't want our countries to fall flat on their faces, so we are not going to stop taxation any time soon, but it is our right to decide where our money goes, and national policy.

Do we really need politicians who do not recognize our wishes nor follow through on them?

  

I am a science fiction authos too. I agree with you. HOWEVER, beware of utopias becoming true, as they may turn out being distopias instead. A 100% democratic society would be ruled by very average people - IQ 100, by definition - but all together they could actually act as little children, as the crowd tends to think and act like that (see Gusave Le Bon's book), ie completely unaware of the consequences of their acts.