2/ A deduction while ppl who voted for good law a credit. Gradually the irresponsible voters would lose market share. Think futarchy but with social currency instead of votes or money
-
-
-
Replying to @Alrenous
Money leads to inequality, and while I don't care about that, a handful of massive brokerage firms would emerge, and they might destroy the system and convert it to oligarchy. A system that converts itself into something else automatically isn't worth designing for its own sake
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AMK2934
It's going to convert itself into an oligarchy anyway.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @AMK2934
It would quickly be restricted to a small minority. Which would be the same minority you got if you just used money. Even assuming the prediction market can in fact measure the effects.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alrenous
The minority would be much larger in a system where everyone is given social currency. It's the difference between meritocracy vs entrenched oligarchy
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @Alrenous
The set of social currency holders would include all adult citizens while the set of investors would be a tiny fraction of society
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AMK2934
The currency holders would rapidly shed value until it matched the tiny fraction.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
If u want to say something else you can have the last word
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.