We’ve already invented technologies that do that. The “market” is really “the people” in a selfish state policing “the people” in selfless state and vice versa. The tech we use to divide and rule ourselves there is money. It creates many problems but it sorta works.
-
Show this thread
-
Media distancing technology should be seen in this light. And do it without violating parts of democracy that work. One key idea is
@noUpside principle that free speech/expression is not free reach. Reach should cost you.1 reply 1 retweet 10 likesShow this thread -
Yes there are algorithmic ways to slow/arrest media contagion but that creates “Straussian platforms”. It just moves the problems with human Straussianism into algorithms. Algorithmic noble lies. Back to square one. Let’s... not do that?
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
But free speech + paid reach. Now we’re talking. Democracy 2.0 as freemium democracy. One vote, one voice, whatever dollars you earn. You want to infect others with your thoughts? They have to either trust you personally (opt-in audiences) or you pay to reach them.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
But not paid reach like the advertising market. Not paid reach as in Putin buying voices to mash like/RT buttons at wholesale prices. No. Paid reach as in: each of us verified humans has to pay out of pocket to like/RT/share. WoM is no longer free.
4 replies 1 retweet 9 likesShow this thread -
I think this will do it. It’s also a mechanism that’s understandable and governable by tech-illiterate politicians assisted by bureaucrats. Moving “reach prices” around is like setting interest rates. So simple even economists could run it. Policy goal: no mobs.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
That’s it. Not super complex. May not even need constitutional amendments. Does not affect first amendment since we’re not touching speech, only reach. Can include traditional media too somehow. Talk radio, TV, newspapers. They are slaves to RTs and likes too now anyway
4 replies 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
Hmm. Wild idea. You could connect money and reach. Make likes and RTs (“proof of distance”) the *basis* for currency itself somehow. Abuse leads to inflation and makes prices go up. A blockchain based on quality of public life. Both too much and too little talk are costly.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
Second wild idea. Mobs are actually institutional black holes. If you take Coasean transaction costs theory of the firm, what happens when you lower transaction costs inside a higher-cost boundary? You get an organization. Pay more to get in, pay less to transact once you’re in.
3 replies 1 retweet 9 likesShow this thread -
What happens when you lower the cost of both to near zero? You get a social black hole. A degenerate institution that can produce nothing, but can eat everything in sight.
3 replies 1 retweet 7 likesShow this thread
For those new to these debates and conversations, read @noUpside series The Feed to get up to speed. Then follow her writing on Wired and elsewhere for the play by play evolution.https://www.ribbonfarm.com/series/the-feed/ …
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.