Re: [projectvrm] Charles Stross's "different cluetrain" (Are we not thinking big enough?)

[Dan Miller < >]

Harking back to Judi's post:

Anyone here know Charles Stross? (I don't, and until now hadn't read his science fiction). We should engage with him and ask him what he means. We need to break out of our closed system which is sometimes an echo chamber and always a source of observations and critiques that refine our high concepts and share them with other communities of interest.

On a separate thread (Twitter stream actually), I've been engaged in an ongoing discussion of whether "artificial intelligence" advances are going to lead to killer robots, or are we going to be able to harness computer and data processing in ways that keep it "assistive". It's gotten to be fun lately because the likes of Elon Musk, Marc Andreessen and Steven Hawking are on the threat side and Jeff Hawkins (he who launched PalmOS, Handspring and my favorite cellphone to this day... the Treo) is on the other side... promoting open source access to resources that mimic the cerebral cortex.

To make a point, one of my friends who is an avid Sci-Fi reader tweeted: "@gideonro @dnm54 @JeffCHawkins @Numenta Overruled: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus:… What writers can imagine, reality can create."

Sort of the opposite of "Truth is stranger than fiction"... But all the same.

Dan

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:00 AM, Devon M T Loffreto < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Johannes... good message.

Kevin... all you say is true imo... but it is not our root structural concern any longer. Our root concern, for those that even pay attention to the clues... is the lack of recognition in how our root concern defines the parameters of participation in any/every data-driven system.

We are here, on this list, seeking to converse around words that serve as markers pointing towards the structure of Human intent. 'Sovereignty' is such a word. Is Human intent aimed at the personal or institutional structure of Sovereignty as the priority? 'Customer' is such a word. Same question... added with, why would you ever seek to be a 'customer' if all the interaction values can be re-construed with a personal origin of leverage? And why call yourself a 'customer' then, when you drive the interaction?

We, people... feed the beast with our complicit and often passive support.

Before money has a chance to amplify the asset:debt:credit structure of Society... an inauguration must take place. People must willingly be transmuted from personal Human assets into systemic debt leverage... and this happens not because an artifact called an 'identity' or 'money' exists... but because of the manner in which you + you + I allow it to be originated.

The flow of leverage is the dream of vrm.

The flow of leverage is the dream of institutional tyranny.

This is not, and may never be a conversation... certainly history suggests that the nexus of this reality is not one that is open for much debate... it is the point at which the kind of Society you are part of is defined, and it is the point at which decisions manufacture bravery and cowardice at a scale that is at once personal and 'We the People' in nature.

Tools, yes... lets build them.

Outcomes... prioritize as you must... and remain open to the possibility that an idea can be defeated simply by speaking the wrong words which lead to solving the wrong problems.

Devon 

 

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 3:11 AM, Kevin Cox < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Johannes,

The use of cluetrain was no accident or marketing spin. 

Stross understands that individual sovereignty is applicable to most (all) of our interactions with others in society. He is saying there are clues that tell us about the problems in those interactions.  Student debt, the politics of the IMF, unnecessary wars, the unpredictable behaviour of stock markets and currency markets, the rising inequality of wealth.  These are clues that something is wrong with our interactions.

A big area is the Money System.

Money is a form of credit and credit is something that individuals create. Most of the world's population has lost control over their credit and over their share of the social and physical capital built up by previous generations.  It has been stolen from them.  Today we have the technology to let individuals assert their rights to their own credit and to their share of accumulated wealth.  We do not have to be slaves to debt.  We can move to an output driven society where money represents our future and past contributions and we can take control of it - not some middle man who charges us for our own credit and for the use of our own past contributions.  (PS. the clue is that estimates of the cost of the finance system are of the order of 40% of total output - don't believe it then add up the Capital Value of Banks, Insurance Companies, Tax advisors and others whose main contribution is moving money).

We are currently living in a world of pseudo capitalism that could be called Monetary Capitalism.  True Capitalism is about individual sovereignty over the fruits of our own labour and our own possessions and our share of our societies Social and Physical Capital.  Monetary Capitalism is moving money tokens in different forms of casinos called markets where the games are rigged in favour of the controllers of money tokens - not in favour of the producers of value.

VRM systems that put individuals on an equal footing to organisations will move Society to one where everyone is a Capitalist and can participate and share in the value they create.

Kevin

 

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Johannes Ernst < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

I was puzzled about “A different cluetrain”, by sci-fi author Charles Stross. People on this list seemed puzzled, too.

He uses “cluetrain” in the title, and then talks about something else. Politics. Capitalism. International relations. Student loans. Not a word about customers or marketing and the topics that the Cluetrain Manifesto is about.

I’m an avid reader of his novels and can attest that he’s a smart and informed guy, and has been plugged into tech for a long time. This is no accident. I think he’s trying to tell us something. It occurred to me:

What if he isn’t talking about something else? What if what he’s writing about is actually the same subject as the subject of the Cluetrain Manifesto — except that we haven’t realized or acknowledged it, perhaps because that would make the subject so much bigger and much scarier?

For example, is it possible that VRM the way we discuss it is not actually viable today in a large scale given, say, the regulatory capture architecture that capitalism has morphed into? Or …?

What if we think the trillion-dollar problem we keep discussing is merely the foot of the elephant, which cannot be stopped from trampling the world until we acknowledge there’s a whole elephant attached to that foot, and come up with a plan to redirect the entire elephant?

Certainly it’s beginning to look like that to me.

In thoughts,



Johannes.