Re: [projectvrm] Banking and the Micropayment

[Guy Higgins < >]

Tom,

Thanks.  I’m sure that there are people who disagree and at least some of them will have ideas to improve my thoughts.  The important  thing, I think, is to figure out ways to keep power from concentrating on any long-term basis.  

Guy

From: Tom Crowl < "> >
Date: Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 17:19
To: Guy Higgins < "> >
Cc: Jason Wong < "> >, Douglas Rushkoff < "> >, Micah Sifry < "> >, David Brin < "> >, "Victoria Silchenko, PhD" < "> >, ProjectVRM list < "> >, Andy Oram < "> >, Joe Trippi < "> >, John Battelle < "> >, Michel Bauwens < "> >, Brennan Center for Justice < "> >
Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Banking and the Micropayment

Thank you guy! We need more concrete thought re practical solutions. Though I'm not so sure all would agree with your proposals... its necessary that we begin to think outside the boxes we're stuck in.

Tom Crowl

http://CulturalEngineer.blogspot.com

On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Guy Higgins < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

+1

This is why I think that we don’t need simple term limits, but rather something like:

• No one can run for an office until they have completely (as in 100%) supported themselves in the private sector for a period no shorter than the term of office for which they are running
• No one may serve in any elected (and perhaps appointed) office for any term longer than they have already supported themselves in the private sector
• After completion of a term in elected office, every official must support themselves completely in the private sector (which means no think tanks, no consultancy, no reliance on “laundering" of government money through some official entity)

I want people in office who are dedicated to good governance – not to “helping” people.  Almost every person can solve their own problems better than they can be solved by some legislator or regulator from 1000 miles away.  

Folks in office should have to worry about living under the laws they passed and the repercussions of those laws, particularly those laws governing personal sovereignty and privacy.

Jes’ my thinkin’

Guy

From: Tom Crowl < " target="_blank"> >
Date: Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 16:59
To: Jason Wong < " target="_blank"> >
Cc: Douglas Rushkoff < " target="_blank"> >, Micah Sifry < " target="_blank"> >, David Brin < " target="_blank"> >, "Victoria Silchenko, PhD" < " target="_blank"> >, ProjectVRM list < " target="_blank"> >, Andy Oram < " target="_blank"> >, Joe Trippi < " target="_blank"> >, John Battelle < " target="_blank"> >, Michel Bauwens < " target="_blank"> >, Brennan Center for Justice < " target="_blank"> >
Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Banking and the Micropayment

By "Altruism Dilemma" I'm referring to the unavoidable gap between biological altruism and intellectual altruism and how that will bias decision makers when in consideration of various alternatives for approach to a problem. (this isn't an argument against intellectual altruism.. we need all we can get.)

A simple way of looking at it is this:

You or most anyone will (I assert) have a stronger physical reaction to the death of a loved one (even a pet)... than the death of a hundred people you don't know. There's nothing 'evil' about this... in fact that gap is necessary for survival... (i.e. we'd be paralyzed by grief every time we watched the news.)

However this "gap" leads to problems In governance. This makes it easier (for instance) to favor personal advantage over the welfare of a constituency. Simple examples... regulatory capture... or the passivity regarding the obvious injustice of how drug laws have been enforced. Combined with rationalizations driven by their cognitive dissonance we have politicians of all Parties and stripes who actually believe that they are not affected by big money contributors while destroying the Middle Class, indenturing future generations all along enriching themselves and their contributors. (hence ideologies often become hooks for rationalization... e.g. "trickle down economics for which there is absolutely NO evidentiary support.

I briefly attempt to define it here:

Self Interest vs Altruism: Problems in Scaling the Decision Process
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2009/02/self-interest-vs-altruism-problems-in.html

Issues in Scaling Civilization: The Altruism Dilemma

http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2012/02/issues-in-scaling-civilization-altruism.html

While he doesn't address the Altruism Dilemma directly... if you happen to get Netflix I highly recommend "Requiem For the American Dream" featuring Noam Chomsky... (and frequently quoting Adam Smith in support). Particularly note his comment about the danger of this pattern of narrowly focused decision making going global.

Finally, recognizing the dilemma doesn't fix it (and in fact it can never be entirely 'fixed)... but rather hopefully will prompt construction of concrete structures to address it... i.e. meaningful mechanisms for providing 'heat-from-the-bottom and reforms of credit/currency creation along with severe restructuring of what we oxymoronically call "the financial services sector"

If what I'm saying doesn't make sense or needs clarification... I welcome critique. I'm really struggling to find my way in this area. I'm a presumptuous amateur.  But I think there's something in what I'm trying to think through

Thoughts on the Biosocial Roots of Oligarchy

http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2014/10/thoughts-on-biosocial-roots-of-oligarchy.html

If I'm wrong... I nevertheless must try to see a way to clarity. The current governing "groupthink" is on the wrong path globally.

Tom Crowl

http://CulturalEngineer.blogspot.com

On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Jason Wong < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Altruism dilemma?  Similar to tit for tat?

I thought Satoshi solved this issue more than seven years ago. Do you have another system in mind?

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016, Tom Crowl < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Below my suggestion for topic at PDF 2016.

I persist in suggesting that the micropayment and especially its requirements is not receiving the attention it deserves.

Topic:

That there's a long standing connection between credit/currency creation, banking and political power which in combination with scale and its relation to what I call the altruism dilemma leads to wealth/power concentration. Further, that the needs of the collective micropayment (scale and one-click identification) offer a pathway made possible by the nature of the Internet to create a cross border, user-owned network with both identification and payment capabilities separate and independent from privatized banking. I believe this is a needed fundamental change in human organization... important beyond the U.S.

This network may form the root for other forms of credit/currency creation... both localized and otherwise.

The "button" (or whatever signaling method) for such a capability... because of curation requirements if for no other reason... is to a considerable degree a POLITICAL mechanism and deserves consideration.

Tom Crowl

http://CulturalEngineer.blogspot.com