Each person alone is powerless, a fleshy mammal that would typically die from the elements. Networked together into factions, we devise ways to benefit “us” or defeat “them”. Social platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Tik-Tok have brought this human story to unprecedented scale, connecting billions. Whatever the platforms might have...
This is my first LessWrong post. I read Inadequate Equilibria by Eliezer Yudkowsky and was inspired to research and articulate additional solutions to get our civilization "un-stuck". I would love feedback from the community on the essay I've posted to www.prosocialcapitalism.com. I can re-post it here if preferable for guidelines,...
Thanks. Planetary scale collective action is the Big Goal. Right now, the dominant social platforms that form the public square are so far from that vision that I was trying to start with the question of “collective action in what direction”? For that, I wanted to make a moral argument without invoking religion or left/right bias. Anyhow, that was the goal. Thanks again. Minus 3 so far, so I guess I need to learn this forum better. Just trying to stand up to Moloch. Peace.
Each person alone is powerless, a fleshy mammal that would typically die from the elements. Networked together into factions, we devise ways to benefit “us” or defeat “them”.
Social platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Tik-Tok have brought this human story to unprecedented scale, connecting billions. Whatever the platforms might have done with this power, the chosen business model has been to monetize access to our minds. They sell the power to divide us into groups and to sell access to each group of “us” to the highest bidder, often pitting us against a chosen group of “them”. Dictators and demagogues have grown particularly adept at using these systems to bend our minds and... (read 1422 more words →)
Hi Giskard,
Yes to your "more utility" point. I am influenced by Robert Wright, who makes a compelling and direct case that communication and trust are what make positive-sum outcomes possible (Nonzero and here). And he points out that societies or organizations that generate those positive-sum effects will outcompete those that devolve in a race to the bottom.
Re your comment "Maybe the cooperating group is acting under a norm that is more complex than just 'always cooperate', that allows a state of Cooperate/Cooperate to become stable?", Yes, that's exactly it! Civilization is a multipolar game, as Scott Alexander points out in Meditations on Moloch and also in the article you cite ('...and the... (read 485 more words →)
Great, thanks gain
Thanks, Viliam
Thanks, Maxwell. That could be. I'm working toward a book, so I built a website around that very long essay. My goal posting here to LessWrong was to see if there really is an opportunity for "World Optimization" / a better equilibrium human condition growing out of those concepts. If the mods of the site think it worthwhile to repost in full (and to sanitize for anything promotional), I can. If not, that's fine too and I'm grateful for the opportunity. I will continue refining ideas toward improving our economy and society. Thanks!
Looks like I was supposed to post the full text here instead of a link, is that right? (I'm new to LessWrong). Thanks.
This is my first LessWrong post. I read Inadequate Equilibria by Eliezer Yudkowsky and was inspired to research and articulate additional solutions to get our civilization "un-stuck". I would love feedback from the community on the essay I've posted to www.prosocialcapitalism.com. I can re-post it here if preferable for guidelines, just let me know. Thank you!
Prosocial Capitalism: How positive sum networks will out-compete communism and antisocial capitalism, reshape the Internet, preserve liberty, and stave off dystopia
A huge concern I have is "longtermism".
https://aeon.co/essays/why-longtermism-is-the-worlds-most-dangerous-secular-credo
Someone could read what I've written and say "yes, fulfill humanity's potential". I don't think those are the same thing. Longtermism looks thousands or millions of years ahead, caring much less about the present day unless it resulted in total extinction or equivalent. As we'd say in finance, the "discount rate" matters (weighing present vs. future). I believe the metric should be measured (a) accounting for *changes* to state (so democracies falling to tyranny matters, curing tropical diseases matters, etc.) and (b) placing nearly all value on those currently living and their children and grand-children. On (b) we all want to leave a better world for... (read more)