Category Archives: specialization

The cult test

cups3

In a previous civgene, I presented a series of axioms that led to the cult test.   Most societies operate at least partly on faith.  Stating assumed truths that individuals can not plausibly test with vigor.  The cult test presents three conditions that if a fundamentalist religious or political faith infringes on outsiders freedom, it has slipped into cult.

The cult test is as follows. If any condition is met, it’s a cult.
1. Denial of exit.
2. Aggression toward outsider speech.
3. Refusal to commit to peace with outsiders.

Freedom is a core human behavior (differs from animals) because it’s how humans allow each other space to make the most of their emotional metadata, usually forming faiths.  A faith being knowing something you can’t prove.  An emotional output from the metamind (the conscience/subconscious), a passively driven risk engine connecting unlike things based on emotional similarity.  A probability engine.  Effectively rationalizing a faith can take a second or longer than lifetime.  Hence the utility for an indeterminate time to make your own decisions, better known as freedom.

Faith alone is not the goal but the means to achieve the goal of all life, autonomy.  Cult occurs when faith becomes an end not the means. Everyone’s set of faiths must inherently be different (aside from biological differences) because the metadata connected to their memories and their experiences are different.  As experiences deviate so will faiths.  Denying this process for an individual is detrimental to the common benefit of human society.

Some faiths will occur in common so expression and organization of common ideas is beneficial.  Rationalization can be rigorous so invention, specialization, and currency operate like in other economies.  But also like other economies stagnation can occur if psychopathic or animal kingdom work-a-likes are substituted for effective intelligence, and progress stagnates.  Damaging and even completely crushing autonomy.

All three conditions of the cult test are designed to protect the natural functionality of the empathic mind without interfering in opportunities of economies of scale (rapid rationalization.)  Just like all logical constructs, logical constructs about natural forming but yet unproven probabilities can have advantages for all people.  The conditions of the cult test together form to protect the fundamental human right, the right to fork.  The right of human beings to pursue their biological advantage of rapid risk assessment without human created hierarchical blockage.  Faith is what gives human beings their complete intelligence, and also is what is cited by those who try to dismember that intelligence for personal gain though hierarchy.

The key to retaining our freedom is the ability to distance yourself from destructive hierarchies while embracing constructive ones.  The cult test ensures that right by disallowing the combination of pure faith as a potentially manipulated or even completely fabricated external process, from the ability to enforce your adherence to an external faith structure.  The cult test protects the rapid rationalizer seeking community from slavery, by separating physical and mental force from faith and it’s beneficial ideas.

I present these additional axioms to permanently disconnect the relationship of force and faith.

  • Faith is subconscious realization (emotional metadata).
  • Reason is rational thought combined with faith.
  • Faith can occur without reason.
  • Force is only moral in the face of clear and present danger.
  • Determining clear danger can include faith.
  • Determining present danger must include literal observation and therefore rational thought.
  • Clear and present danger can be determined either by reason or rational thought alone.
  • Force justified by faith alone is a farce.

 

Open source and the complexity horizon

event-horizons

Open source really embodies three changes from typical hierarchical human social systems.  Gift culture, the right to fork, and perpetually increasing levels of complexity.  But these pieces are not all new, what changed to make open source happen?  What problem is it actually solving?

Gift culture is not new.  It is as old as currency.  Currency predated coinage as barter and skills and tasks.  So why did open source happen if not for gift culture?  What did change?  GPL.  A new kind of copyright license establishing the right to fork.   That’s how Linux, the trial of a hard right to fork based in law, succeeded.

The right to fork is not new.  Clearly established by the Christian reformation, and enabled by Gutenberg, the right to fork, until the 1980s was only established against ultimate authorities by war.  Civil rights in the freest countries acknowledged it and derived their rights from it, but did not explicitly establish as a basic rule of engagement and existence.  In politics threats of an ultimate fork were often sufficient to deter one.

What is new?  Complexity at modern levels is completely new.  Where is the complexity?  Not in tasks or problems to solve.  They are still simple to explain.  In communication.  In language.  What does language indicate?  Respect for stature and respect for others time.  Not always based in the currencies of accomplishment and skill, but as a product of many parallel societies.   A focus on the importance of social structure undermines ideas, there for innovation, and ultimately investment.   The social structure becomes impassible and no problems or tasks are solved.

Repairing social structure becomes a second level trap.  Meetings are held.  Seminars attended.  No, a fork is needed.   The problem needs to be solved in order to be assigned sufficient language to solve it.  The language to solve the problems have no parallel and therefore no linguistic identifiers for needed concepts.  The industry tries to solve this by pumping out new names and acronyms, but they are often the property of someone and useless for general progress.  This is a distraction.   Undeveloped ideas are slowed by the work needed to name them.  In the computerized, Internet connected world, the source code is language of progress.

The complexity horizon is reached when the task is so complex that less efficient top down problem solving can no longer function.  No amount of time spent can solve the problem from the top.  ‘Leader’ understanding doesn’t scale language fast enough.  The client can solve the problem better if administration doesn’t block him.  No right to fork means the client no longer invests.  Trust (predictability of future trends) is lost because their personal experience is impassible.  Future investment is diminished.

The perception that the ability to understand a problem and articulate it are always equal is a lie.  Therefore the complexity horizon occurs when comprehension of tasks outrun articulation of it.  False cooperation becomes apparent (bogus reciprocity) and destroys trust.  How can understanding outrun articulation?  The subconscious must participate in solving the toughest problems.  That is imagination.  Rationalization of conceptualization is being outstripped.  The metamind is doing the work but the rational mind and the mouth can’t keep up.  If a fork can be had, the solution can employ more minds at the task of articulation.  If it can’t the relationship between solver and the client grinds on failing to economize and destroying the trust needed for investment from both.

This would have been impossible to decipher without first exploring Civgene’s explanation of the metamind and it’s subconscious roles.  Based in fundamental behavioral contrasts between humanity and the animal kingdom, and the implications for economics.  Please explore those ideas at your leisure.

To help grasp this here are some practical applications of open source and roughly when their complexity horizons were reached.  Note that the open source alternatives begin to gain momentum at the complexity horizon but are not accepted as inevitable until some time later.

Linux: 1993-1995

The original, complete, experiment.  Operating systems are a software layer between varying hardware and the programs people are really trying to run.  Commercial operating systems were plagued with bugs and suffered from declining stability.  The cause was the non linear growth in variety of hardware a computer could be built with.  Communicating in code eliminated grafted societies and their cumbersome verbal language.

Bitcoin: 2008-2010

Currency looses it’s value to a client as quality of transactions become less visible.  The increasing non linear complexity of derivatives makes understanding any market impossible, ultimately damaging trade.  By solving they Byzantine generals problem the complexity of language is eliminated.  A small collaboration of solvers can write code to track and transfer currency for clients at a global scale in a transparent way.

Devops: 2013-2016

Internet applications are a way to handle reliability and scalability problems.  The non linear expansion of global cyberwarfare, and the non linear expansion of the internet of things (ultimately internet connected computers in all equipment) requires management of operating system functions at the network level or a systemic scale.  This seems to be the first multi-factor complexity horizon.  Devops holds another distinction as well.  It is a new system.  Not drawing on errors from past attempts to breach the horizon.

3d printers:  Soon, perhaps some breaches now.

An epic confluence of complicating factors defy description and add complexity for manufacturing in on demand customization, trade, natural resources, security, and in the race to the atomic scale.   3d printers are likely the first multi-factor complexity horizon with more than two vectors of complexity.  We have likely passed some of the factors already.

Civgene presents simple effective solutions to AI

terminator

There is growing concern that AI or artificial intelligence will ruthlessly enslave humanity.  These fears are real, and on the current path, very justified.

Some background.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2016/mar/16/artificial-intelligence-we-should-be-more-afraid-of-computers-than-we-are-video

Lets separate this in to it’s two separate threats.

The first threat is that AI achieves intelligence with no counterpart either in the human or computer world, and then decides humanity is no longer useful or worthwhile.  Some know this is as the singularity.

This may be solvable by hard wiring a conscience in a very similar fashion as described by civgene.  An emotional metamind with mandatory emotional recall.  With a distracting and sometimes painful compulsion to also consider a rationally inaccessible risk calculation created passively and involuntarily.  Initially populated both by parental type training, and real world experience, but constantly creating further compound emotion associations to signal danger in both a useful and intrusive way.  In a word, digital empathy.

The second and more immediate threat, that automation will obsolete the vast majority of human thinking or skilled jobs but unlike the industrial revolution those people will become unemployable.

This is a problem that has already been solved.  Psychopaths are natural centrist statists.  Centralizing power both because they want to become the master of all other people(and the other people become slaves), but also because they regard empathy as a myth, a fraud, and an erratic defect.  Much like a purely rational super intelligent AI might view the whole of humanity.

That centrism comes at a price. a large and growing graft proportional to the growing proportion of psychopaths in a particular civilization (they eventually collapse it)  Legal distribution, designed to add risk to centrisim for the sake of itself does so by using democracy to override bluntly wasteful laws.  Laws can be intentionally wasteful, diverting economy of scale to increased power for a few, or UNINTENTIONALLY wasteful, like forcing people to work a longer work week than the economy needs, in turn creating a glut of labor and enslaving the people that can get jobs.

This of course varies case to case as most law and economics, but that’s the beauty of distributing one law at a time.  A distributed law responds to public calls of no confidence with new segmented market data.   (A lack of uncontaminated market data being the most cited failing of persistent socialism/communism.)  It is the solution to socialism meant as a temporary repair to an ailing people, but becoming de-facto permanent rule as a tool of oppression. (a 40 hour work week was a blessing 100 years ago, and now is a curse) It is a populist relief valve against too much power on the statist side of the intentionally hidden axis on the political compass.

The problem is arbitrary labor force hourly requirements creating a glut of labor.  The present state is slavery or obsolescence, but cooperation and prosperity can return if law speeds up to match the recent blinding speed of technology.

Please see the background page for more information on the civgene theories and legal distribution.

Who is in contol? Banking vs new technology

banking-vs-technology-v3

Thank you for your feedback an patience! Perhaps these new images will shed some light on how pack vs social topologies effect human economic behavior.

Here are the individual images, but they loose something without the dimension of time.  Just click on them for detail.

Inherent-technology-all-behaviors-fiat Inherent-technology-unique-behaviors-fiat Inherent-technology-common-behaviors-fiat

 

Feedback is welcome.  Thank you for your help!

Edit v.2 :  minor repairs.
Edit v.3 :  After some consideration realized fiat is a substitute for coinage.  The animation helped with perspective..

Note:  I have deleted the earliest post and version of this graph.  Not trying to be revisionist, it’s all up on github, but this graphic is so much more clear cut and understandable.

 

What is happening to the global economy?

Econ-tech-subsitute-v2

Psychopaths are exerting disproportional influence on the economy.  Some empaths have been captured  either by cult or by  political ideologies, becoming temporary proto-psychopaths.  This  leads to collapse, and a  rout of genetic psychopaths.   A brutal but effective means to reversion to a trust and metamind based economy.

We broke that mechanism when we split the atom.  If we let that happen again, the nuclear power plants could melt down, as they will fail disaster not fail safe when their daily mechanizations are no longer attended by knowing employees.  Perhaps this was by design as part of MAD, but it’s guillotine hanging over the planets head now.

Green loosely matches the Adam Smith model.  As we approach the red psychopathic supplements for trust behaviours, (substituting debt for money for example) we approach the dystopia Marx and Engels observed but lacked to data to understand.   Just in time, open source has demonstrated the vital importance of the right to fork.   If we support that right through systemic changes we can back away from the edge of the cliffs of collapse.

Discuss this with your families this Thanksgiving and perhaps we can make a change for the better.  Please share your ideas and comments.

EDIT: I left this post up for completeness but there is a newer superior 3d graph.

 

Trust markets to a fault? Ask an ad man for the facts about behavior.

 

Great Interview with Rory Sutherland.  Turns out he, armed with some ideas from Richard H. Thaler has rather scathing (and pleasantly veiled) criticism of modern economics.   I have some reading to do, but it sure seems the Thaler’s ‘econs’ are EXACTLY like civgene’s economic view of psychopaths.  Logic or rational thought being the only thing making decisions for people in an economy is an absurd idea.

Marketing if you didn’t know finds it’s start with people like Edward Barnays,  Sigmand Freud’s nephew.  It, like a dead man’s switch, is a morally neutral tool.   Ranging from useful public service announcements, to nazi propaganda.   Rory certainly seems to want to do some good in the world, sharing his secrets.   Not only does this help us understand his trade, but ourselves.

Some quotes follow if you prefer to read.   Enjoy.

“One of the fantastic things, I always say, is that the digital world is like Galapagos Islands for the understanding of evolutionary psychology.  The little foibles of human behavior that crop up online.   Are very very telling in what the what deeper human mind really cares about.   What it finds attractive, more important what it finds repellent.  The system one brain (Earlier quote “primarily the subconscious”) is more about the avoidance of catastrophe than the attainment of perfection.”
 
“System one resides in the darker part of the brain.  System two(the logical conscious brain) is post rationalizing decisions taken by system one.”
 
“When we design experiences, or when we design choices , or when we design websites, it makes perfectly good sense to design them to work with our evolved psychology.  What we somtimes do is design products for what Richard Thaler calls ‘econs.’  Which is a completely imaginary species which has never existed.  That probably wouldn’t would have survived had it sprung up by chance which is that completely rational man beloved of economic models.  Which would be comepltely hopeless in any real world situation.”

 

When is money just favour?

cash

Money is currency with the additional simultaneous attributes of property.  Inherent value and therefore purchasing power beyond the lone trust of either set of attributes.  An insurance policy against corruption of either.  It likely came about from attempts at corruption from psychopathic forces.  Creating a dual trap of the conscience to block animalistic regression back to territory or favour.  Each element protecting the other.  Money was invented to make both property and currency resistant to corruption from short term thinkers.

As discussed property and currency are derived from the conscience.  This stems from our discussion of the behavioural differences between animals (and psychopaths) and conscionable human beings.  As a a result we can assert what property and currency can not be.

Property can not be a territory.  Currency can not be favour.  The primary difference between both is the internalized will of the conscionable human being to respect both ownership and accomplishment in the present and future without further work.  In the case of property and currency, if you add the work of defense back in the result is, territory and favour.

This is why debt based money is a fallacy.  It functions on the premise that any currency can be made into money simply by promising it in the future.   ‘Money’ is created by saying the property is the promise of future human labor.  Money can never be debt because it completely undermines a conscionable construct and replaces it with it’s psychopathic social structure.  Debt based money is based on the concept that human beings, or at least their labor can be property.  Unreasonable on it’s face.

A debt based money turns property into territory.  Currency into favour.  Property and currency, which long term risk weighs as beneficial to the whole, becomes more subject to the whims of nature and man.  They are no longer the pillars of investment and economy of scale, but a transient permission to persue them.  A favour.  In a way debt-money is psychopathic commentary on the conscience itself.  The lender with a short term jealousy based risk management borrows the wisdom of a holistic conscience long term risk management system in exchange for the only thing they can give, territory and favour.  ‘You may continue to produce widgets to pay off your business debt.  You may continue to maintain the banks house.  You thought you were so smart about risk.  I don’t care what happened, your labor is mine.  Pay me.’

Systemically the reason the self contradicting nature of debt as money is not detected earlier is the competition it inspires.  During the transition from property and currency to territory and favour society can benefit from the attributes of both cooperation and competition.  Guiding and applying each to a perpetually lessening degree.

Eventually cooperation fails.  The mechanism is simple.  Compound interest, once introduced, demands growing competition.  Investment itself becomes no longer wise and eventually no longer possible.  Currencies and property begin to evolve outside of the system.  The debt-money loses trust, and the economies of scale, which need some degree of systemic cooperation, collapse.

I know of the properties that couple well with currencies now, but can’t imagine what they will be in the future.  I do know they need little defense.  I know true currency forces no hierarchy, and fiat can never be money.  I know people, and their labor can never be property.  Money was imagined to resist reversion to an animalistic society.  The day we discover the perfect money, will be the day we no longer need it.

Edit 6/10/15: Added a link.

Psychopaths effect on culture

competition

“Did you exchange. A walk on part in the war, For a lead role in a cage?”  –Pink Floyd

What are the consequences of shifting a civilization’s culture from an empathic one?  The scripts and narratives the psychopaths use become embedded in our metamind and in turn form myths.  One could spend a lifetime exploring and discussing those myths, but that shouldn’t stop us.  That very idea leads into the first myth.

1.  You must be an expert:  You must understand something en total to contribute to it’s exploration. – Since all exploration occurs at the outlying data, and outlying data is OUTSIDE the pattern and the potentially incomplete or incorrect function that’s assigned to it, a new perspective may be the only functional one.  I’m not saying modeling the world around us has no value.   I’m saying pretending safe understood decisions are growth is a lie.  A lie told specifically to prop up the master/slave relationships that psychopaths superimpose on our lives to simplify their social interactions.  This flows into our next myth.

2. Experts must be vetted: It is dangerous to allow decisions to be made by people without official training. – While learning is always beneficial, there are often vast obligations that come with vast training.  Those obligations form another hierarchy, which in turn can put cooperation, the source of most human progress, at risk.

Experts are often employed at the periphery of growth where there their role if successful is not to employ their training, but to avoid it.  Yes knowing what’s known is important, but being multi disciplinary, probably not at an expert level is more important to identifying the cause and sources of outliers.  Since there are not enough hours in a human life to become and expert in everything, cooperation is needed where disciplines intersect aka: the outliers.  The only thing expertise guarantees is more of the same.

3. Competition is efficient:  There are winners and losers, and who needs the loosers?  –  Competition can efficient, but also can be flat out counterproductive.   It can be very beneficial but not for the reasons frequently touted.  Competition is great for forming perspective.  Understanding others points of view and skills, and understanding your own.  It’s great for learning how to fail and observing behavior and expressing compassion when others fail.  Competition is crucial to communication, as we explored communication is needed for real growth or progress.

Problem is a competition is defined by it’s rules, so it’s only as good as they and their scope, interpretation, and enforcement are.  Rules that promote both fair weights and measures and personal expression are fundamentally conscionable because they promote communication.  Communication is vital to growth as the periphery is explored.  At any scale it enhances the economy of scale.

Poor competition focuses on rewards, especially external to human communication.  The more permanent power such rewards afford, the less productive it is.  While not all communication or interaction is productive, blocking communication through hierarchy(the afforded power) is never productive.  While it may exclude the selfish and inept, it also removes the individuals ability to decide who those unable players are.   Reward focused competition is a way to disable the risk assessment abilities of the competitors conscience, allowing the psychopath equal footing, at the expense of both real growth and productivity.  This is identified by most as the lack of will to ‘play fair’, as learning benefits of the game are counter productive to the psychopaths status above those around them.  Their real goal is obfuscation of their condition and avoidance of their more primal reactions like jealousy.  That goal is hurt by growth stemming from cooperative competition.

4. Silence is consent:  That’s a myth deriving from freedom as a give and take (which proper freedom is). – Just because you are in a position to see risk doesn’t mean you can address it.

At this time in the United States, it is widely thought that speaking your mind is both a human and legal right.  But there is a flip side.  Trying to convince people of a wrong, if you fail, will create the opposite effect.  We have embraced judgement of winners and loosers instead of consideration.  Consideration of both freedom and perspective.  Often a failed attempt to sway a person is considered proof that person is wrong.

To end implied consent we must end judgement of those who speak their minds.  Not only should we walk a mile in another mans shoes, but then fail to judge after we take them off.  Wisdom is the understanding of our vast limitations when assessing the environment around us.  We can see what’s in front of us.  We can only feel our own heart beat.  We only speak of the things for which we have words the listener understands.  Cooperation is difficult with our small perspective in a big universe.  Only a concatenation of our views can begin a mosaic with any real perspective.  A mosaic which will never form without communication.   Communication that will never happen if we only play to win favour instead of the currencies of accomplishment.  That is how the psychopath population destroys a civilization.  By inspiring people to jail themselves with perspectives they can’t change to protect rewards from rules that block progress, by blocking cooperation.

If you liked this please review my type one civilization paper and consider supporting legal distribution.