Category Archives: golden opportunity

Who gets the benefits from the doubts?

self-mutilation(tasteful self mutilation)

If faith is rationalized knowledge you can’t prove, and forgiveness emotional resolution to avoid manipulation, who are you really doubting?

Truth telling is a regular affair. If empathy is the engine, spoken truth is the grease of civilization. Most of the time, the benefit of the doubt is not only implicit, but entirely unvisited. Analysis of every statement, every gesture, every promise would undo civilization. Investment would be exhausting and a terrible trade.

When a flash of insight presents a doubt, the temptation is to ignore it. Civilization is a big machine, and the wise human knows the gears must turn to perpetuate the economy of scale. Down time for repairs will have a non linear cost, but the conscience is first and foremost is a risk engine. The dilemma is usually treated as such, ‘is your conscience groaning more loudly about the risk of a lie, or the risk of addressing it’. This can work but introduces a new risk, gaslighting.

Gaslighting seems silly at first but can be the flat edge to a long wedge. First the lies are subtle and inconsequential to the operation of your society, with one exception, you. You learn to NOT trust your gut and ignore insight.

If a high EQ empath is faced with a single dishonest threat, the dishonest actor eventually becomes silhouetted against their more honest context. Your risk engine retunes itself with it’s flow of higher quality data, and they stand out. The problem is addressed and civilization’s machine chugs on.

There is systemic risk, the risk the conscience is poor at managing a flurry of lies. The intelligent and psychopathic defector WILL notice this golden opportunity. Instead of identifying a narrow pattern of doubt, the conscience is too noisy to be useful. Doubt is aimed inward. ‘I must be the problem.’ Without warnings of risk the conscience becomes a liability.

If you are untrained in proposing and rationalizing conspiracies, you can be taught to throw away your conscience or even program it against your own interests. Not just you. Everyone. Flooding people with enough lies to disable their conscience requires a conspiracy. Those that discourage conspiracy theory are likely in the institutional gaslighting business, better known as propaganda.

Who benefits from the doubts? The institutions people are directly involved in. The hierarchies that are riskiest to fork or otherwise defect from. Today that is their governments, their schools, their employers. Those wise to history know finding a criminal conspiracy can be as simple as asking who benefits? Cui Bono.

Doubts are yours, and no good comes from throwing them away. Rationalize them. Not because the conscience is never wrong, but if you don’t use your risk manager, you lose it. Researching, fact checking, and setting traps for the unscrupulous benefits you. Detect reality. Accept no lies, not even the small ones. Painful honesty keeps your conscience active, well tuned, and in a position to defend the economies of scale that afford us the luxury of leisure, and it’s prosperous civilization.

Your empathy, and it’s outrage, IS the machine. The top priority must be keeping the context honest. Demand people with high EQs. Always observant, tough as nails, and a zest for learning. Test their empathy. Protect the machine with vigorous curation. Reject the benefit of the doubt. Doubt people. Doubt systems. Doubt away.

The why of how devops works


Business vs disruptive technology

Why do devops pushes go wrong?  Lets talk a bit about what devops is.  Devops is an attempt to merge the strengths of open source bazaar with the order and certainties of business hierarchy.  By clinging to the nomenclature of automation (as least as old as the water mill) as a complete stand in for a social phenomenon, organizations undermine their own efforts.  Businesses set the wrong organizational objectives in motion and then react to the inevitable failures by further detuning the successful components.

Why do companies seek out devops workflow techniques?  In the positive case they want to increase profit.  They are acting as futurists.  Improving their potential before it’s required.  In the worst case they are reacting directly to one or more complexity horizons.  Their social communication has been stymied or dwarfed compared to people communicating in functional code on the other side of the horizon.  They just can’t compete.

How people work

Many people have struggled with gift culture as the origin of open source.  Gift culture permeates open source, but is not it’s source.   Gift culture naturally expresses in any society where reputation currencies are in circulation and rewards are only expressed as probabilities.  In other words, gift cultures are the lubricant of free markets.  Once a person’s foundation of their hierarchy of needs is satisfied, people  work for improvements in reputation.  Accomplishments are the coinage of gift culture’s currency.

Bazaars are the most free, and have the most moving parts, so lots of lubricant is needed.  They are highly complex organic machines.  Adding components as they grow.  Their advantage is self healing anti-fragility.  Their disadvantage is huge pools of waste.  Individuals work to improve reputation, not for profit, because reputation currency offers better long term stability.  Most bazaar market machinery enjoys little or no economy of scale.  This is where devops can help a business reenter or influence a market dominated by the bazaar.  By merging the strengths of both.

Economy of scale of what?

Economy of scale is what automation brings to the devops equation, but it is not novel without nurturing gift culture.  What does a probability driven gift culture bring to the equation?  Imagination turned systemic.  Not for short term profit but for reputation and credibility.  Becoming known as a kind of problem solver becomes insurance (a mid and long term trust structure) against ostracization and obsolescence.  A guarantee of future (perceived) utility to society.

For a devops initiative to succeed you must also nurture gift culture.  To do this you must trust some appropriate objectives to with the people closest to them.  Then analyze their output for organization wide economies of scale.  This is typically done in codes (statistical or mechanistic) bypassing complexity horizons.  This is done to harness skills of the members of the society, as they try to build their personal portfolio of accomplishment.  With the grease available to them, workers can build the machinery the business needs, without having to express their solutions beyond code.

Traditionally business reserves access to objectives for the very top, and tactics are employed at the very bottom, with various strategies employed by middle management to glue them together.  This is eventually effective but requires translating all action to human non functional language.  This translation inefficiency is why businesses can’t keep up.  Most technical fields are in a race against the complexity horizon.  With clear objectives great strategy and tactics write themselves.  Why?  Code as a communication tool is fast.

Doing dumb things faster

This brings our first failure into focus.  A focus strictly on automation.  Automation is both positive and critical as it pushes forth the code created at the bottom of the hierarchy, embracing it in a way that creates economies of scale.  It is the end but not the means.  The means is worker access to corporate objectives and some freedom to implement them.  Look no further than Google’s policy of self directed projects to see how this works.  If you don’t nurture the gift culture both with recognition for good work and self directed opportunities to fulfill company objectives, you will miss great opportunities for new economies of scale.  Continuous integration really means technician access to objectives.

Ladders and snakes

This frames the secondary risk of failure.  Businesses are traditionally hierarchical because not all actors are trustworthy.   Most, but not all, employees seek to excel by improving their reputation. If you move objectives down the tree towards the bottom of the organization, it will present strictly selfish actors(sometimes psychopaths) with golden opportunities that they will take.  This justifies a metered scaling of moving objectives down.  This is where the failure lies.  Metering serves a purpose, to limit the destructive capacity of discovery of bad actors, but it is often used as an excuse to never push objectives to those expressing code.  A guaranteed failure for devops initiatives.  Potentially fatal to the whole business if it is already competing with a successful devops deployment.

As an important note psychopaths can be valuable intelligent members of a team, but they have special needs.  Rather than discard them it may be possible to create purely technical work roles with no direct reports and and no singular authority over data.

A well oiled machine

The misunderstood role of gift culture as the end and not a side effect may cause businesses to supplement perks for access to organizational objectives to far less effect.  Fundementally people don’t want to just feel like their reputation is good.  They authentically want to improve it.  Being able to both see AND influence most if not all company objectives is critical to identifying the potential economies of scale that the bazaar is often structurally unaware of.

The key to understand the difference between devops and mere automation is the complexity horizon.  Where functioning technical solutions are by far the most efficient way to express both better strategy and objectives, and retool objectives when necessary.  Technicians need access to objectives.  Then both the game theory centric corporate objectives and individuals long term reputation objectives can combine to create the well oiled machine.

About Civgene:  Understanding the currency of gift culture and the complexity horizon would not be possible without Civgene.  Civgene is a novel scientific theory which provides a framework to view all societies.  Please consider exploring it further to grow your understanding of human behavior, particularly in groups.

The rule of law


It may seem at first that law is about hard power.  Hard power is not without it’s merits.  Namely it brings all people together under the lowest common denominator.  Force.  It seems that all animals that are capable of inference can comply behaviorally with Kolhbergs entire conventional stage.  That law, enforced by hard power brings stability and in turn inferred morality.  Yet while animals can display sympathy (relating to experience.) no animal society is considered even transitionally post conventional.  The simplest conclusion is that while at a glance advanced animal society may appear to respect freedom, that reversion to opportunism and alliance is inevitable.

Animals display many favorable efficient behaviors, even sometimes in large and complex groups.  But those come at a cost.  Constant vigilance.  Hard power must be ready to bare or golden opportunities will be exploited and the order upset.  This is the rule of law without symbolic codification.

Is codification what sets human beings apart?    Psychopaths can not only comprehend codification but can enjoy material success as professionals in law.   Psychopaths who share social behaviors with the animal kingdom can not ascend beyond the conventional stage.  To do so requires imagination, specifically empathy, which by definition they do not possess.  It seems as if the the rule of law it’s self it in place to protect us from psychopaths who consistently seek power as it’s own end.  Conventional law and order is a referendum on the psychopathic mind with hard power as best understood barrier.

In humans codification allows law at a distance where vigilance is at it’s weakest.  Why does it not fail catastrophically like with animals?  The virtue of law in any particular case is embedded in an individual’s risk assessment.  As discussed at length here, the conscience is a risk assessment engine.  So while law at a distance is aimed at restraining hard power obsessed psychopaths, it is more often followed by those able to assess risk the best, the empaths.

This difference in behavior is the source of corruption.  It increases with societal scope as distance causes the effect of vigilance to fade but conscionable people react to their own emotional state in the same way.  Even worse corruption is codified and becomes part of the rule of law.  Further, the corruption increases by another factor as psychopaths breed faster than empaths and their percentages increase.  The bigger the legal scope, and the higher the percentage of psychopaths, the more law works against the conscionable.  Valued for protection from the very people increasingly exploiting it.   Restraining only their not the psychopaths activity.

This is why the rule of law becomes the law of the jungle.  It continuously falls further short of morality as it’s society grows in size and age.  The civilization gene the mutation of superior risk assessment compared to mere jealousy allows people to live in relative harmony.  For a while at least.  Not because law is vigilant, but because intelligent beings with a conscience are.

Secrecy becomes regressive



Why do hierarchies embrace secrecy?  To lower the risk to hierarchy, both real and imagined.  The problem is there is no way for the citizens of the hierarchy to discern between the real and imagined risk with the secrecy blocking reasonable analysis of the distortion of identity, justice, and some or all of the facts.  This is a direct result of amoral agents being imperceptibly embedded among moral ones.  The result for the hierarchy is even greater graft and corruption.

Unfortunately secrecy is also necessary.  Those same amoral agents will always seize perceived (sometimes real) golden opportunities and they will always, with time, occur with complete transparency.  Since making mistakes is necessary to both emotional development of empaths and to social cohesion, the same things that make moral people grow, present amoral ones with opportunities to accumulate and grab power.

Emapths who push for a more compassionate society or civilization often run into a wall.  A wall of skepticism of erected by those who recognize that some people are amoral as described above.  They recognize part of the equation.  That some people are not reasonable and see power as an end to itself.  They don’t know how to accommodate required mistakes without adding vulnerability.

It is a human right to fork.  This is where some basic human rights (like freedom of religion) derive from.  Forking should happen early and often.  Forking solves the issue of opportunistic taking of power derived from hopefully minimal but required mistakes, by assigning the secret to the most interested moral party.

This is the rational basis for organizational forking, or at a governmental scale legal distribution.  Since power can be leveraged and projected, this also suggests a mechanism for successful legal distribution.  A petition to fork a legal authority (a law) should be completely democratic (direct citizen voting) with no secret components.

For the ultimate authority the person or persons proposing the vote only need to demonstrate interest beyond denial of government services.  For example it might be required present a petition of one tenth of one percent of the voting population to set the proposed distribution to ballot.   A simple majority vote of ‘no confidence’ in the larger bodies ability to manage their secrets without corruption should immediately distribute the challenged law and it’s apportioned funds to the lower jurisdictions.

In the case of a non legally binding entity, no formality is required whatsoever.  Simply a decision by anyone that trust is not possible at the current scale.  That a hierarchy with a smaller scope and fewer more accessible leaders is needed.

If a distribution or fork is initiated by an amoral or incompetent agent, it can be forked (or distributed) again until corruption and waste is brought under coherent control.  Success in preserving identity, justice and ready access to accurate facts will be modeled by lateral organizations or governments through competitive pressures.  The feasible scope has been found.

Since to err is not only a common attribute of moral human society, but a prerequisite, it is a basic human right to distribute laws by majority in the face of corruption.  Denial of that right is denial of freedom itself.  Freedom is a fundamental attribute of the conscience.  Denying this right is a psychopathic behavior.

Edit 4/7/15 10:50 EST:  Sorry for all the changes. (title, image, some structure) This was a sudden inspiration last night that exhausted me before editing was complete.  Please reread it at your convenience.

Civgene, why now?


Why me?

I’ve been asking myself this question since about since the civgene first dawned on me in about 2011 or so.  Most ‘leaders’ are simply in the right place at the right time.  The person will need certain skills, but they always need to be ‘lucky’ in the timing of their role.  I am no exception.  The closer I look the more I realize that everything was set up just right, and I very nearly just had to be present.  The moment of inception the tiniest breeze.  Had things been even slightly less well timed I would have noticed, and contributed, nothing.  I am merely the envoy between civilization, and it’s readiness for a new idea.

I have an associates degree in computer science.   My mother had a masters degree.  My wife has two!  I know I am capable of furthering my education, but never elected to.  With some irony, this may have been the key to having all the pieces I needed to discover something new in science.  A good monthly salary was my goal, when I recognized the need for intelligence and natural skill in system administration.  I was about to begin my bachelors degree, when the dot com bubble swept me into a professional role.

Making myself into a Linux specialist, suited the needs in three separate scientific research institutions.  This along with my non-profit Linux work gave me a broad base in both diverse computing environments and the social wonders of open source.  My wife studied psychology.  My mother studied and eventually taught business and economics after obtaining her MBA.  I was exposed to disciplines that would rarely or never be placed together in a college environment.  I am ‘passionately curious’ but in the past this manifested as an interest in viewing, reading and writing science fiction, not pushing the boundaries of hard science

Ultimately it was some rough events in my personal life that drove me to look deeper into psychopaths.  I wanted to find an angle to protect myself and others.  Hare estimates that 1-5% of population are psychopaths.  This is not small and made this the most likely part of my unlikely journey.  It was inevitable that I would have a hard run in with a psychopath.  That is everyone’s reality.

I’ve long since struggled with the huge leaps that economics takes to explain civilization, or money.  For years I was at a loss to explain why anyone would anyone would help Linux for free.  I’ve struggled to understand why artificial intelligence was so icy cold.  How people can trust each other in the face of thousands or even tens of thousands of risks a day, seemingly unaware, and survive.  In my desperation it all gelled together.

The civilization gene is obvious in hindsight.  Once I knew roughly how psychopaths acted what was missing jumped out.  My logical training made me look in both directions, spotting the absence of behavior, the negative instead of the positive.  As if debugging a program.  I had a rough idea that game theory failed in the real world from my own disappointment with AI, and from science studies.  It connected to my cynicism about the foolish trust people but not animals seemed to display.  Without every piece of my background I could not have connected the clues.  The lynchpin was real world tuning of computers. Unassuming, unforgiving computers.

I would watch PBS as a child.  For decades shows like ‘Nature’ were the best entertainment on the television.  Years of programming just discussing, filming and studying animal behaviour.  Monkeys, primates, any of them.  They move around.  No animal with legs or wings longer than a centimeter stays put.  They can have territories, but not properties.  Only mankind, and only at the beginning of civilization, had such a distinction.  That’s a big change.  It doesn’t just happen for no reason.

Psychopaths are cavemen.  Currency and investment, the cornerstones of civilization, are just huge bags of trust.  Something you can’t have without empathy.  The realization flashed into existence.  The solution to the chicken and the egg problem of economics.  Who trusted first and why.  It wasn’t a choice.  Empathy, at least at the scale only humans display, is a mutation.  The very last one most of us shared.  Everything after, as they say, is history.

Why now?

This is an easier question.  The easy answer is one acronym.  MRI.  And all the technologies that led up to it.  Dr. Robert Hare demonstrated a clear pattern of different brain activity between a psychopath and empath.  That would not have been possible without the MRI.

The same scans that helped me to recognize, combined with civgene, how the conscience actually works.  Body part and body function archetype thoughts light up the brain.  I recognized the signature for the empath from computing.  A computer database thrashing a computers hard drive on a wildcard search.   The physical structure wasn’t important, but what it was doing.  Accessing every memory at once.  All connected.  A passively driven database connected by emotion.  A metamind.

I’d also say the Internet.  It is both responsible for a growing breadth of knowlage, dissemination of it, and for open source and Linux themselves.  I can’t deny the impact of watching a hobby grow into the most important operating system in the world without a single line of code written under threat of hard power.  Massive cooperation, investment, and economy of scale without any psychopathic behaviour driving it.  Open source is what science aspires to be.  Pragmatic but testable and repeatable.  Open both to innovation and scrutiny by anyone.  Perhaps someone else could have put it together without the society behind open source, but I could not.

I wanted to write this so that people can understand how it is possible that I without a grant, a PHD, or even more than a passing interest until a few years ago could be the one to discover something so fundamentally important to humanity, it’s origin.  Why not someone who is smarter, or more schooled?   This is the right time.  Had I not found it someone else would have.  The MRI and the Internet and open source were all in place by about the mid 1990s.  A whole sixteen years passed before I finally pieced it together.  The background was there, but I was missing something.  The study of psychopathy.   A few well written books and civgene snapped into place.

Thanks to Dr Whitney Winter for suggesting I write this.

What is the Distribution Party?



Today is election day in the United States.  What better time to discuss a new, populist, party.  Please pass this around today and tomorrow, the fifth of November.

I originally brought up the idea of a new political party in my Type One Civilization paper.  It is a solution to avoiding empowering psychopaths, without having a specific gene to screen for.  It can be argued that both global and United States civilization is so corrupt and distorted that it is beyond saving.  I disagree.  Sun Tzu points out that an organized retreat is the hardest military action.  While this is true, it is not conclusive.  You can change the game by agreeing to surrender, ending the two way violent conflict, obsoleting retreat.  This is what most empaths have resigned themselves to.   It is not necessary.  There is another way.  You can declare victory.

The core idea of the civilization gene is that psychopaths are the predecessor to modern man.  How did I conclude this?  Several ways, but the most compelling is the simplest to understand.  Psychopath behaviour is a subset of all human behaviour.  In other words they possess no qualities that every other normal human does not display.  Our conscience blocks us from displaying them more often, but they are present.  Why does simply knowing this make us victorious?  Because we are a superset of psychopathic behavior, and since each of us are best suited to adjust our own conscience to suit ones self, YOU are the most important impediment to having all of the psychopaths strengths, and none of their weaknesses.  Compared with them, you are a super human.  With such powers, how can you loose?

What has changed is that we now know who psychopaths are, and by inference, who we are.  The MRI, the Hare, and the failure of pure logic (ex:game theory) has revealed psychopaths to the interested empath.  This is new information.  This is very much the sister of the revelation of intricacies of the empath’s conscience to the Bernays, Gobbles and the like.  Marketing and propaganda, subsequently.  There are multiple actionable courses we can take to slip out of the yolks of propaganda and corruption of the hierarchies we ironically approved to free ourselves from the very reigns of psychopaths that now control them.

The Distribution Party is but one of many such paths.  Such as above, no hierarchy is needed to create the party.  This is critical as hierarchy can be used to distort the original intent.  It’s philosophy is simple and easy to verify.  A concateny of competing websites can easily list which politicians have some or any track record distributing law to smaller jurisdictions.  Distribution while simple is unlikely to be confused with any other kind of bill or law.   As it is so simple to identify it in action, it will fade in popularity when laws are sufficiently local that citizens can personally identify and attend to corruption.  Conversely, outbreaks of corruption will indicate further distribution is needed.

The idea is simple.  Corruption takes root where it is furthest from view.  The more distance a political leader has from their constituents, the more golden opportunities form to abuse their power.  If a psychopath happens to hold the office, they simply can not resist taking a golden opportunity.  Such is the strict purview of a conscience.  The traditional approach to solve this is to call for the revocation of the law, yet laws are never revoked.  Instead a fruitless argument persists over the balance of money and power until a yet larger crisis occurs, and it is forgotten and nothing is fixed.  Instead of arguing over who looses what, a distribution law can be passed.  Keep funding and legal language exactly the same, but split it into equal pieces (based exactly on the original funding methodology) for each state.  This can also be applied to lower level of government as well.  State to county.  County to Township.  Township to village.  The law and it’s funding are distributed until the corruption ceases.  You have now found the smallest safe scope for that law, and it’s funding, to be free of corruption.  Maximizing the largest possible, but not larger than possible, waste free economy of scale.

To be clear these laws may change or be completely eradicated by the smaller jurisdiction, but the funding will remain intact.  It will be as if the local (state,county,etc) legislature passed the law themselves.   Likewise they can nullify it with new law.  This can happen in the case of redundancy, waste, inefficiency, of simply a different point of view as to what the law should say.

Local jurisdictions may change the law.  If a laws original signing body become distressed as to the practice vs intent of a distributed law, they can simply revoke the original law or the distribution and it’s accompanying funding, but they will have to do so for all jurisdictions.  If they try to revoke just a convenient part of the distributed law, they face the same stalemate and bickering they always do.  Good legal distributions will include language prohibiting selective or partial favoritist revocation, but it is not necessary to maintain balance.

Distributed law is the necessary way to tackle psychopathic culture.  One where accumulation of power is an end on to itself.  It is an organized retreat from centralization gone one step too far, as evidenced by overt corruption or poor legal or economic performance indicating graft and waste.  Legal distribution can suit the ends of liberals and conservatives, statists and anarchists alike.  Conserving tax resources through efficiency, and preserving social programs through distribution.  Making government more successful.  Bringing it under direct influence and improving accountability.

No one should own this idea, but all should support it.  Please tell people you are part of the Distribution Party, tell others to say the same, and enjoy your victory.  It was always in the mind.

How to personally deal with psychopaths.


I’ve written about this topic here several times, but it occurs to me I haven’t properly categorized it.   All the appropriate blog posts are under Defense Against Psychopaths.

The problem is that category has become quite broad.  So I’ve created a new category Defense Against a Psychopath.  This is where to go if you’re trying to solve an immediate personal problem.

Here is a quick guide to the new category, so far.

Shunning is key.  The problem is no solution will work unless you can identify them BEFORE they take advantage of you.  They will succeed unless you know your self


  • Know yourself.
  • Identify psychopaths
  • Shun psychopaths

If you can’t shun them keep all interaction public.  This is a decent disincentive to anti-social behavior.  This is so you never let give them 1. singular authority over data or 2. a supervisor role over another human (including yourself.)

So now it’s

  • know yourself
  • Identify psychopaths
  • shun psychopaths
  • If you can’t shun because you have to enforce the two rules, keep all interaction public.

If you want personal help, read the following in order.


Sponsored sociopathy



Persistent shunning is effective when a psychopath tries to treat you as a slave.  Is this cruel?  Not at all, you are actually helping them.  You are sharing the virtues of your conscience.  By isolating them from risky social situations, you are helping them to avoid the long term social risks they cannot weigh subconsciously.  More so than than the empaths who are oblivious to their exact disorder, you are acting as their guardian.

Without compound emotions, psychopaths can’t feel fear like we do, only despair.  Human fear is despair imagined in the future.  Fear requires imagination.  Imagination is not just visualization, but subconscious immersion with emotional context.  You could argue that animals display fear, but they are strictly reacting to an occurrence now.  I argue fear indicates a future time component.  Animals are reacting to something they associate with attributes of a past pain, or the basic attributes of danger (a loud noise for example.)  Remove the stimulus and the despair will retract at a predictable pace.  Not necessarily true for a human.  An empathic human will also react to perceived future risk.  Depending on the circumstances, possibly as long as the rest of their life.

Since first putting together the civilization gene theory, I’ve been haunted by the question.  Will the shunning be relentless?  Perhaps not.  Psychopaths have a choice.  Any particular psychopath could decide operate in the open with the logical tools they do have.  If a psychopath were to openly acknowledge civilization as their master, they would then have a framework for treating other humans as peers.To be clear, a psychopath can offer a slave like submission on an individual or small basis, but this is a risky proposition for the propositioned empath(s).  The societies around them and civilization itself are not aware of their psychopath nor in some cases that such a person can even exist.  So when such an agreement is challenged, the psychopath can simply lie and say no agreement existed.  Further they can lie and say they never displayed the negative behavior that brought the agreement to bear.  That is the likely choice to be made by someone driven entirely by selfish logic.  With near certainty if they perceive a golden opportunity.

A zero trust network is needed.  Science is possibly the first such information classification system.  First information is proposed.  Then tests are formulated by someone with both the means and the interest.  Finally the results are verified by anyone with the means to do so.  The cheaper information verification is, the better the system works.

Traditional science has huge barriers to entry for some scientific verification.  Enormous grants are needed to build extravagant machinery and hire vast staffs to perform multi-year experiments that are then locked behind large paywalls guarded by minimally staffed scientific journals.   But more recently open source software has catapulted computer science to the fore with a barrier of entry to one computer, internet connection and food, clothing and electricity for a staff of one.   Just now (in history) Bitcoin and it’s ilk have further scaled the zero trust (scientific) method down to a mere single statement with instant verification on a global scale.

Psychopaths now have simple mechanisms to commit themselves to the greater good.  They simply need a cell phone with a small piece of free software and a golden opportunity that drives them to use it.  They simply need to state under the rigors of vetted mathematics, that they are indeed a sociopath and are prepared to submit to civilization itself.

What does it mean to be part of this commitment to humanity?  Both a commitment to those empaths who have not grown beyond their default state of trust, and to psychopaths who recognize they are being offered assistance navigating or even conquering the oddities of a world built on irrational compassion.  It would looks like this.

Psychopath’s duty

  • Dedication to logic.
  • Admit to sociopathy.
  • Admit civilization and society as your master.
  • Admit a lack of conscience creates social problems.
  • Openly establish trusted sources of criticism (empath sponsors.)
  • Accept criticism from your sponsors.
  • Demonstrate implementation or dismiss feasibility of criticism.
  • Psychopaths must admit that empathic sponsors are capible of Kohlberg’s post conventional thinking.

Empath’s duty

  • Vigilence.  Sponsorship means always being prepared to revert to shunning.
  • Psychopaths have no singular authority over data.
  • Psychopaths have no direct reports.
  • A commitment to a reasoned approach to inclusion baring violation of the above.
  • Sponsors must understand that Kohlberg’s conventional stage is the final moral destination for psychopaths.

The essence of this system is for empaths to lend, and verify the reception of, the post conventional properties to the conscience to sponsored sociopaths.  In return the psychopath can enjoy more (though obviously not limitless) social freedom.  The ability to move freely around people who will shun rather than punish or attack them for missing some ‘common sense’ about long term risk.  Who instead of condemning them for not displaying a behavior they simply can’t display, will lend their abilities to navigate day to day risks.  Instead of doubling down on social pressure (more importantly the consequences of not complying) allowing the sociopaths isolated downtime to logically asses their environment and subsequently control their mood swings.

While this will likely fail for any psychopaths in narcisistic or ASPD stage (described in ‘psychopath labels’) there is real promise for assisting an intelligent logical sociopath into a sponsored conventional stage.  This would be both beneficial to psychopath and to society as a whole as the long term risky behaviors are reduced.