Perhaps humanity’s communications will always be rooted in surveillance-based business models. But let’s indulge for the moment the ideal of a platform that networks people together for a novel purpose: not for monetizing access to our minds, but rather with the express purpose of elevating humanity.
Library Genesis
Regardless of how it’s implemented (whether via an AI, an oversight board, or some other means), what moral framework would be “best” for humanity?
Huh. A goal seems more specific, and easier to orient towards. But less defined stuff can be important as well.
The thriving civilization is measurably more complex and interesting, especially accounting for the rich mental lives of its people, than the dystopia.
I’m not sure it’s the right thing to optimize far. Dystopia: the matrix, everyone gets a different unique world, with very different cultures. This might ‘be more interesting’ and also not what we want.
The rest covers a few different things:
Interesting
True
Moderation?
Universal morality (a call for fair rules applied evenly)
Overall it mentions interestingness more than true. The usual classification might be
Nonfiction (part of truth)
Fiction and other stuff (Interesting)
Both can be interesting, though fiction (and art) seems to go there more often. I think building a better world needs to be a more specific goal, and kind of seems like a third thing.
The call for more platforms, and solutions to collective action problems is interesting.
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.
Library Genesis
Huh. A goal seems more specific, and easier to orient towards. But less defined stuff can be important as well.
I’m not sure it’s the right thing to optimize far. Dystopia: the matrix, everyone gets a different unique world, with very different cultures. This might ‘be more interesting’ and also not what we want.
The rest covers a few different things:
Interesting
True
Moderation?
Universal morality (a call for fair rules applied evenly)
Overall it mentions interestingness more than true. The usual classification might be
Nonfiction (part of truth)
Fiction and other stuff (Interesting)
Both can be interesting, though fiction (and art) seems to go there more often. I think building a better world needs to be a more specific goal, and kind of seems like a third thing.
The call for more platforms, and solutions to collective action problems is interesting.
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.