The benefit of a single scalar price is that it is super easy to compute, and lets you compare different types of value in a like-with-like fashion. The downside is that in order to compare different types of value, you have to sacrifice all of the information about it; there are probably arguments where this is considered a feature between two simple agents, but in meatspace there is a large problem with organizations not having good internal knowledge which means prices conceal information from yourself just as much. Secondly there is the eternal matter of externalities, which by long standing tradition are impossible to address outside of regulation. This is because we have no good way of assigning value to things not happening.
I think a multidimensional pricing model would help with this, because it would allow all the elements of value to be evaluated independently, including negative prices for things to be avoided. Then the whole thing could be computed as a single eigenprice, giving us the same overall benefit as regular dollars, but keeping all the relevant information. We are very good at automatic computations of this type now, so it seems feasible as long as something as sophisticated as a smartphone or engineering calculator is available. There is no reason a bank or transaction platform could not have this built in.
Generic strategy models
I’ve never been able to let go of Jaynes’ notion of using the phase-space of macrophenomena for prediction, which gives me a strong feeling that there is a fully general and scalable method of generating strategies. If we think of strategies from an action perspective as being a combination of predictions+interventions, it seems like any desirable end-state could be approached.
This should help a million and one things, because at least the United States is pretty strongly anti-strategic. If it became more consistent, cheaper, and effective, then I expect adoption to go up and overall efficiency as a result.
Full spectrum group alignment methods
At some point in the relatively near future we will start putting together the pieces that allow the entire spectrum of human experience to be brought to bear in building group alignment. This will include tools traditionally shunned in developed nations, like violence and fear. Of the three ideas I suggest, this one feels the most inevitable and simultaneously the most double-edged; most of the legwork to date has been done by professional militaries and religions, but there is plenty of interest in investigating things like trauma, abuse, and political movements gone haywire. As far as I can tell consent is really just one more variable in this space, because otherwise conscription would not be viable as a military method, and people seldom set out with political or religious radicalization as their goal. As a consequence, once these methods are well established I expect them to work on whoever happens to be within reach, rather than requiring voluntary association.
Multidimensional pricing
The benefit of a single scalar price is that it is super easy to compute, and lets you compare different types of value in a like-with-like fashion. The downside is that in order to compare different types of value, you have to sacrifice all of the information about it; there are probably arguments where this is considered a feature between two simple agents, but in meatspace there is a large problem with organizations not having good internal knowledge which means prices conceal information from yourself just as much. Secondly there is the eternal matter of externalities, which by long standing tradition are impossible to address outside of regulation. This is because we have no good way of assigning value to things not happening.
I think a multidimensional pricing model would help with this, because it would allow all the elements of value to be evaluated independently, including negative prices for things to be avoided. Then the whole thing could be computed as a single eigenprice, giving us the same overall benefit as regular dollars, but keeping all the relevant information. We are very good at automatic computations of this type now, so it seems feasible as long as something as sophisticated as a smartphone or engineering calculator is available. There is no reason a bank or transaction platform could not have this built in.
Generic strategy models
I’ve never been able to let go of Jaynes’ notion of using the phase-space of macrophenomena for prediction, which gives me a strong feeling that there is a fully general and scalable method of generating strategies. If we think of strategies from an action perspective as being a combination of predictions+interventions, it seems like any desirable end-state could be approached.
This should help a million and one things, because at least the United States is pretty strongly anti-strategic. If it became more consistent, cheaper, and effective, then I expect adoption to go up and overall efficiency as a result.
Full spectrum group alignment methods
At some point in the relatively near future we will start putting together the pieces that allow the entire spectrum of human experience to be brought to bear in building group alignment. This will include tools traditionally shunned in developed nations, like violence and fear. Of the three ideas I suggest, this one feels the most inevitable and simultaneously the most double-edged; most of the legwork to date has been done by professional militaries and religions, but there is plenty of interest in investigating things like trauma, abuse, and political movements gone haywire. As far as I can tell consent is really just one more variable in this space, because otherwise conscription would not be viable as a military method, and people seldom set out with political or religious radicalization as their goal. As a consequence, once these methods are well established I expect them to work on whoever happens to be within reach, rather than requiring voluntary association.
These answers gave me a strong sense of “there’s really useful models to be found here, but I’m not quite sure what they look like”.
Me either. I am lining up a crack at building gears for number 3, and the technique for number 2. We’ll see what can be made of it.