Other accounts:

@Danterious@lemm.ee

All of my comments are licensed under the following license

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en

  • 29 Posts
  • 32 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 15th, 2023

help-circle











  • Just because someone has more skills, experience or information doesn’t mean that person has or should have authority over others. There are even situations where having more of those things can become a hindrance because it biases the person to doing things a certain way when someone from an outside perspective could handle the situation in a different, possibly better way.

    It still should be on the individual to decide whether they want to defer to the experts depending on the situation. The reason why people can come to collective decisions and rely on other people’s knowledge is because they have shared purpose and trust each other to be working to similar goals. That is what makes people’s choices voluntary.

    I don’t believe we should uphold hierarchies in any form instead we should help teach people to reason through when to trust other people’s judgements which doesn’t rely on defaulting to an authority.

    Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)






  • To be honest I am still having a bit of trouble understanding what a firm and a pure market is but either way I think the problem that occurs when you scale these interactions to larger communities are informational problems. You start to run into problems relating to Dunbar’s number and how many meaningful relationships you can maintain. That is where elinor ostrom’s method would need to be improved.

    However I don’t believe currency would actually help resolve it because it is too detached and doesn’t provide enough information to actually build meaningful relationships between communities and people therefore would still have to deal with the tendency for people to dehumanize/exploit processes that can be turned into numbers.

    An alternative that I think was shown (but I’m not sure because I haven’t read the second book) was something from the Monk and Robot series which is a nice solarpunk book that I recently got into. There were instances when a traveling tea monk (therapist with tea) went to a few different communities and “bought” a lot of herbs for their teas and “sold” their services as a tea monk by tapping their phones (which they called something like a box computer or whatever) together.

    The thing is that it was never explicitly stated that it that they were exchanging money so I interpreted it as it just being an activity log between the people that are doing the exchange so that if you were doing business with them again you would have a pseudo-memory of your relationship so you can make the decision of whether or not it is worth interacting with them or not.

    I liked that solution because it actually is tackling the root of the problem (not being able to build trust with limited memory) and doesn’t have the exploitative nature of regular currency being roped in at all.

    Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)







  • I think the fediverse already experienced what happens when those problems arise during the canvas event and yet it was still eventually resolved peacefully.

    There was limited space on the board and certain structures couldn’t be created somewhere else because it was in relation to something that was in that specific part of the board (the pony blast was a big attraction and the rainbow traveled through a lot of things.) So if you want to see what happens look at one of those time lapses very closely.

    Edit: And what was even more interesting about that event is a lot of the negotiation happened without any direct communication where as in this hypothetical community you would be able to talk to those people.

    Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)