@freeschool @Gargron

Polkadot is also paying for events.

Finance can be a roadblock. But when one can print money and distribute it efficiently, power dynamics changes.

@freeschool @Gargron

Empowering people with hope is key! Teaching that small actions can spark BIG change is crucial.
#education

@amiya_rbehera
Good stuff...

1❓ Do you want to ping pong more about direct change to people on Fediverse? ?

I believe we can change peer to peer or as small group with consent and transparency...

2❓ And how do you see things (so I can see where you're at about this kind of work / starting of ideas), it seems you might be ahead on some work and doing this all already or just blogging mostly?

======================
P.S My Favourite line from Link 3
======================
"...imagine a world where everyone was deaf. “People would stop talking,” he said..."

(https://iambrainstorming.github.io/chapters/how-to-tackle-disinformation.html)

@freeschool Currently working on blockchain voting.

Testing how direct democracy would be possible.

https://iambrainstorming.github.io/chapters/democracy/secure_blockchain_voting.html#problem-of-high-stake

@freeschool Two years have passed building it. Still lot of work to do.

@amiya_rbehera It's really good + I like how you write also which is really magnetic.

================
Short version from me is:
================
I'm not sure about any tech any more and the whole time invested/"time is lost in tech" thing - you already spent years yourself and maybe that was away from people themselves?
And "Still a lot a of work to do." which is good but not people work perhaps...
Therefore lost time, even if people are a bit hopeless, tech even more somewhat...

So even if good system is achieved I'm not sure I'd trust people to vote on anything - and scratching the Fediverse surfaces reveals many fairy-tale / bourgeoise people - so voting is useless somewhat.

================
LONG VERSION - What I wrote first...
================
As someone looking at these types of things, it seems natural to critique it a bit to understand it - but I can see people don't always get how that works and only see it as critique more than that action as a positive thing and understand the ins and outs of it all, so not hammering on your project but educating myself... if I can ask a few question?

It seems that you see that top-down change is going to be changed in order to attempt any sort of voting and even tech guys can't be trusted - agree.

So what will blockchain voting change in that AND that people still can't communicate or express themselves properly - these are my own conclusions and open tests with Fediverse people (those we considered wiser) but scratching surface see a bit of a twitter user actually or weak user behind it all... so I wouldn't even trust them to vote necessarily on anything without getting the love for other back by practising a lot more (online zoom style but better versions).

So overall
1/ I like you can respond
(first thing !)

2/ You can write back (second thing)

3/ Have some direction

4/ Can show me how it works or eventual deployment

As my name suggests a bit, improving any tech is measurably a waste / too much gambling of time when users are weak or tech can be forked / fucked / forgotten... so in respect to your time I wanted some light on that and corrected on the better ways (many ways are good and needed but tech I'm not sure about any more and you already spent years maybe away from people themselves?)

Thanks for appreciating a my directness as best you can...

@freeschool You don't trust vote, thats ok. But most decisions are taken by people, good or bad. The goal is to design governace system that is mostly good, not necessarily accurate all the time. We can build reputation system that rewards truthier system. With better reward and punish system this can be done
Wikipedia and stackoverflow are examples. Also, I am not the only one working (wasting time) on it.

@freeschool If we look at the tech, there are only few 3-6 companies that control our world of information, they are reason of tech pessimism.

Its google, meta, microsoft and amazon, apple, X. They lasted long, but won't last for ever.

@amiya_rbehera I'm glad you wrote again, again I want to say all is positive, and even if short it is not unkind but a kind of proof by testing your idea - so I will reply some things here;

What you just said (about companies) summarises the constant denial (not just education) and wanted control by people - they are willing massively to give them and very happy for exchange. This is hard for us to get (it is not very logical but they get their sugar and don't care if teeth fall out)

The ANONcompany (google or any brand) is chosen rather than whatever you make. This is not to say it won't be good or useful BUT people who can't trust (LOST the ability) is what I mean by anything like "waste of time" by proof of what people have consistently chosen and like now they are on that drug or devil's luxuries or short-cuts (even if it cuts humanity). It's not a moral thing for them unless someone in person comes to them with an axe (distant remote-threats / climate etc are near 0 credible to consider more than 1 minute small talk).

I have had strong consistent experience (as my whole life) where people will not trust / can't / don't care and literally choose XYZ brand - even American stuff despite being hugely anti-American and even rascist again them as a super-power / spies etc.

It is now as certain behaviour like a bread of dog you want to change (or any animal). Some will change but without supporting human behaviour and personal #p2p they wouldn't be able to vote different anyway (evil / damage / extraction / data is where money is at and food for children - just look at people's jobs). I usually always get to this job or 'my family' stage. Can't trump or defeat that excuse and that why anything more needs almost a suicide to achieve liberation.

We few are almost only the people who care or don't - not my wanting of that. In past the people I / we were saving were laughing at us - we need to grow better people.

Literally nothing will change unless we redesign trust which I think you are on the side of... and even in my fast writing I want to be careful not to hurt my fellow caring person - but if you have your head in a computer (or anyone does) most of your life - then it's hard to solve from that extreme... especially NOW WE HAVE ALMOST EVERYTHING for communication (and not saying I have wonderful answers but I have had wonderful audio chats with people and mini-collabs which is 100% tangible and relative NOW to finding more of 'us' not more weak or easy sell-outs <--- I respect them but they are baggage like carrying a baby in Bruce Willis movie to survive something better / more autonomous).

So some questions to define that below - because any designer can see what does or does do or its aims and I'm keen to hear (not use it against you but discover real potential if you can justify it)

❓ I'm only asking to see what now is tangible on your side?
Does it do something now I can see ? Can you demonstrate a part of it?

❓ Even if you achieve for example, will it largely be rejected as we already see now? (we have the proof of answer mostly - our admins included)

❓ Did Mastodon stop googlism or safer social (in a way yes, in a way admins using google and gargron don't care were a new ad-farm / data link - so much that they will not say it (he did reply it's not his responsibility even to only suggest it once in a while or offer links, original and proxy/non-advert which is why Invidious IS really tangeble in our struggle for non-advert/less data to them). So despite Admin user base and even same-same principles of Mastodon / QOTO - NONE of these want to put a NO CONSENT or even suggest a different way... I could say scared but also they don't want so that's that.

❓ Even if tech doesn't survive what makes you think you will ! At that point and at that stage we will be nearly dead when they go or far from using software by proxy or able to network on same level or even power up carrying our tech. It will be water and basics ALL of computing like all these versions of same thing DEAD / WASTE (even considering sometimes it's needed, most is bloat now or excess - so not including your work but just copies of copies sapping forests almost <-- don't want to sound like a naturist but Germany's hamburg forest or whatever everywhere being cleared is literally the cost of computing EVERY minute AND every minute you are not doing human work which I appreciate talking to me you are doing but more and more, plus I have some answer but want to hear you also)

RELATIONSHIPS LAST LONGEST...

The relationship now is where it seems to all lead - but through these questions above I hope to be proved wrong (I got to this stage by changing constantly when solidly defeated based on logic or emotions - i.e. having reasoning. So if it's not another assumption already proved that people don't want it or isn't another then I'm really going to change my view for sure...

Keep in mind people don't vote, and often keep silent - even for their children push them into selling themselves - they *know* the banks cheapen the money that no longer is the same worth yet willing to work endless hours for various #psychological errors...

...they know they're neighbours or other countries are being extracted/ killed for their petrol in cars and increasingly now lawn mowers so they can relax and drive around to burn up energy and even by another smaller one for their kids to drive around like a new privilege.

And finally NOT MANY want to be FREE - this might not even hit home to you unless you test many people. At the very end, for some reasons they will chose back to the fake-normals instead of drive change. Sorry - it's hard to even accept...

SO WHY I'M AIMING FOR PEOPLE WORK
The people work is what capitalism cuts out - emotional intelligence and well caring basicallyt, so that almost shows what is needed (capitalism cuts out the 'good' often so we can use that to see what is needed).
Caring even as voting doesn't seem to quite get there unless it's a virtual theoretical thing (like on Mastodon now - I can make a poll)

❓ What is difference between #Mastodon #polls and your more evolved thing (ok I know it's much more organised or able but the basics of voting here or in your system, what would it change?)

So I like even if people waste their time (I don't like this phrase people can see it as calling people stupid) ...but if it can't be justified then people are usually hoping / not testing / don't have solids or even fully thought thing...

If everyone jumps off a bridge or follows each other in bad system, doesn't not make their waste of time justified.

I am interested in raw justification while I am being forgiving also - what will reach humanity (which almost 100% needs more loving/respecting humans than tech, which also is another proof for me limits of tech).

Voting is great if you can do some of this human stuff...

❓ but I wonder why you went for this in first place? When not many vote and what would you want people to vote on (with or without iron-gated system that WILL NOT allow such)...? And also what people eventually need do in person... maybe from virtual internet to local it could work... but without lovingness voting seems hard to break people bad logic and belief in fallacies / fairy tales...

Wikipedia and stackoverflow are ok examples, but not really about POWER, self-trust, poor people, improving relations... many of these 'systems' don't do that....
Good non-human. knowledge base, or maybe I missed something about them that cares?

I appreciate you reading long text (proving it can't work as short) and even this "caring" topic is almost a new thing like "emotional intelligence" and dispelling all the fallacies / fairy-tales of life (I think there is about 80 lol common to us all!)

@freeschool You wrote so long. I agree with you in most cases. In short As a demonstration that already exists is open -gov https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/opengov

If 51% agree, than your referendum is passed.

The problem of open gov is token voting, more money you have more the power of your votes. I am trying to solve its limitation, through KYC.

@freeschool A good governance solves many issue, like any organization can be decentralized without need of any boss. Employees can directly decide there salary through voting.

@freeschool

You can look at the bullshit jobs. Such system can kill such jobs.

https://iambrainstorming.github.io/opinionated_observer/bullshit_jobs/bullshit_jobs.html

@amiya_rbehera You write too short... Good you can reply but...
🔴 ... you distract from many points you could answer
🔴 ...you didn't answer almost any of the questions

🏁 Congrats... we're done! 🏁
To keep working this way is a mistake.

There rest is not needed, I think the above is enough...

So you think logic works with workplace type people or sharks or with work/money logic, and even general people views.

51% is often a stupid mechanism too as 1% either way means it was even so half unhappy is bad.
Another way is needed to not make not that much unhappy.
(Eeven 60/40 is still close and bad / need to work together)

Anyway I'm wasting my time..

I like you're writing in theory only but without many answers back sorry it doesn't work at all.
All these things could... work... like always so many good things around. Why are they not used?

I guess it's tempting to keep developing... good luck without answering people's questions.
_shrug_ .... "NEXT!..."

@freeschool I am using mastodon instance that has 500 characters, for answering in detail I need the help of blog.

Regarding 50% or 70% there are tradeoff, written here.

Simple majority and Super majority.

https://iambrainstorming.github.io/chapters/democracy/simple_majority_and_super_majority.html

Another blog,

Tyranny of the Majority, Minority, Representatives, Shareholders and Democratic trilemma
https://iambrainstorming.github.io/chapters/democracy/tyranny_of_the_majority.html

@freeschool And I am not looking for perfect solution, because it doesn't exists. There are always tradeoff which we have to live with it. Just can be make thing a bit better, more balanced.

https://iambrainstorming.github.io/chapters/reasoning/fallacies.html#tradeoff-and-opportunity-cost

@freeschool
I needed time to reply. Here is my reply:

> I'm only asking to see what now is tangible on your side?

I already gave the open gov example. Regarding my app, It's still in process of building, testnet soon.

@freeschool Even if you achieve for example, will it largely be rejected as we
already see now?

Rejection is a part of the journey. First one has to test how much a protocol works, then need for a shared vision. Some may reject, some may appreciate it if they understand the vision. It's a part of life. One need to reevaluate the protocol and strategies and adapt it based on what works best. Time and resources are limited.

@freeschool Did Mastodon stop googlism or safer social

If you ask better mastodon better than googlism, I would say yes. But mastodon is far from killing other bigtech social media. They have to go by word of mouth rather than advertising. Big tech has so much money. It's better because it doesn't keep us in a walled garden, being abused by big tech algorithms. Mastodon is adaptable, any FOSS developer can adapt is to user's need, but one has hardly any choice in cased of bigtech social media

@freeschool Even if tech doesn't survive what makes you think you will !
Protecting the environment is a mammoth task, decreasing our population which has started, need of stronger democracy, where environmentalist are heard, and end consumerism. Will 51% votes of people solve it. It don't know. If we design a system where positive externality are rewarded, and they have more voting power, will it lead to mass adoption, I don't know. It all depends on the ability to create a shared vision.

@freeschool There are also technological challenges that has to be overcomed.

21@amiya_rbehera@mas.to
Growing people first it seems better for many contexts;

Growing B- can get rains I think better than - this scores in the now more than later or as technical challenge with uncertain / perhaps near-0 use. Growing people first it seems better in many contexts;

@amiya_rbehera Human change first because technology almost ONLY gets forced towards profit without that.
If it's public and people need money, thenyou can hardly trust anyone who are working for money (willingly or not... loving money or not- they must find money at any cost to humanity)

But all things _might_ be needed to try even if it plays into the same bad hands first...

Open-source and 'open' stuff is also turned towards evil on larger scale. Good or or bad - all leads to profit first unless really it's defence is built in. And one defence is more clever AND loving people (we have clever people but not loving).

Imagine all the people trying for good and the bad just take the cream of that only first for advertising tricks and forcing another kind of governance.

Again your stuff on blockchain _might_ be needed, if allowed... if people want it, want more tech and blockchain in their life... etc etc... if... while real power is existing over weak people just working endlessly...

@freeschool https://iambrainstorming.github.io/opinionated_observer/observation/move_to_decentralized_platform.html

Breaking Free from the Post-Truth World: Why Indian Media Should Migrate to Mastodon and Bluesky

@amiya_rbehera
#climate #environmental #activist

Licypriya Kangujam is a young #environmental #activist from #India that has been campaigning for #climate #action in India since 2018, to pass new #law / #laws to curb India's high #pollution levels, and to make #climatechange literacy mandatory in #school / #schools.

She has been regarded as India's #GretaThunberg, though she does not like the usage of this term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licypriya_Kangujam