Kill the Culture and Burn the Pulpit Part 1: An Analysis of a revolution

[Captain Utopia]

Point.  But I'm not giving you a picture, I'm describing a paint set.  

That was a cop out.

There are "real world" examples of collaborative ventures out-performing institutions at their own-game, all over the internet.  It is something only possible with the internet.  If saying that there is potential to improve upon the performance of our governmental institutions by using the exact same means, places me in an ivory tower in your eyes, then so be it.

What stage of planning are you at? How many committed member do you have? How many countries are currently involved?

This isn't about me.  I'm trying to implement just a small part, and I'm doing so independently.  If I get hit by a truck today, the project will still go on just fine.  I don't know the numbers, every few days metagovernment finds new projects from all over the world that had sprung up independently.

There is an incomplete list here:  http://metagovernment.org/wiki/Related_projects

[Doktor Howl]

There are "real world" examples of collaborative ventures out-performing institutions at their own-game, all over the internet.  It is something only possible with the internet.  If saying that there is potential to improve upon the performance of our governmental institutions by using the exact same means, places me in an ivory tower in your eyes, then so be it.

So, let me get this straight:  The path to your near-utopia involves people using the internet, but you don't have any concrete ideas as to actually implimenting that?  I don't want a paint set, man, I have to worry about keeping 56 people employed, getting my bills paid, and doing horrible shit when nobody is looking.  I am a busy man...So are most people.  If we all stopped what we were doing to design an internet utopia, we'd all starve to death.

Sad fact:  There were only a couple of hundred people involved in setting up the entire US system.  Everyone else was busy growing food, making tools, sailing cargo ships, robbing people, etc.  When the visionaries were done with their model, then people decided whether or not they wanted it.  In that case, they did.

You've cast yourself in the role of a visionary.  Let's have some vision, okay?

[Adios]

Point.  But I'm not giving you a picture, I'm describing a paint set.  

That was a cop out.

There are "real world" examples of collaborative ventures out-performing institutions at their own-game, all over the internet.  It is something only possible with the internet.  If saying that there is potential to improve upon the performance of our governmental institutions by using the exact same means, places me in an ivory tower in your eyes, then so be it.

What stage of planning are you at? How many committed member do you have? How many countries are currently involved?

This isn't about me.  I'm trying to implement just a small part, and I'm doing so independently.  If I get hit by a truck today, the project will still go on just fine.  I don't know the numbers, every few days metagovernment finds new projects from all over the world that had sprung up independently.

There is an incomplete list here:  http://metagovernment.org/wiki/Related_projects

So the beast has no head, no brain, no focused goals. Sounds like a bunch of people with time on their hands running around willy-nilly screeching about change but not accomplishing anything.

[Doktor Howl]

Point.  But I'm not giving you a picture, I'm describing a paint set.  

That was a cop out.

There are "real world" examples of collaborative ventures out-performing institutions at their own-game, all over the internet.  It is something only possible with the internet.  If saying that there is potential to improve upon the performance of our governmental institutions by using the exact same means, places me in an ivory tower in your eyes, then so be it.

What stage of planning are you at? How many committed member do you have? How many countries are currently involved?

This isn't about me.  I'm trying to implement just a small part, and I'm doing so independently.  If I get hit by a truck today, the project will still go on just fine.  I don't know the numbers, every few days metagovernment finds new projects from all over the world that had sprung up independently.

There is an incomplete list here:  http://metagovernment.org/wiki/Related_projects

So the beast has no head, no brain, no focused goals. Sounds like a bunch of people with time on their hands running around willy-nilly screeching about change but not accomplishing anything.

Rather like a certain administration, no?   

[Adios]

Point.  But I'm not giving you a picture, I'm describing a paint set.  

That was a cop out.

There are "real world" examples of collaborative ventures out-performing institutions at their own-game, all over the internet.  It is something only possible with the internet.  If saying that there is potential to improve upon the performance of our governmental institutions by using the exact same means, places me in an ivory tower in your eyes, then so be it.

What stage of planning are you at? How many committed member do you have? How many countries are currently involved?

This isn't about me.  I'm trying to implement just a small part, and I'm doing so independently.  If I get hit by a truck today, the project will still go on just fine.  I don't know the numbers, every few days metagovernment finds new projects from all over the world that had sprung up independently.

There is an incomplete list here:  http://metagovernment.org/wiki/Related_projects

So the beast has no head, no brain, no focused goals. Sounds like a bunch of people with time on their hands running around willy-nilly screeching about change but not accomplishing anything.

Rather like a certain administration, no?   

[Cramulus]

Some good points:

-if somebody invents an iPhone app which allows them to actually participate in democracy, it will sell like mad
-I support the effort to decentralize power. To some extent you can take it away from lobbyists by giving a voice to the consensus. Technology can do this. It's already happening gradually, but it needs another push*.



Cons: (and this is an ancient con)
-democratic consensus doesn't always select the best ideas. Look at the teabaggers!



It's impossible to predict how technology is going to change the world. We can get a glimpse of it by examining current trends, but those aren't great predictors due to the black swan effect. So I'm not really looking for Captain Utopia to paint us a picture of exactly how this is going to work - as you get more specific, you get less accurate.

I do have hope that all this technology is going to give us some better measures of consensus, some better way to let the politicians know what's up, than gallup polls.



*Kalle Lasn's terrible book "Culture Jam" describes what he calls "the jaws of change" - he says that to get anything done, to change the status quo, you need two angles working in concert. Below, you have grassroots movements run by regular shmucks (like metagovernment), and above, you need some more powerful support. A serious investor or government sponsor, for example.

[Adios]

Some good points:

-if somebody invents an iPhone app which allows them to actually participate in democracy, it will sell like mad
-I support the effort to decentralize power. To some extent you can take it away from lobbyists by giving a voice to the consensus. Technology can do this. It's already happening gradually, but it needs another push*.



Cons: (and this is an ancient con)
-democratic consensus doesn't always select the best ideas. Look at the teabaggers!



It's impossible to predict how technology is going to change the world. We can get a glimpse of it by examining current trends, but those aren't great predictors due to the black swan effect. So I'm not really looking for Captain Utopia to paint us a picture of exactly how this is going to work - as you get more specific, you get less accurate.

I do have hope that all this technology is going to give us some better measures of consensus, some better way to let the politicians know what's up, than gallup polls.



*Kalle Lasn's terrible book "Culture Jam" describes what he calls "the jaws of change" - he says that to get anything done, to change the status quo, you need two angles working in concert. Below, you have grassroots movements run by regular shmucks (like metagovernment), and above, you need some more powerful support. A serious investor or government sponsor, for example.

Of course there is 0% chance of abuses.

[Doktor Howl]

Cons: (and this is an ancient con)
-democratic consensus doesn't always select the best ideas. Look at the teabaggers!

Sure it's ancient.  It led to the end of Athens as a cultural center, for example.

[Cramulus]

Some good points:

-if somebody invents an iPhone app which allows them to actually participate in democracy, it will sell like mad
-I support the effort to decentralize power. To some extent you can take it away from lobbyists by giving a voice to the consensus. Technology can do this. It's already happening gradually, but it needs another push*.



Cons: (and this is an ancient con)
-democratic consensus doesn't always select the best ideas. Look at the teabaggers!



It's impossible to predict how technology is going to change the world. We can get a glimpse of it by examining current trends, but those aren't great predictors due to the black swan effect. So I'm not really looking for Captain Utopia to paint us a picture of exactly how this is going to work - as you get more specific, you get less accurate.

I do have hope that all this technology is going to give us some better measures of consensus, some better way to let the politicians know what's up, than gallup polls.



*Kalle Lasn's terrible book "Culture Jam" describes what he calls "the jaws of change" - he says that to get anything done, to change the status quo, you need two angles working in concert. Below, you have grassroots movements run by regular shmucks (like metagovernment), and above, you need some more powerful support. A serious investor or government sponsor, for example.

Of course there is 0% chance of abuses.

Okay?
I didn't realize this thread was only for posting foolproof, fully concocted plans to save the world and harm no one. Sorry, I'll try to be more doom and gloom.

[Adios]

Some good points:

-if somebody invents an iPhone app which allows them to actually participate in democracy, it will sell like mad
-I support the effort to decentralize power. To some extent you can take it away from lobbyists by giving a voice to the consensus. Technology can do this. It's already happening gradually, but it needs another push*.



Cons: (and this is an ancient con)
-democratic consensus doesn't always select the best ideas. Look at the teabaggers!



It's impossible to predict how technology is going to change the world. We can get a glimpse of it by examining current trends, but those aren't great predictors due to the black swan effect. So I'm not really looking for Captain Utopia to paint us a picture of exactly how this is going to work - as you get more specific, you get less accurate.

I do have hope that all this technology is going to give us some better measures of consensus, some better way to let the politicians know what's up, than gallup polls.



*Kalle Lasn's terrible book "Culture Jam" describes what he calls "the jaws of change" - he says that to get anything done, to change the status quo, you need two angles working in concert. Below, you have grassroots movements run by regular shmucks (like metagovernment), and above, you need some more powerful support. A serious investor or government sponsor, for example.

Of course there is 0% chance of abuses.

Okay?
I didn't realize this thread was only for posting foolproof, fully concocted plans to save the world and harm no one. Sorry, I'll try to be more doom and gloom.

Wasn't my intention. I guess I am far too jaded. I have seen and heard too many Great Plans™ that all ended up with a new set of the powerful with no change.

[Cramulus]

forgive me for the sarcasm, I just got a little tweaked by being force fed cynicism.. I just don't think it's necessarily a given that things are going to get worse. Technology has been steadily improving quality of life (by some measures). Every few years they come up with a new type of communication or network. And it keeps accelerating - we're going to be seeing MAJOR growth every few months now. The general trend is that these things give more power to regular jackasses (through the magic of representation). It's easier to get educated now than ever before. Sure, some people will use technology maliciously, some will be out for profit, and some people will ignore it, but technology is also empowering lots of people who want to do something about their shitty situations.

This guy is a good example. He's not a celebrity or politician, or even a guy who wrote a book. He's just some prole. Maybe it's not the perfect idea, but you've heard of it, right? That's a victory for chumps like us.

Yeah, no plan we can come up with is foolproof. Every plan has chaos in it, especially the ones that aim highest. That doesn't mean we should just roll over and accept that we're going to get fucked, it means that the plan that we're operating on right now (the status quo) is living on borrowed time - we should be grabbing sticks and hammers and hitting this fucking thing and jumping on it and kicking it until quarters are flying out everywhere.

[Doktor Howl]

forgive me for the sarcasm, I just got a little tweaked by being force fed cynicism.. I just don't think it's necessarily a given that things are going to get worse. Technology has been steadily improving quality of life (by some measures).

Technology has improved quality of life by leaps and bounds.

It's also the only hope we have of surviving another 100 years as a species.

On the downside, some of it drives people crazy.

[The Wizard]

I just posted part two in a new thread. Enjoy. 

[Cramulus]

the phase of culture we're in right now reminds me of the industrial revolution

they told us that vacuum cleaners and microwaves would free up the housewife's day

instead, the housewife ended up doing MORE housework because everybody's standards went up.


And today, e-mail is supposed to make life easier than sending snail mail

but when you're applying for a job, now you're competing with thousands of people instead of just dozens. So you have to use the full potential of the technology and blast your resume all over the goddamn place like it's ebola or something


And I think this is a good microcosm

if technology allows us more hands-on participation within democracy, and everybody is using that system, it's going to take a lot of effort to actually make a signal in all that noise.

[President Television]

forgive me for the sarcasm, I just got a little tweaked by being force fed cynicism.. I just don't think it's necessarily a given that things are going to get worse. Technology has been steadily improving quality of life (by some measures).

Technology has improved quality of life by leaps and bounds.

It's also the only hope we have of surviving another 100 years as a species.

On the downside, some of it drives people crazy.

Downside? It'll be hilarious.