• @sturlabragasonOP
    link
    11 year ago

    I appreciate the insights you’ve shared. Here’s a clarification on the core points:

    1. Algocracy vs. Human Emotion: The objective isn’t to replace the entirety of human decision-making but to use algocracy in areas where certain human flaws can be systematically minimized. Algorithms, when designed properly, can reduce the impact of biases and inconsistencies.

    2. Selection of Human Overseers: The selection would remain transparent and lean towards open-source principles. Individuals would be chosen by peers and those deemed competent within the community. We migh utilize a meritocratic governance model combined with token-based voting for stake, enhanced by a reputation system to ensure decisions are made by competent, committed individuals, all underpinned by open-source principles for transparency and collective oversight (this is oversimplifying it, there is a huge amount of great ways; I hope to have time later to write about them).

    3. Purpose of Algocracy: The goal is not an AI or algorithmic “takeover.” It’s about integrating algorithmic governance in specific areas to achieve consistency and fairness, always with human oversight at its core.

    The emphasis is on refining our governance systems, not replacing the human touch. Challenges exist, but with collaboration and transparency, we can navigate them effectively.