That's interesting. I did read quadratic voting more accurately reflects preference, along those lines. I wonder if there isn't some way of modelling a world with independent actors and a fixed number of unique activities, where availability of the activity changes with respect to preference, maybe conceptually your quadratic vote budget is effectively time units. I suppose you'd have to consider how innovation increases available activities. Is there a real world example of that type of model with pricing data?
Very interesting. I still have this niggling belief that things like price and utility should be able to be derived from a fundamental matrix of possible unique activities and learnings and there collapse into actions or learnings enacted. I don't know enough mathematics or economics to even start to model it, though I did watch the khan academy on eigenvalues, lol. but building it as a computational model in the way described in the article seems way more accessible to me. I might look for some code.
people on this thread seem really aggressive. so go easy on me. But I've started to wonder about economic value. to an individual like myself the only real value(outside eating every day) is new experiences/skills or learning new things(out of a theoretical matrix of total available things). I feel like that is probably true for everyone. It would seem to be the source of the jealousy that relative wealth engenders. It causes mid life crises, the realisation that your cumulative choices have pruned your world of possible experiences and learnings. To me, it seems much more fundamental than price or a currency. Could that be modelled on a computer with individual agents? I wonder if it would prove interesting.
This is interesting. I read an article the other day that concluded our brains are made of the same neurons as other animals. it's just as ours out grew the natural limit to conectivity and forced our brains to evolve localised units that then feed into working memory and the pattern state that is self. small brains are actually more heavily interconnected than ours. That got me thinking, the difference between our brains evolving into networked self and the internet evolving into a networked version of self can't be that far apart. we all contribute our thoughts to the network. The only difference is there is no platform equivalent of working memory or executive function that coordinates the whole thing. Humanities brain is basically epileptic. once our attention is governed by a self organised executive function. maybe a direct democratic platform, we might become a global Brian.
interesting, what are your thoughts on modifying our epigenetics via crisper to pulse Yamanaka factors? also what ever happened to that CEO who gave her immune system a boost with stem cells?