Re: The Party Question Cont'd (Was Marxism and War)

(re-posting, as there appears to have been a technical problem with my previous attempt to post)

Hi Tony and Steven,

First--thanks to both of you for your encouraging words and suggestions regarding next steps.  This means a lot to me.

-- 1 --

I will work on a follow-up article (concise, and covering key principles) and post it here for feedback before submitting to potential outlets.  It is quite helpful for me to get feedback.  Some of what I write strikes a chord with a segment of readers, but other things I write are more difficult to understand because many misconceptions are common.  There is no substitute for feedback from experienced activists.  I will make an effort to have something before the end of this month.  The challenge (for me) is to keep things concise: to say what needs to be said--and not too much more.

-- 2 --

The "news and information crisis" of our ruling classes is steadily growing--resulting (for example) in the popularity of "Count Binface" in Britain (a comedian who wears a garbage can over his head and is running for election against Nigel Farage) who ridicules the institutions of the ruling class.  Just a few minutes ago I ran into a YouTube video explaining that the British government is attempting to control the algorithms that recommend YouTube videos in order to direct viewers to "trustworthy news" (and away from Count Binface).  This has already happened in the U.S., where key social media executives have been integrated into the national security apparatus.  Eventually, however (over the long term) the popular demand for algorithms that are liberated from all forms of corporate or government control will become irresistible.

[cid:[email protected]]

There is also a recent documentary on liberated algorithms: "Code for the People - A Film by Bao Nguyen" -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lQijrTaaGg

-- 3 --

Tony commented:

>  The main question is, who sets the standards
>  for judging reputation, and how can those standards
>  be challenged? If every user has their own system,
>  there's no shared judgment. If the platform sets
>  a common system, it's still using political power,
>  even if it calls that power democratic.

Tony's question is excellent.  This question may be the most important for me to answer--if I can do so in a way that is both concise and understandable.  I may have answered the question here: http://communism.org/node/4058/4058.pdf -- but I would like to write an answer that is shorter and easier to understand.

Quick summary: on a platform representing a "level playing field", the standards for judging reputation will be "liquid state".

Solid state      = the platform sets a common system (ie: standards are set by a hierarchical authority)
Gas state         = each user has his own system (ie: no meaningful common standards at all)
Liquid state    = self-organized systems compete, cooperate and evolve

In other words, standards will be set by users (individually or in self-organized groups).  All users will have the right to pass judgement on anything they like--by means of replying to a post with a post of their own that contains #tags.  For example: if John Smith makes a post that denies the ongoing genocide in Palestine--then Alice, Brian, Chris and David would have the ability to reply to John's post with a post of their own that contains the tag: #contains_genocide_denial.

Other users (such as you or me) could then instruct our algorithms (which are obedient only to us) to filter out posts which have been labeled as containing genocide denial.

Some people, of course, will post misleading tags.  One possible solution to this would be for you to instruct your algorithm to only count tags from people on your "trust list" (ie: activists whose judgement you trust).  There are many ways to do things like this.  The key point is that, once such a platform reaches maturity--there will be no "higher authority" that stands between John Smith and yourself--other than the algorithm (which is obedient only to you).

So there will certainly be shared judgement.  But the political power involved will be in *your* hands.

-- 4 --

>  How can these standards be challenged?

There would be many ways to challenge wrong decisions.  It would feel awkward for me to attempt to invent or list them all.  One way or another--a platform would enable collective action by communities--and ultimately you will need to make your case to other people.

For example, if Jane puts you on her list of jerks to filter out, and a lot of your potential readers subscribe to Jane's filter--then you may need to change your ways if you want your voice to be heard.  You may need to contact Jane and ask her to remove you from her list.  Jane may reply that you must first make a public apology, etc.

What if Jane is herself a jerk and she abuses the trust people place in her?  That will become clear with time.

So there will be a multitude of "common systems" competing for popularity in an evolving ecosystem.  There will be a lot of discussion, debates, mistakes and corrections.  And people will learn and change their behavior.  The "intelligence" that gives you a stream of useful info with a high signal-to-noise ratio will not be in the algorithm itself--it will be in the consciousness of the activists on your trust list.  Hence--your algorithm is not a substitute for consciousness--but a way to leverage, harvest and harness the consciousness of experienced and dedicated people.

And your trust list will evolve as you gain experience.  For example, if Jane does a poor job at maintaining her filter--you may eventually decide to unsub from her list--and subscribe to someone else's.  There will be both blacklists and whitelists--and you will be able to combine these as you see fit.

The platform will be a tool to lubricate and accelerate the interaction, competition and cooperation of political trends.

All the best,
Ben





-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#42485): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/42485
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/120158195/6024700
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/10173629/6024700/1441833971/xyzzy [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-