Aukštesnės kategorijos: Kultūra.

Sea vs Boat Mindset

Be asocial copycats or crediting idea recyclers?

YAML Kategorija

Imagine two kindergartens:

(1) In the kindergarten "Sea", kids copy each others: if one kid comes up with something novel and useful, others quickly copy him, and take this to their advantage, without giving any credit to those who originally came up with it.

This social set-up incentivizes kids to keep their novel and useful things to themselves, and form closed groups of trust to keep the secret advantages, and trade carefully.

(2) In the kindergarten "Boat", kids give credit to each others: if one kid comes up with something novel and useful, others praise the kid, and gives him/her credit, in that, if someone else uses their ideas, they are remembered, and if someone succeeds big way as a result of publicly shared innovation of another kid, the rest of the kids force the one who succeeded big way to give reasonable support back to the kid who publicly shared the innovation.

This social set-up incentivizes kids to share their novel and useful things as soon as possible with the public, in the expectation of social validation, and future returns, when someone else succeeds as a result of it.

Transfer a kid from one kind of kindergarten to another, and the kid's behavior will have to change, adapting to the social norm, not because the ethical views of the kid himself or herself, but because of the phenomena similar to prisoner's dilemma with respect to expected returns with respect to the given society's social norms.

So, which kindergarten would you like to be raised in?

In most cases, I would like to be raised in the kindergarten (2). This is because I don't have time to implement all the ideas that I come up with, yet I want to profit (both financially and in terms of social return) from all of my ideas without having to patent, hire an army, or work individually on every one of them to have this return to happen. I want the society be the army, that, as described in (2), praises and protects its contributors, that publicly shared ideas generate financial returns by default.

Status Quo and Prospects

I think, this kind of society will happen sooner or later, because technology allows to track, and prove increasingly many facts about events, their dates, identities and authenticity, and therefore, it is just a matter of time before those facts will be increasingly intelligently recognized, and credit given where it is due, therefore, it is sufficient to start recording those proofs now using various standards (one of the possible ways I described here), writing them to various data storage systems, as those records will get increasingly recognized regardless of particular way in which people have made those records, as long as they are probabilistically credible.

Cultural norms needed

This may happen just because technology allows to tokenize and trade ideas or to have enough evidence to sue someone for patenting a publicly shared idea. In this case, we'll still be living in the wild (1) type world. Technology alone does not fully solve all problems.

To achieve the comfortable and fun (2) world, people have evolve a culture of caring about tracing origins. People don't put down the guns because blockchain exists. They do so, because others show care about them socially and economically.

I think we should try to evolve and facilitate such culture as in the kindergarten "(2)".


Nėra sub-kategorijų.

Balsas (nebūtinas) (nesiųsti pranešimų) (nebūtinas)
Prašome prisijungti.

Jums tereikia pažvelgti į programinės įrangos inžinerijos klonuotas programas ir svetaines, kad pamatytumėte žmonių požiūrį į tai. Jūs manote, kad žmonės, galintys programuoti, bus pripažinti. Tačiau jie sakys, kad jų programa yra kažko kito klonas.

Atrodo, kad „O2oo“ dizainas pagrįstas puskepiniu. Mes visi esame įtakojami kitų

You only need to look at software engineering cloned apps and websites to see people's attitudes to this. You would think that people capable of programming would credit. But they will say their app is a clone of something else.

O2oo design seems based on halfbakery. We're all influenced by others



    : Mindey
    :  -- 
    :  -- 
    

chronological,

[chronologiškai], taip, tikrai, O2oo įkvėpė Halfbakery, taip pat įvairių kitų idėjų (pvz., [1]). Tačiau [jutta] nepatiko, kad pavadinimas „Halfmakery“ per daug panašus į „Halfbakery“.

// Mes visi esame kitų įtakojami

Būtent: "Mane formuoja sąveika su kitais. Jie kuria mane taip, kaip aš juos kuriu." - Rei Ayanami („Neon Genesis Evangelion“ / NGE) forkability // Jums tereikia pažvelgti į programinės įrangos inžinerijos klonuotas programas ir svetaines, kad pamatytumėte žmonių požiūrį į tai.

Taigi, problema išlieka – kaip tinkamai kredituoti, kad bankų sistemai rūpėtų, kas ką sako? Ar turėtų būti žyma, kuri leistų žmonėms internete susieti tuos, kurie įkvėpė tai, ką jie parašė, mašininio skaitoma forma? Galima atsekti šakutes ir viską paveldėti įvairiais būdais, kad idėjos galėtų „užsiimti seksu“ daugiau būdų? Kiti dalykai?

[chronological], yes, surely, O2oo was inspired by Halfbakery, as well as various other ideas (such as [1]). However, [jutta] didn't like that the name "Halfmakery" is too similar to "Halfbakery".

// We're all influenced by others

Exactly: "I am formed by interaction with others. They create me as I create them." - Rei Ayanami (Neon Genesis Evangelion/NGE) forkability // You only need to look at software engineering cloned apps and websites to see people's attitudes to this.

So, the problem remains -- how to credit properly, so that banking system cares who says what? Should there exist a tag, that lets people on-line associate those who inspired with what they write, in a machine-readable form? Traceable fork-ability and multi-inheritability of everything, so that ideas can "have sex" in more ways? Other things?


Man patinka biblinė nuorodų sistema. Mes remiamės Šventuoju Raštu, norėdami pripažinti faktą arba pateisinti elgesį ar įstatymą.

Kiekviena eilutė yra sunumeruota ir kiekvienai knygai yra skyriai, o jei yra daugiau nei viena knyga, pradžioje užrašome knygos numerį.

Taigi nuoroda atrodo kaip 1 Korintiečiams 13:1-13

Universitetų mokslinių tyrimų sritys turi skirtingas nuorodų schemas.

Intelektinė nuosavybė taip pat yra dalykas. Jūs tvirtinate, kad turėtume gerbti kitų intelektinę nuosavybę ir viską, ką kažkas sukėlė.

I like the biblical referencing system. We refer to scripture to acknowledge a fact or justify a behaviour or law.

Each verse is numbered and there are chapters to each book and where there is more than one book we prefix the book number at the beginning.

So a reference looks like 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Universities research fields have different referencing schemes.

Intellectual property is also a thing. You're arguing we should respect others intellectual property and all things caused by someone.


Man patinka idėja naudoti apskaitos sistemas efektams. Naudokite apskaitos technologiją, kad atsižvelgtumėte į priežasčių padarinius. Mes egzistuojame priežasties ir pasekmės visatoje. Jei kas nors sukelia kažkieno sėkmę, už tai turėtų būti atlyginta. Taigi jūsų mokytojai nusipelnė kažko už tai, ką jie padarė jums.

I like the idea of using accounting systems for effects. Use accounting technology to account for effects of causes. We exist in a cause and effect universe. If someone causes someone else's success they should get rewarded for it. So your teachers deserve some thing for what they caused for you.


Kalba