Loomio
October 14th, 2016 15:07

Secrecy Avoidance within model construct

Joe
Joe Public Seen by 350

Secrecy is one form of communication action/inaction. From the perspective of "seeking the truth" as a primary objective or purpose, secrecy is a negative practice.

Imagine a model solution with a design that does not reward the player who uses secrecy. Instead most reward comes from playing openly, honestly and truthfully. Turning something into a secret one holds alone or in a small group actually creates negative/no reward for the player(s.)

I believe a very large majority of all the communication today, in the present model, involves some form of secrecy component. Mainly because the model was created with power, money, physical objects, and belief influence as the primary reward.

Consider a model (game) with a different set of rewards: 1) happiness; 2) freedom; 3) recognition; 4) better understanding of what might be the truth; 5) attention/influence; 6) little bit of $$$.

To maximize these rewards you must be creative, transparent and honest. You must freely share your creativity vs. hold it close and keep it a secret from others (all or some.)

In this model ownership does not exist. Everything is free or leased - both objects and concepts.

This is at the heart of the Lease Economy. And secrecy no longer creates so many side problems as it does in our present model.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C7mVIpGaPoxTU_u4jvgJ-hWhImPXih8LXDWLZiSxsFA/edit?usp=sharing

Secrecy and the misinfo created because of its usage in today's model - because of the need to be the owner of creativity and the reward objects - is at the core of the dead-end design of this model. It encourages most of the negative behavior that is quickly leading to the implosion of itself.

We are witnessing the near death moment of this model. Capitalism (for $$$ reward) has forced the imbalance between humanity and our planet's natural long-term offerings. We are (and have been for decades) consuming the future generation's resources.

But there are possible new models that can create indefinite long-term sustainability. So do not give up hope and continue to help work to shift into a better model.

The Lease Economy is just a starting place tangible offering to build upon. It, as is, is NOT the answer. It's importance comes from its innovative concepts. It's always easier to compare what we have now to something as tangible and possible.

Don't give up imagining and creating the better tomorrow! And most of all DO NOT keep your ideas a secret. All great things grow from seeds in one person's mind when those seeds are improved upon with the help of others minds.

John Rhoads

John Rhoads October 15th, 2016 20:48

Good points. I am one of those that sees ideas that benefit (or harm) the common good as being something that should not be hidden. I am a musician and things that I create are intrinsically meant to be given out for enjoyment if people so choose. However, the process I use to make my music is sacred, is what makes me unique and may in the end be unknowable or even to be taught. The music itself is not secret but the process I use to create it is. By the same token, if somehow my music caused people two quit killing each other than I would want to try and teach people how I did it. The only reasoning here is if I ceased to exist the people would need my formula and it should be given freely for that purpose. If I created a cure for cancer and gave it away but kept the formula secret, this wouldn't perpetuate the cure very long. Another example is I originated a design for table that was aesthetically pleasing and unique to me and hence the source of creation is secret along with the design method. However, if it became clear that this table was a perfect model of sustainability from a common good POV, I would be compelled to disclose the secret and not hold it hostage. The point is people should not hold ideas hostage if those ideas will benefit the common good but aesthetics is better left to that beautiful mystery. So, I guess a secret can imply deception or conversely something that is a natural part of dignity. In this respect, I also feel my home is a place that should be absolute privacy but out in the street it's all all about being for the common good. Secrets should only be kept for the sake of dignity but not for the sake of hiding something that would benefit or harm the common good. This applies to the family unit as well.

Joe

Joe October 16th, 2016 12:47

@johnrhoads Totally respect your concerns about your family and home privacy. Not 100% sure why you hesitate to share your processes and approaches. Is it to protect any $$$ reward possibility more than anything else?

My Lease Economy (LE) gives everyone, no matter what they do, the exact same periodic survival benefit, so everyone has economic equality as a basis for creating a good life. There's still the whole biz world where goods and services are created and offered and this sort of competition to get ahead $wise, but this is greatly limited now.

Instead now the vast majority of citizens are working for increased happiness, recognition and attention/influence. No one need work for extra money, so you are free to do what you will with your time.

In the LE, life now is mostly about creativity. Sharing your creativity as openly and freely as possible will in time yield you the most happiness via positively impacting others with it (or NOT - if your creativity is seen as bad for society.)

In the LE world you do not own your creativity. Once shared with even a single person it becomes FREE for all the world to adopt, copy, edit, etc.

You get credit (via creativity tracking), but you own nothing.

So using your music as an example...

Your song may have been inspired by some other piece of human work, educational tidbit of knowledge or natural beauty or wonder the universe provided for free. But no one owns any of this so you have zero worries and fear as a prerequisite to your creativity work. You are freer and freedom GREATLY helps inspire new creativity!

You freely share your song with the world. No one need buy it from you. Anyone can copy it from anyone else. If it's good/great it will naturally spread and impact the world.

You can get increased happiness just from watching the spread stats. At any point anyone can give you: 1) a thank you message; 2) a story of inspiration; 3) a $gift. Each with great potential to add more happiness to your daily life.

That $gift comes from the part of the $ survival benefit everyone gets. Note people have extra money if they budget wisely or receive extra $ via: 1) gifting; 2) commerce activity.

Every citizen has a digital self that is accessible by all the world. You share your creativity thru this digital instance of you. You have 100% control over who can access what. Instead of secrecy you use access control features. You can hide certain creativity for yourself - eg a work in progress. You can give your sig other (SO) access alone. Or just your immediate family. Or community. Or you can place it so anyone exploring you can access it.

This virtual you (btw - also your governance avatar) lives on after the passing of your physical being. So in the LE world no one every totally goes away.

You can hide some of your creativity while physically alive but then make it accessible after your death is officially registered. Again, with full control of who gets to access what.

So now put secrecy in this new context. The LE world has people thinking and acting much differently than they are encouraged to in our present model.

I love to ponder what LE now does for the terrible issue of suicide. Now suicide must include deleting your avatar from the virtual world. Will anyone do this?

In a world where everyone can be far more creative and obtain unlimited happiness from their efforts, have far fewer worries about $ to survive, be on equal footing with most everyone else, have no one person or group who has far more negative-world power than anyone else - what happens re fear and secrecy and all the negative problems human beings create for our world? Might the world work far more at becoming more sustainable with human creativity?

Tons more to reveal about the LE world, but a few glimpses at its possibility offerings.

Really the key is better tools for communication and collaboration - working together (co-creating) in far more harmony while tolerating any unique set of beliefs or importance priorities.

John Rhoads

John Rhoads October 16th, 2016 18:48

@joe21 "Not 100% sure why you hesitate to share your processes and approaches. Is it to protect any $$$ reward possibility more than anything else?"

No, a world where people freely give away ideas (and labor) based on its usefulness to the common good does not hold ideas hostage for money. But one important thing to consider in this world is a need to be unique. We all need something that is truly our own that makes us different from everyone else. Otherwise, we lose our individuality and that can be a real bummer. So, people express art and that naturally expresses their individuality and it benefits society "if they so chose". To be unique is to have dignity.

In this respect, it is aesthetics or art that can be kept secret in order to cultivate individuality and hence dignity. People should not be "obligated" to give anything away about their art that they do not so chose. Think of it like a rare bird that gets seen very seldom. What a treat for those lucky enough to catch a glimpse. This to me is that beautiful mystery that we don't need to know why or how it is. It just is and that's good enough. People need some mystery in this way and I think they will never be able to think their way out of this.

Conversely, people should be obligated to give away those things that are needed for the common good. Now, we could argue that art is a "need" of the common good and may be true but like was said earlier, we can't force people to create art, display art or anything about their art that they do not so chose. This could be defined as freedom to some people. From a group POV and where people depend on other people, the common good is an obligation where art is not. If we follow this thought we see how freedom and dignity are tied to art (and arguably our bodies which is very much like art).

In this hypothetical world, the only secrets that exist are those dealing with aesthetics.

As a digression, labor is given away freely to the common good. Money is only a means of exchange and holds no intrinsic value. The only things with true intrinsic value are sun, soil, water, air, life (nature) and those cannot be owned. They can only be cared for collectively.

As a side note, it's interesting to see that at one moment something is an obligation and at another moment it's given away freely. I won't go into this but is centered on the idea of acceptance. Also, the idea of Privacy is the idea of individuality and dignity. I could go on here about how "privatization" should never include things that are not a part of our individuality. Lastly, dignity = having needs met which is more accurate than how I stated it previously but is till "beauty" or "loving". Feeding a starving person appeals to the sense of his dignity yet still has that "beauty" or "love" component. More accurately, having an individuals needs met by the group is dignity whether it be the need for privacy or the need to be cared for when sick. It is still a very personal thing and is of humility.

John Rhoads

John Rhoads October 16th, 2016 19:19

"In the LE world you do not own your creativity."- I agree with this only from the standpoint that this creativity serves the common good. Otherwise, your creativity is yours to share as freely or not as you wish. I think a distinction can be made between aesthetic creativity versus all other forms. I also think a definition of "own" is in order here. I define ownership differently. I see ownership as a byproduct of a system of "haves" and "have nots". In a world where all peoples true "needs" are met is a world without ownership. For example, if everyone felt it necessary to own a TV in order to survive, than that TV would be a "need" that should be met (perhaps a bad example I know but for the sake of demonstration it will work). Being an "owner" is like saying your need was met and vice versa. If everyone had a TV, no one would "own" a TV. If I had a TV and you didn't, you might break into my house and steal it - your need gets met. If everyone had a TV there would be no need to break into your house and steal it. In fact, I could go on to say that nearly all crimes are based on the fact that there are haves and haven nots, laws to protect the "haves" or owners and punishment for those that broke the law because their needs weren't met. Furthermore, ownership is based on scarcity. So, it's all about meeting peoples needs and eliminating scarcity. This to me is the credo and life-strategy.

"You have 100% control over who can access what." -I agree with this only from an aesthetic point of view and personal home or body.

"This virtual you (btw - also your governance avatar) lives on after the passing of your physical being. So in the LE world no one every totally goes away." -This to me is "history".

"Now suicide must include deleting your avatar from the virtual world." -For me this would not be possible or acceptable if your contribution to the common good was notable. Otherwise, you would be as free to erase who you are as you wish.

"Imagine a model solution with a design that does not reward the player who uses secrecy. Instead most reward comes from playing openly, honestly and truthfully. Turning something into a secret one holds alone or in a small group actually creates negative/no reward for the player(s.)" -I agree from the "common good" POV. But I tend to think of "player" and "game" as things that we do not mix with the "mission critical" aspects of living a happy and dignified life. For me, games are really cool for recreational purposes but when it comes to life and limb, games are not a good fit. This is why I hate Wall Street and capitalism because they use "game theory" as a means to define and manipulate peoples lives. IMO, we shouldn't game peoples lives for any reason ever. Life is not a game. But that is not to say that life doesn't have or should not have "strategy". I think strategy can exist without "game" because I differentiate strategy for fun versus strategy for survival. The strategy in a game is for one person or team to win over another; in life the strategy is for everyone to win and no losers. I think a better analogy perhaps would be a "play" at a theater where instead of a winner of loser we have the "moral of the story".

John Rhoads

John Rhoads October 16th, 2016 20:58

@joe21 Keep up the comment threads, they are perfect for what d@ is all about IMO and helps me more accurately formulate my position on things while learning new things. Your ideas are really excellent!!!

Joe

Joe October 17th, 2016 00:47

Will do and many thanks. Hope others join in soon too.

Joe

Joe October 17th, 2016 01:41

I'm a game creator, so I tend to use game analogizes a lot. I respect your sensitivity to NOT thinking about the serious parts of life as playing a game.

The great thing about creating new models like LE is that we can build game-like platforms to play test many of the concepts and work out any bugs that emerge. No need to try to force radical changes on real people in the real world. Instead we can build the tools and try them out before asking the real world to change.

If we create great tools and new solutions that work well in these test worlds then players will start using them in their real world and life.

Our world is becoming more and more digital and virtual all the time. Really just a different form of storytelling that is central to being human. It's both education and entertainment and how we explore and discover real-world possibility thru imagination. Everything new starts as a story of sorts.

Much of what exists today was created into the world by innovative human imagination. By boldness and fearlessness of a few who would not conform and settle for the status quo. There was tons of bad ideas created and tested to get to the great things that now exist. There was/is also a lot of bad things created into the world. Bad stuff to support the bad model that gives power and wealth to a few who are so selfish they will do almost anything, including take that which rightfully (resource continuity) belongs to others of the future.

IMHO the current education system greatly stifles kids (then adults) imaginations. As quickly as possible the model's ed system strips away freedom replacing with fear, worries, stress and problems that eat up a life's time - to help get people to fall into line. To NOT find extra time to imagine changing the world into a better place with better solutions.

The story the powerful have created to cover up the truth is quite clever. Tell stories that tug at the emotions. Say you are doing these great deeds for others while they take take take for themselves and maintain their power positions. (IMHO most not-for-profits are the biggest scams of the corporate world.)

These bad guys are playing games with real lives and real resources. Many fooling even themselves by telling themselves, "This is the best it can be. There's not enough for everyone."

I'm 100% certain there's more than enough for everyone. The problem is the waste and inefficiency of their model. Today's capitalism demands unending growth and this is impossible given a limited control volume like planet Earth.

The LE model looks to growth in efficiency and reduction in wasteful consumption and rewards for these achievements. It does not create new jobs, but instead creates new found free time and freedom for even more creativity creation. It's completely sustainable and actually things get better as time moves forward. It's a model that can fulfill that dream of most of handing to our kids and grandkids a better world.

In the future when I talk about playing the game think about it in the context of testing out the new innovations prior to adopting the new solutions into real life.

Like you, when it comes to doing real life in the future I hope every citizen can view life as not needing to win the game as one winner or one of the few who end up as winners. Instead everyone should attain great happiness in whatever they do and at the end of their life feel they had a great life.