Test: Difference between revisions

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
Michel Bauwens: Just a moment. My mouse isn't working. Yeah, all right. I don't know what's happening anyway.


Claire: Oh, it's okay. I think Jialin is joining us. Let me see what's going on here—do I need to approve something? How are you?


Governance in the P2P / Commons Age
Michel Bauwens: I'm fine. I just don’t know why my mouse isn’t working. I just changed the battery, so I don’t know what’s going on. Anyway, I can use my pad, so it’s okay. I’m pretty good. I was ill last week, but I’m better now. You know, it’s very polluted here in Chiang Mai.


Below, you will find a copy of an email from Tiberius Brastavicenau, the founder of Sensorica, a Montreal-based cosmo-local community involved in the production of open sensors, and has created a very elaborate open value accounting methodology. The basic idea is that this is a system in which everyone can log in his work or contribution on a common project, is peer reviewed and acknowledged, and then receives appropriate tokens that represent a percentage of the overall work done for a particular project.When income is generated for the common work, the contributions are then rewarded accordingly. This is a system which allows for the non-hierarchical coordination of common work.
Claire: Oh, how come?


‘Tibi’ is a good friend, whom I admire for his pioneering work in setting up fthis sophisticated tool to initiate open systems of peer production and value exchange, which predate similar attempts in the crypto economy.  
Michel Bauwens: They burn the forest every year for industrial corn production. The farmers make a lot of money when they burn the forest because mushrooms and other things grow, and these big agro-industrial concerns are very powerful. If nobody provides an alternative, the practice just continues. The middle class in the cities hates it, but if you simply tell the farmers to stop, they’d be on the streets protesting. So it’s a difficult problem to solve.


In a contribution and text reproduced below, after my response, Tibi refers to a wikipedia entry on ‘P2P Social and Political Processes’ which references my older work on peer production and its governance mechanisms, and asks me specifically, if I still support ‘Multistakeholder Governance’ formats.
Jialin Li: Yeah.


You may want to read it first, in order to understand the logic of my response.
Michel Bauwens: And it’s getting worse every year.


I think this is a good occasion to re-specify and eventually update potential insights.
Claire: Yeah.


So peer production is the capacity for people to connect, self-organize and coordinate production and value exchange at a translocal level, using digital open ecosystems to coordinate their activities. These ecosystems, such as the systems for open source production as well as crypto-economic systems, are generally open and permissionless. This means that people can freely (as in free speech) join the common production project, and are not necessarily in a situation of wage dependency nor do they have to ask a priori permission to collaborate. Instead, contributions are verified by a layer of ‘maintainers’, who can protect the integrity of an ecosystem by refusing to accept contributions that are sub-par.  
Michel Bauwens: Hello.


Thus, this type of permissionless and contributory peer governance, also requires new forms of ‘peer governance’: an alignment of the various contributors to the common work, usually called ‘poly-governance’ to distinguish it from market pricing mechanisms and/or hierarchical commands; peer production and governance in turn require a third element, i.e. ‘peer property’. These are specific protections so that the collective work cannot be privately appropriated. These new forms of ‘peer property’ take the form of ‘commons’, i.e. shared resources, that are collectively maintained, according to the own rules of particular communities.
Claire: Hello.


The first iteration of such commons-based peer production was the joint creation of digital commons of knowledge, software and design. For example, the production of free software and open source code.
Jialin Li: Hey.


The second iteration was the dramatic expansion of urban commons projects which accelerated after the crisis of 2008. This concerns groups of citizens, mostly in cities but also in rural areas, which started mutualizing their provisioning systems, such as guaranteeing group access to organic food, creating cooperatives to jointly purchase renewable energy infrastructure, mutualized forms of co-working, makerspaces, cooperative grocery stores, authentic car sharing associations or cooperatives, and the like. We personally documented, a tenfold increase of such initiatives in the city of Ghent, from 2008 to 2016, but this is a generic phenomena, documented in other cities and regions. Such initiatives pre-existed the digital, but became hugely facilitated through the use of open digital networks, and our investigations showed many similar values and organizational forms.
Michel Bauwens: Hello.


The commonality between the open source formats and the urban commons is the value regime, i.e. the value is contributed to the commons; around such commons various entrepreneurs (often for-benefit initiatives) can then coalesce, creating added value for the market. And we noticed that to align the various contributory forces (the worker-contributors, the users, the entrepreneurs, etc..), these ecosystems of collaboration, most often create for-benefit associations. Think about the Linux Foundation for Linux, the Drupal Association, the Wikimedia Foundation. This is the dominant modality in the world of the digital itself, because it consists of shareable code, knowledge and design, which can be massively reproduced at low or marginal cost.
Jialin Li: Hi. For some reason, Google Meet didn't allow me to join earlier.


What we call multi-stakeholder governance can either refer to the informal alignment of various groups of collaborators, for example, users, code developers, participating companies, etc … Or it can exist as a formal structure, i.e. as the form taken by a cooperative legal entity.
Claire: Oh yeah. I saw that you had applied to join the call, but then it disappeared. Anyway, I’m glad we got it sorted. It’s great to have you both on this call—I think it’ll be very useful for you two to know each other. Maybe, Michel and Jialin, you can introduce yourselves to each other.


In the urban commons, i.e.the commons-centric citizen initiatives that attempt to mutualize provisioning systems, the value regime is very similar, but not entirely, since we are here dealing more directly with material systems and commodity distribution. Whereas knowledge and software and design can be, once produced digitally, massively reproduced with literal extra costs, this is not the case for physical production ,where goods and services need to be purchased. In this case, specific reciprocity is required between partners in a transaction.
Michel Bauwens: Okay, I’ll start. I’m originally from Belgium, but I’ve been living in Chiang Mai for 20 years now. I have a Thai family here. I’m the founder of the P2P Foundation, which is where Satoshi Nakamoto published his white paper. There’s some debate about whether I was the first or second person to tweet about Bitcoin, but I was on it very early. That said, I’m not a technical person—I focus more on digital anthropology and sociology. I study practices, governance, and methods. I’ve been doing this for over 15 years, mainly through a wiki: wiki.p2pfoundation.net, which is widely used by researchers and activists in free software, open design, and related fields.


Quite often, we see that the entrepreneurial coalitions most often take the form of cooperatives, NGO’s, social entrepreneurs, social and solidarity economy formats. This includes the platform coops that are created to bring supply and demand together in one self-owned and self-governed platform.
I’m also closely connected to HCT, the Pop-Up Village People, and the Network Nations Workshop, which we organize periodically. My role is primarily that of an observer, and I try to build bridges between different groups.


So this is where my first preference for multistakeholder governance comes in: in these systems, various stakeholders need to be aligned, and the worker-owned model, which gives democratic governance rights to only one of the stakeholders seem inappropriate. Take a platform for ride-sharing for example, a cooperative version of the Uber model: everybody is probably familiar with taxi coops, which have existed for many decades, and yet, can still have an exploitative relationship with their paying customers. In such a context, we can easily see why it makes at least as much, if not more, sense, that the multiple parties involved have all a stake in the governance of such platforms.
Right now, my focus is on launching the Cosmo Local Foundation. I’ll start fundraising for it in the coming weeks. The idea is to connect local productive communities—those engaged in regenerative, circular, bioregional, organic, and renewable projects—with the coordination capacity of Web3. The goal is to create knowledge commons for these communities, develop protocols for cooperation, and facilitate capital flows.


When the commons economy scales at the full urban model, as in Italy, where cities have adopted regulations for the care and development of the urban commons project, we also see they have adopted multistaker governance models, such as the Quintuple Helix model. In this model, the city plays the role of the coordinating body, but in cooperation with the commercial, non-profit, and research sectors, all four being at the service of the fifth player, i.e. the commons-centric initiative of a group of citizens. So we see that both historically, this one one of the main findings of commons researcher Elinor Ostrom, multi-stakeholder alignment has bene one of the primary mechanisms to govern commons projects.
Currently, we have a bioregional financing facility, and my aim is to develop a Cosmo Local financing facility. The core idea is that if you’re engaged in local initiatives, you’re horizontally connected to other bioregional actors while also being virtually connected to Cosmo Local. This allows people doing similar work around the world to support one another and collaborate on innovation.


We have argued that the emergence of the open source model heralds a shift from commodity-based to contributory-based value models, since all participants and stakeholders rely on their commons-based infrastructure, and the market value is derivative from the continued contributions to the common pool.  
Jialin Li: Yeah, that makes sense.


Similarly, the governance models evolve to systems that can align and integrate multiple participating entities. So, generally speaking, ‘‘polycentric governance’ is not a bug, but a generic feature of most commons projects.
Michel Bauwens: So that’s what I’m working on right now.


Now imagine that such collaborations are not just local, but prefiguratively represent <the> new value model for a whole society, which in turn becomes contributory.
Jialin Li: Okay, great. Thanks.


Indeed, as the importance of commons-based peer production models grows, we also believe this prefigures a new type of political economy:
By the way, is it correct to call you Michel?


In which civil society becomes productive, and recognized as such, through the contributions of the citizens to commons-centric initiatives
Michel Bauwens: Yes, Michel is fine. And I’ll need to learn to pronounce your name correctly—is it Jialin?
In which entrepreneurs become inter-dependent towards their commons-based infrastructures; this creates the issue of whether these entrepreneurs extract value from the commons in such a manner that the commons are weakened and exhausted, or whether these forms can be generative towards the commons. We have argued that entrepreneurs that work collaboratively and generatively around joint commons, become ‘entre-donneurs’, ‘giving in between, rather than ‘taking in between’.
Just as we can see that the for-benefit associations do not command the production, but make it possible (the Wikimedia Foundation maintains the common infrastructure for Wikipedia, but does not command the production of articles), so we can infer from that a new model for common governance of the public sphere. The Partner State is a form for the governance of public authority in which it ‘enables and empowers the self-organization of society and individuals’.


Jialin Li: Yes, that’s perfect. Very nice to meet you. I’m Jialin, and I currently wear two hats. I’m the co-founder of HA2 Protocol, where I mainly handle the technical side, and I’m also an Assistant Professor at a university in Singapore. Have you been to Singapore before?


Michel Bauwens: Yes, I’ve been a few times. I used to know Jack Liu at NTU—I haven’t spoken to him recently, but he was working on platform co-ops and is an expert on Módzi, which I want to read but haven’t gotten to yet.


Jialin Li: Oh, interesting. NTU and NUS have a friendly rivalry here. I joined NUS about four years ago.


A third iteration of peer production, emerging after the open source and urban commons model, has been the emergence of the crypto economy: the creation of open ecosystems for economic collaboration that are based on tokens and cryptocurrencies, but also on retaining the usage of  open source software and strong community dynamics. While open source modes of production enabled the global mutual coordination of labor, outside of the nexus of the state and corporations, crypto economics in addition allows for the payment of such work. Crypto-based projects, for example in the form of DAOs (Distributed Autonomous Organizations, are self-infrastructuring organizations, which have been able to fund their own commons, through mechanisms for funding ‘public goods’.  
Michel Bauwens: By the way, Jack might have switched to NUS. I’d have to check—he’s been at both universities, but I’m not sure which was first and which was second. I haven’t talked to him in a while.


In the open source model, market-facing contributors could more easily create income than those working for the general benefit of the network as a whole. This made open source systems vulnerable to the influence of larger software companies, who funded, and therefore unduly influenced, the core of the commons’ contributors. The crypto system is more distributed, and creates tokenized income for contributors to the common infrastructure.
Jialin Li: Yes, he’s been in both schools, so that makes sense.


Generally speaking, as you can read in the extensive study, Blockchain Technology and Polycentric Governance, indicates. Crypto systems are equally poly-centric in their institutional models that aim to align various stakeholder groups. They do this by applying game-theoreric incentives, based on using tokens to rewards contributions, and binding their payments through smart contracts.
Jialin Li: Okay, sure. So, I graduated with a PhD in the U.S., primarily focusing on distributed systems research. After that, I joined NUS as a faculty member, diving deeper into decentralized infrastructure research. This covers a broad range of topics, including consensus, communication, storage, and computation—essentially every part of the stack.


Now, if contributory peer production, and the evolving poly-centric models of blockchain-based DAO’s are prefigurative of an emerging societal model, must that mean that the government of human societies, will also be based on multi-stakeholder governance. I believe this is the question asked by Tiberius (see below).
I also co-founded a research lab with my colleague Akasha about three years ago.


I have indicated the following:
Michel Bauwens: I’ve come across that name—Akasha.


I believe that the state model will move from the production-consumption model still evident as the paradigm of both the welfare state and neoliberal models, will evolve to become partner states. This means an evolution of the nation-state, and other potential models as yet to emerge, will have to be adapted so that they can become supportive of individual and collective autonomy.
Jialin Li: Yes.
I also believe that the market sector will have to become a regenerative sector, i.e. required to contribute to the welfare and reproduction of life systems, rather than undermining them. We could call this a regenerative market sector.
Finally I believe that civil society will become recognized as being fully productive itself.


My point is that, even if we are able to create and organize trans-local spaces, to create CoordiNations, network nations or network states, even then, we will have to live geographically just as much. The institutional form that such living together will take, will evolve and change, but there is no doubt in my mind that geographical administration of common affairs will persist to some, probably substantial degree. And such governance can take various forms.
Claire: He was also part of my life during our co-living and co-working experiences when we met.


Equally likely, is the combination of sovereign forms, i.e. agreements between geographically-based entities, and trans-locally based entities.
Michel Bauwens: For some reason, I thought Akasha was a female name.


Will the translocal create its own entities, even sovereign entities. Yes that is likely.
Jialin Li: It’s actually a Sanskrit name, commonly used in India. The male version is typically Akash, but I’m not an expert in Hindi or Sanskrit.


Tiberius and others have introduced the idea of Fourth Sector Organizations. These are ‘cosmo-local’ entities that combine local physical production of goods and services and trans-nationsal institutions and practices of knowledge sharing and governance. So in such an entity, market organizations, public organizations and nonprofit entities can collaborate, along with independent contributions, at a higher level of integration.
Michel Bauwens: Neither am I. In French and other Latin languages, names ending in 'A' are usually feminine, while those ending in 'O' tend to be masculine. That’s probably why I assumed it was a female name.


My own concept of Magisteria of the Commons is quite similar. My argument is that we have a commons gap in our global institutional order. We have inter-national governmental cooperation, we have trans-national financial flows, but we do not have transnational civic institutions that are able to project the web of life and the dwindling resource base of the planet. I strongly suspect these Magisteria will evolve various forms of multi-stakeholder governance, but with participation of the productive citizens directly. This is emphatically not an iteration of the WEF model.
Jialin Li: That makes sense. It’s similar in some Indian names—for example, Naveen is male, while Naveena is female.


These options for me represent a third way, between the western drift towards transnational domain-specific multi-stakeholder organizations, as promoted by the WEF, but which are dominated by transnational finance, invite in technocratic NGOs, but do not have a representation of the autonomous civic world of peer production communities.
Michel Bauwens: Yes, it’s a pattern across Spanish, Italian, and French as well—like Alexandra and Alexander.


Similarly, the Russia-China axis, and the BRICS countries aligning with them, want to reinforce nation-state control again.
Jialin Li: Exactly. Anyway, Akasha is male. Together, we co-founded the lab, and one of our research projects later evolved into the Haytu Protocol. Our research lab is called Advaita Labs, and Haytu Protocol is our go-to-market initiative.


So to be clear, my own proposals do not represent an endorsement of neither the neo-sovereignism proposed by Russia or China, or the un-democratic and technocratic multi-stakeholderism of the WEF.
Michel Bauwens: I see. I have to admit, I’m not very technical. I tried reading about the Haytu Protocol, but I struggled to grasp what problem it is addressing and how it offers a solution. If you could explain it in simple terms—maybe at a beginner’s level—that would help me understand.


I simply notice how open source communities, urban commons, and the crypto world, evolve their own governance mechanisms, and that aligning various stakeholders around common goals, plays a big part. This polycentric governance is entirely in line with historical commons.
Jialin Li: Absolutely. I can start with the philosophical idea behind Haytu before diving into the market aspect. This will provide a foundational understanding before we discuss real-world applications.


In the open source model, we find a combination of stigmergic self-organization, managed for quality control by a layer of maintainers, aligned businesses, and a kind of ‘state of the commons’, i.e. democratic organizations which allow various stakeholders to negotiate within the for-benefit associations that manage the alignment of various forces, usually through democratic mechanisms.
The core idea behind Haytu is about discovering relationships between different ideas or events in a decentralized world. Blockchain already establishes a kind of decentralized relation, but it is quite limited—it primarily serves as a ledger recording transactions in sequence. That’s what allows for digital currency and finance.


By contrast, the crypto world takes a more radical techno-cratic stand, using game theoretic models to align behaviour through token issuance, and using qualified voting mechanisms such as quadratic voting.
Haytu aims to go beyond that. It seeks to map relationships between all kinds of events, not just transactions—such as human interactions, collaboration, and even intelligence-driven activities like AI interactions.


I believe we are evolving towards a complex adaptation of various contextual governance systems: polycentric governance models.
Michel Bauwens: So, would you say it’s event-centric? And is an event broader than just a transaction?


This is not historically unprecedented: think about the thousand year existence of the very complex Holy Roman Empire, which combined very local governance with multiple models; the existence of agreements at different levels, i.e. medieval charters could be seen as an earlier iteration of smart contrasts, with an elected monarchy that kept the overall integration of the system. Direct democracy in independent cities, coupled with leagues of merchant cities, coupled with feudal-type states, and church-controlled land and religious congregations. The system was not conflict free, but not chaotic, and maintained social order and cultural integration over a very long period.
Jialin Li: Yes, exactly. An event is much more than a transaction. For instance, our conversation right now consists of multiple events: I speak, you respond, we discuss ideas, and perhaps we even reach some form of agreement. These are all decentralized events occurring in real-time.


Obviously, like any system, it can be recuperated and co-opted, but commons are by definition self-government, and dispose of a panoply of self-governance mechanisms not just to defend themselves, but to grow and expand. Many of the examples of co-opted projects cited by Tiberius, were never commons in the first place. They used the language of sharing and cooperation with ulterior motives of extraction.
At the end of our conversation, we might decide on an action—that’s a form of subjective consensus, which differs from financial transactions but is still a crucial part of decentralized interactions. Haytu aims to map and understand these relationships by constructing a causal graph of events, identifying the cause-and-effect links between them.


It is not clear to me what Tiberius counter-proposals consist of, and what the modalities are that he proposed as alternatives to the democratic and autonomous alignment of various stakeholders in complex systems.
Michel Bauwens: That makes sense. So, it’s about understanding the causality between events rather than just recording them as isolated transactions?


The conflation of the polycentric governance models of the commons, both historical and contemporary, are entirely his, and are not related to my own work, which is an analysis of emergent practice.
Jialin Li: Exactly. For example, in our discussion, your question about Haytu was triggered by my initial explanation. That’s a causal link. Haytu’s goal is to establish and analyze these links in a decentralized world.


This concept applies across various domains. One application is AI development—where people contribute data, refine algorithms, and improve models based on prior work. Another application is scientific research, where discoveries are not isolated but emerge from collaboration, data sharing, and peer reviews.


Scientific breakthroughs, for instance, don’t just happen because one person has a brilliant idea. They result from datasets, previous research, peer evaluations, and collaboration. Haytu aims to capture these relationships in a structured way, creating a comprehensive view of how decentralized knowledge and innovation evolve.


Michel Bauwens raises an important point about informal, non-digital interactions and their role in influence and decision-making. Jialin LI acknowledges this challenge, pointing out that their approach does not claim to solve all issues. Instead, they recognize the inherent difficulty in tracking influence outside of digital systems—what Jialin refers to as a "loss of influence." While current causal models can capture structured, digital interactions, they struggle with informal, interpersonal exchanges like water cooler conversations or private phone calls. Expanding the system to include more causal relationships is a long-term goal, but it will take time to achieve comprehensive coverage.


Jialin envisions a progressively expanding causal graph that maps contributions and influences more extensively. The ultimate objective is to build a decentralized system that allows reasoning about contribution, making previously invisible inputs more visible and accountable. Michel Bauwens finds this approach compelling, as it aligns with his broader vision of shifting from a commodity-based system to a contributory system. He critiques capitalism for externalizing costs onto society and the environment, making essential contributions—such as care work and ecological sustainability—economically invisible. He argues that recognizing these contributions is vital to long-term stability and fairness.


Web3, according to Bauwens, is already making strides toward this recognition through public goods funding and decentralized governance models. He emphasizes the importance of networks structured around commons-based infrastructure, where collective resources strengthen all participants. Stronger networks, in turn, become more competitive, innovative, and resilient. Jialin agrees, noting that Web3’s transparency and verifiability offer an advantage in tracking and rewarding contributions fairly, without central control.


The discussion then shifts to the concept of intersubjectivity. Bauwens references Ken Wilber’s quadrants, distinguishing between subjective (individual experience), objective (physical reality), intersubjective (shared cultural norms), and interobjective (systemic structures). He is particularly interested in whether Jialin’s use of "intersubjective" refers to qualitative, meaning-based interactions or if it remains primarily quantitative. Bauwens argues that an overemphasis on quantification can strip away the richness of human experience, which is deeply influenced by unconscious assumptions and projections—issues that are especially problematic in social media dynamics.


Tiberius Brastaviceanu writes:
Intersubjective Consensus and Cultural Framing


Jialin Li introduces the idea that certain truths exist not because they are objectively true, but because social conventions dictate them as such. Language serves as a prime example of this intersubjective consensus, where shared agreements enable communication and mutual understanding.


Michel Bauwens expands on this by illustrating how cultural differences influence perception. He references a study on eye-tracking, which suggests that Chinese individuals tend to scan an entire scene before focusing on a central object, whereas Westerners fixate on the main subject first. This variation in visual processing, he argues, is linked to language structure—ideographic versus alphabetic writing systems—which shape cognitive frameworks. He suggests that language constraints affect what people can conceptualize, thereby making culture a key determinant in perception.


Jialin acknowledges this point, emphasizing that social convention is inherently intersubjective. This principle is central to HA2, as it aims to structure decentralized reasoning through intersubjective consensus. Since many aspects of blockchain environments are subjective, HA2 leverages intersubjectivity to establish agreements in decentralized settings.


Communicating the Vision of HA2


Bauwens proposes publishing this discussion on his Substack, believing that a broader audience would benefit from understanding HA2’s conceptual framework. He highlights the need for clearer, non-technical communication about HA2’s motivations to engage a wider Web3 audience. Jialin agrees, recognizing the value of producing more explanatory content on the philosophical underpinnings of HA2.


HA2’s Approach to Intersubjective Consensus


Jialin explains that HA2 constructs intersubjective consensus by leveraging causality. The protocol employs causal graphs to trace the development of ideas, showing how discussions and contributions build upon each other. If an idea has widespread participation and approval, it signifies strong intersubjective consensus. Conversely, ideas with limited engagement reflect weaker consensus. This causal mapping enables decentralized reasoning by making subjective agreement processes transparent and structured.


HA2’s Infrastructure and Ethereum Integration


The Wikipedia page on Social p2p Processes quotes Michel Bauwens.  
Bauwens inquires about the practical implementation of HA2. Jialin clarifies that HA2 is an infrastructure project with its own blockchain, validators, and applications. When asked how HA2 connects to existing blockchains like Ethereum, Jialin explains that HA2 integrates with Ethereum via Eigenlayer, an Ethereum-based security and staking mechanism.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_peer-to-peer_processes


The quotation comes from an old blog post, I believe that it was published in 2011.  
Bauwens, recognizing the significance of this connection, recalls meeting key figures in the Eigenlayer ecosystem. He expresses surprise at HA2’s involvement and acknowledges its place within the broader Ethereum ecosystem. He then seeks a more concrete understanding of how HA2 functions in practice, setting the stage for further discussion on its real-world applications.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110722003910/http://www.re-public.gr/en/?p=133


From my understanding, it reads that Michel would agree that Stakeholder Governance would be an appropriate model for state-level and perhaps even global governance.


Reading that blog post and knowing Michel for a long time now, this may fit with the three-party governance model: partner State, private sector and the Commons. Stakeholder governance would be something in between direct democracy and representative democracy, where power is shared among these 3 pillars through stakeholders from each sector, to represent the interest of actors in each sector. Whatever that is, it's not peer governance, but I understand that Michel was describing a possible near future rearrangement of the  power structure within Nation States.


First, I wonder if Michel holds the same view or if the view on governance has changed.  
Jialin acknowledges that their background is rooted in computer science and may not be as philosophically nuanced. From a computational perspective, subjectivity is often viewed as the opposite of objectivity—where objective statements have clear truth values, while subjective ones depend on interpretation. Intersubjectivity, then, refers to the process by which subjective statements gain social validation through discourse and consensus. Jialin’s approach sees intersubjectivity as a structured process of social influence, where collective agreement helps shape perceptions of truth.


From my perspective, back in 2011 we didn't clearly see this transnational space opening and what we now call the 4th sector. In essence, the commons and all p2p was put into the 3rd sector, the cooperative, solidarity economy / civil society. But as we see now, p2p has grown into something different: organizational model, property regime, governance, ...
AI-Focused Go-To-Market Strategy: Model DAO


Second, when you click on Stakeholder Governance you get to another page that is, to some extend, hijacked by the World Economic Forum. Pretty high up on that page it is stated that the WEF is the main proponent of this global governance model and the largest body where this governance model is actually applied. There is there a relation, an indirect association that one can make, between Michel's views and the WEF. One could conclude that Michel endorses Stakeholder Capitalism as proposed by the WEF. In fact, as we experience accaparation of the p2p movement by all traditional factions, I really wonder if these relations were put in there purposefully, to direct flows and form associations between p2p and the WEF agenda. I believe that p2p is a new thing and people experience it today mixed with all sorts of things, as everyone tries to co-opt it and adapt to it at the same time. We're seeing a lot of hybrid models and there's a lot of ambiguity and it is our duty to disambiguate, since we see it probably better thsn others.  
To make Haytu's impact more tangible and actionable, the go-to-market strategy is centered around an AI-focused initiative called Model DAO. The core objective of this initiative is to facilitate the creation, governance, and monetization of AI models, particularly in an open-source environment where profitability has traditionally been challenging.


So remember the so-called sharing economy? It turned out to be platform capitalism, an adaptation of capitalism to the new possibilities of Web2.0, by incorporating some parts of the p2p nescent culture, so they branded it as sharing. Many of us saw the wolf inside the sheep's skin and called it out. I remember protesting the presence of Airbnb at the Ouishare Fest in Paris in 2014. Some people thought that I was crazy.
Addressing AI Model Monetization Challenges
The same way I called out crowdsourcing services like Taskrabbit, which were branded like collaborative platforms.
https://multitudeproject.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-i-dont-like-crowdsourcing.html?m=1


The cooptation of the p2p movement has not stopped. Another example, from web2 to web3, platform capitalism is now evolving into the platform state, branded as The Network State, coming out of the same place, Silicon Valley. They scream p2p and open source everywhere, and it's true, but there's a new catch, it's not p2p as we see it, just a more sophisticated form of control built on higher levels of value, which are invisible for the great majority of people.
Many developers and researchers contribute to the evolution of AI models, but monetizing these contributions remains difficult. The Model DAO approach provides a comprehensive platform and infrastructure for launching AI models. This includes:
 
Infrastructure support for deploying models, including access to necessary computational resources.
 
Tokenized assets that allow for seamless monetization and incentive structures.
 
Governance mechanisms to ensure fair distribution of value among contributors.
 
However, merely launching models is not sufficient. AI models are inherently aggregations of knowledge, built upon previous ideas and technologies. Recognizing and rewarding these dependencies is crucial for a sustainable ecosystem.
 
Evolution of Intelligence: A Networked Approach
 
AI development can be seen as an evolutionary process, akin to the progression of human intelligence. New models are built on foundational architectures like transformers and deep learning frameworks. The Model DAO framework acknowledges this evolutionary nature by mapping contributions at multiple levels:
 
Historical Contributions: Tracing the lineage of ideas and algorithms that influence new models.
 
Resource Contributions: Recognizing the individuals and organizations that provide training data, computing power (e.g., GPUs), and other essential inputs.
 
Causality Graph: Mapping Contributions and Influence
 
To ensure that all contributors are fairly recognized and rewarded, Haytu employs a causality graph that visualizes and traces how different contributions lead to the development of AI models. This graph captures:
 
Direct contributions, such as coding new model architectures.
 
Indirect contributions, such as providing training datasets or computational resources.
 
Knowledge propagation, where insights and innovations are built upon previous discoveries.
 
By leveraging watermarking technology, the system tracks how knowledge is transferred and evolved. Instead of analyzing the content of contributions directly, the system focuses on relationships—ensuring that intellectual and technical inputs are accounted for within the broader AI ecosystem.
 
Assessing Contribution Impact
 
One of the ongoing challenges is determining the relative importance of different contributions. While Haytu can track participation within the causality graph, evaluating the significance of each contribution remains an evolving aspect of the system. Potential solutions include:
 
Community-driven evaluations, where stakeholders collectively assess and validate contributions.
 
Automated influence metrics, where engagement and model success are factored into contribution weighting.
 
Hybrid models, combining subjective assessments with objective computational analysis.
 
Currently, Haytu's approach is to track and record contributions, with further refinements in progress to measure their impact effectively.
 
Model DAO is not just a technical infrastructure but a new paradigm for AI model development, incentivization, and governance. By making contribution tracking more explicit and transparent, Haytu aims to foster a more collaborative and equitable AI ecosystem.
 
Michel Bauwens (50:08)
That's a very difficult question. A long time ago, I participated in an experiment with O Net. The Omidyar Foundation launched an initiative where instead of NGOs deciding who to fund, a community of activists and advocates would self-evaluate each other, and at the end of the process, the money would be distributed accordingly.
 
Jialin Li (50:39)
Right.
 
Michel Bauwens (50:40)
But within just a few weeks, the system was already completely corrupted. People were trading favors—"I'll say good things about you if you say good things about me." It became totally gamed and, honestly, pretty disgusting very quickly. It just didn't work.
 
And it's a complicated problem. I find myself in an opposite situation—many people tell me I've inspired them, which is great to hear, but that kind of recognition doesn’t necessarily translate into making a living. There's no direct connection between appreciation and sustainable financial support.
 
Jialin Li (51:32)
Right.
 
Michel Bauwens (51:33)
So far, we don’t have techniques that can make that connection real, and even if we did, we’d have to be very careful about preventing gaming. Once people understand how a system works, they’ll inevitably find ways to manipulate it.
 
Jialin Li (51:54)
Right.
 
Michel Bauwens (51:55)
That's why I don’t believe this can be solved purely in a digital space. In the end, a lot of these processes happen in real life—people meet, talk, and reach intersubjective consensus through facilitation techniques.
 
Jialin Li (52:28)
Yeah.
 
Michel Bauwens (52:29)
And while that’s different from what you’re doing, there is a lot of intersubjective consensus-building in real life.
 
Jialin Li (52:36)
Right.
 
Michel Bauwens (52:36)
Many people are working on ways to facilitate good meetings, draw meaningful conclusions, and ensure that agreements are actually implemented. There’s a whole field of intersubjectivity that hasn’t been digitized, and these two worlds—digital and non-digital—rarely intersect.
 
Jialin Li (52:53)
They really don’t.
 
Michel Bauwens (52:53)
They operate separately.
 
Jialin Li (52:57)
Yeah.
 
Michel Bauwens (52:57)
And you're working in the digital sphere, particularly through blockchain applications.
 
Jialin Li (53:02)
Right.
 
Michel Bauwens (53:03)
That said, this conversation has already been really useful for me. I’d still like to learn more at some point—specifically about the technical aspects, like how exactly you're implementing this—but I think this has been a good session.
 
Claire (53:40)
Yeah, we’ve already been on for about an hour.
 
Michel Bauwens (53:46)
And I need to go in about seven minutes.
 
Claire (53:49)
Right. If you’d like to schedule a follow-up meeting, we could go deeper into the technical details, and Jialin could provide more background.
 
Michel Bauwens (54:02)
That sounds good. You could also send me some reading materials first, and I’ll go through them on my own. Then, when we meet again, we can have a more in-depth discussion. I imagine for Jialin, a lot of this is basic knowledge, but for me, this has been a very enlightening conversation.
 
Jialin Li (54:20)
Yeah, I found it inspiring as well. This was a really productive discussion.
 
Michel Bauwens (54:28)
I definitely feel like I understand a lot more than I did before.
 
Jialin Li (54:34)
Yeah. Are you planning to go to Denver?
 
Michel Bauwens (54:37)
No, it’s too short of a trip for me. It’s a 36-hour flight each way, just for a few days. What I am looking for, though, is funding to go to Taiwan at the end of April. There’s an event—ETH Taipei, among others—and I’d like to be there.
 
Also, my book Peer to Peer: The Commons Manifesto has been translated into Chinese. The translation is done; I just need to write a foreword to update it since the book was originally published in 2018. The idea is to do a speaking tour in Taiwan at the end of April and then visit mainland China in the summer. I’ve been in contact with the 706 Movement—the community organizing cultural events in private spaces in China—and I plan to do a tour there as well.
 
But the people in Taiwan have had some difficulty securing public funding for my trip. So, if you know of any possible funding sources, that would be really helpful. And if you have connections in Taiwan, we could even organize an event together—perhaps a discussion on intersubjectivity, where I present the philosophical side and you present the digital side.
 
I’m also talking to Vivian Chen—she’s quite influential in Taiwan—as well as someone in the digital ministry. You know Audrey Tang, right? Taiwan has this digital democracy platform… I can’t remember the English name of it right now.
 
Jialin Li (57:47)
Yeah, I know what you mean. That all sounds really interesting.
 
Michel Bauwens (57:49)
Yes, and in the short term, we could start by working with the transcript from this conversation. I’ll publish it on my Substack, maybe adding some context in an introduction. That way, people can engage with our discussion.
 
Jialin Li (58:22)
That makes sense. I think it would be a great idea.
 
Michel Bauwens (58:22)
And beyond that, we could explore a dialogue between the digital and non-digital worlds. There are prominent thinkers in intersubjectivity from fields like philosophy, spirituality, and humanistic sciences. If you’re interested, I could recommend some people for high-level discussions with you.
 
Claire (59:02)
Sure.
 
Michel Bauwens (59:03)
We could even do a sponsored podcast series—discussions between these experts and one of you. It would be great for the He2 protocol’s image, showing that you’re open-minded and willing to engage with different perspectives. Blockchain solutions don’t always translate perfectly outside the blockchain world, and bridging that gap could be really valuable.
 
Jialin Li (59:47)
Right.
 
Michel Bauwens (59:47)
People think differently depending on their background and experiences, so if you want to reach a broader audience, it helps to engage with these diverse perspectives.
 
Claire (59:57)
That’s a great idea. We could start planning a podcast series.
 
Michel Bauwens (1:00:32)
We could set up a Google Doc to brainstorm ideas and take it from there.
 
Claire (1:00:38)
Sure! I’ll also follow up on Telegram. Next week, we’ll be in Denver, so we can find a good time to connect.
 
Michel Bauwens (1:00:57)
That sounds good. If I were to go to Denver, I’d prefer a longer stay—at least a week or 10 days.
 
Claire (1:01:07)
That would work! We’ll be in a co-working space from February 24th to March 2nd.
 
Michel Bauwens (1:01:17)
That’s really soon. Let’s discuss it further on Telegram and see if it’s feasible.
 
Claire (1:01:26)
Yes, for sure.
 
Jialin Li (1:01:29)
Sounds great. Thanks, Michel!
 
Michel Bauwens (1:01:30)
Thank you all—it was a great conversation. I really appreciate your time and insights.
 
Claire (1:01:39)
Likewise! I learned a lot as well.
 
Michel Bauwens (1:01:43)
Take care, everyone!
 
Jialin Li (1:01:47)
Bye!

Latest revision as of 12:53, 23 February 2025

Michel Bauwens: Just a moment. My mouse isn't working. Yeah, all right. I don't know what's happening anyway.

Claire: Oh, it's okay. I think Jialin is joining us. Let me see what's going on here—do I need to approve something? How are you?

Michel Bauwens: I'm fine. I just don’t know why my mouse isn’t working. I just changed the battery, so I don’t know what’s going on. Anyway, I can use my pad, so it’s okay. I’m pretty good. I was ill last week, but I’m better now. You know, it’s very polluted here in Chiang Mai.

Claire: Oh, how come?

Michel Bauwens: They burn the forest every year for industrial corn production. The farmers make a lot of money when they burn the forest because mushrooms and other things grow, and these big agro-industrial concerns are very powerful. If nobody provides an alternative, the practice just continues. The middle class in the cities hates it, but if you simply tell the farmers to stop, they’d be on the streets protesting. So it’s a difficult problem to solve.

Jialin Li: Yeah.

Michel Bauwens: And it’s getting worse every year.

Claire: Yeah.

Michel Bauwens: Hello.

Claire: Hello.

Jialin Li: Hey.

Michel Bauwens: Hello.

Jialin Li: Hi. For some reason, Google Meet didn't allow me to join earlier.

Claire: Oh yeah. I saw that you had applied to join the call, but then it disappeared. Anyway, I’m glad we got it sorted. It’s great to have you both on this call—I think it’ll be very useful for you two to know each other. Maybe, Michel and Jialin, you can introduce yourselves to each other.

Michel Bauwens: Okay, I’ll start. I’m originally from Belgium, but I’ve been living in Chiang Mai for 20 years now. I have a Thai family here. I’m the founder of the P2P Foundation, which is where Satoshi Nakamoto published his white paper. There’s some debate about whether I was the first or second person to tweet about Bitcoin, but I was on it very early. That said, I’m not a technical person—I focus more on digital anthropology and sociology. I study practices, governance, and methods. I’ve been doing this for over 15 years, mainly through a wiki: wiki.p2pfoundation.net, which is widely used by researchers and activists in free software, open design, and related fields.

I’m also closely connected to HCT, the Pop-Up Village People, and the Network Nations Workshop, which we organize periodically. My role is primarily that of an observer, and I try to build bridges between different groups.

Right now, my focus is on launching the Cosmo Local Foundation. I’ll start fundraising for it in the coming weeks. The idea is to connect local productive communities—those engaged in regenerative, circular, bioregional, organic, and renewable projects—with the coordination capacity of Web3. The goal is to create knowledge commons for these communities, develop protocols for cooperation, and facilitate capital flows.

Currently, we have a bioregional financing facility, and my aim is to develop a Cosmo Local financing facility. The core idea is that if you’re engaged in local initiatives, you’re horizontally connected to other bioregional actors while also being virtually connected to Cosmo Local. This allows people doing similar work around the world to support one another and collaborate on innovation.

Jialin Li: Yeah, that makes sense.

Michel Bauwens: So that’s what I’m working on right now.

Jialin Li: Okay, great. Thanks.

By the way, is it correct to call you Michel?

Michel Bauwens: Yes, Michel is fine. And I’ll need to learn to pronounce your name correctly—is it Jialin?

Jialin Li: Yes, that’s perfect. Very nice to meet you. I’m Jialin, and I currently wear two hats. I’m the co-founder of HA2 Protocol, where I mainly handle the technical side, and I’m also an Assistant Professor at a university in Singapore. Have you been to Singapore before?

Michel Bauwens: Yes, I’ve been a few times. I used to know Jack Liu at NTU—I haven’t spoken to him recently, but he was working on platform co-ops and is an expert on Módzi, which I want to read but haven’t gotten to yet.

Jialin Li: Oh, interesting. NTU and NUS have a friendly rivalry here. I joined NUS about four years ago.

Michel Bauwens: By the way, Jack might have switched to NUS. I’d have to check—he’s been at both universities, but I’m not sure which was first and which was second. I haven’t talked to him in a while.

Jialin Li: Yes, he’s been in both schools, so that makes sense.

Jialin Li: Okay, sure. So, I graduated with a PhD in the U.S., primarily focusing on distributed systems research. After that, I joined NUS as a faculty member, diving deeper into decentralized infrastructure research. This covers a broad range of topics, including consensus, communication, storage, and computation—essentially every part of the stack.

I also co-founded a research lab with my colleague Akasha about three years ago.

Michel Bauwens: I’ve come across that name—Akasha.

Jialin Li: Yes.

Claire: He was also part of my life during our co-living and co-working experiences when we met.

Michel Bauwens: For some reason, I thought Akasha was a female name.

Jialin Li: It’s actually a Sanskrit name, commonly used in India. The male version is typically Akash, but I’m not an expert in Hindi or Sanskrit.

Michel Bauwens: Neither am I. In French and other Latin languages, names ending in 'A' are usually feminine, while those ending in 'O' tend to be masculine. That’s probably why I assumed it was a female name.

Jialin Li: That makes sense. It’s similar in some Indian names—for example, Naveen is male, while Naveena is female.

Michel Bauwens: Yes, it’s a pattern across Spanish, Italian, and French as well—like Alexandra and Alexander.

Jialin Li: Exactly. Anyway, Akasha is male. Together, we co-founded the lab, and one of our research projects later evolved into the Haytu Protocol. Our research lab is called Advaita Labs, and Haytu Protocol is our go-to-market initiative.

Michel Bauwens: I see. I have to admit, I’m not very technical. I tried reading about the Haytu Protocol, but I struggled to grasp what problem it is addressing and how it offers a solution. If you could explain it in simple terms—maybe at a beginner’s level—that would help me understand.

Jialin Li: Absolutely. I can start with the philosophical idea behind Haytu before diving into the market aspect. This will provide a foundational understanding before we discuss real-world applications.

The core idea behind Haytu is about discovering relationships between different ideas or events in a decentralized world. Blockchain already establishes a kind of decentralized relation, but it is quite limited—it primarily serves as a ledger recording transactions in sequence. That’s what allows for digital currency and finance.

Haytu aims to go beyond that. It seeks to map relationships between all kinds of events, not just transactions—such as human interactions, collaboration, and even intelligence-driven activities like AI interactions.

Michel Bauwens: So, would you say it’s event-centric? And is an event broader than just a transaction?

Jialin Li: Yes, exactly. An event is much more than a transaction. For instance, our conversation right now consists of multiple events: I speak, you respond, we discuss ideas, and perhaps we even reach some form of agreement. These are all decentralized events occurring in real-time.

At the end of our conversation, we might decide on an action—that’s a form of subjective consensus, which differs from financial transactions but is still a crucial part of decentralized interactions. Haytu aims to map and understand these relationships by constructing a causal graph of events, identifying the cause-and-effect links between them.

Michel Bauwens: That makes sense. So, it’s about understanding the causality between events rather than just recording them as isolated transactions?

Jialin Li: Exactly. For example, in our discussion, your question about Haytu was triggered by my initial explanation. That’s a causal link. Haytu’s goal is to establish and analyze these links in a decentralized world.

This concept applies across various domains. One application is AI development—where people contribute data, refine algorithms, and improve models based on prior work. Another application is scientific research, where discoveries are not isolated but emerge from collaboration, data sharing, and peer reviews.

Scientific breakthroughs, for instance, don’t just happen because one person has a brilliant idea. They result from datasets, previous research, peer evaluations, and collaboration. Haytu aims to capture these relationships in a structured way, creating a comprehensive view of how decentralized knowledge and innovation evolve.

Michel Bauwens raises an important point about informal, non-digital interactions and their role in influence and decision-making. Jialin LI acknowledges this challenge, pointing out that their approach does not claim to solve all issues. Instead, they recognize the inherent difficulty in tracking influence outside of digital systems—what Jialin refers to as a "loss of influence." While current causal models can capture structured, digital interactions, they struggle with informal, interpersonal exchanges like water cooler conversations or private phone calls. Expanding the system to include more causal relationships is a long-term goal, but it will take time to achieve comprehensive coverage.

Jialin envisions a progressively expanding causal graph that maps contributions and influences more extensively. The ultimate objective is to build a decentralized system that allows reasoning about contribution, making previously invisible inputs more visible and accountable. Michel Bauwens finds this approach compelling, as it aligns with his broader vision of shifting from a commodity-based system to a contributory system. He critiques capitalism for externalizing costs onto society and the environment, making essential contributions—such as care work and ecological sustainability—economically invisible. He argues that recognizing these contributions is vital to long-term stability and fairness.

Web3, according to Bauwens, is already making strides toward this recognition through public goods funding and decentralized governance models. He emphasizes the importance of networks structured around commons-based infrastructure, where collective resources strengthen all participants. Stronger networks, in turn, become more competitive, innovative, and resilient. Jialin agrees, noting that Web3’s transparency and verifiability offer an advantage in tracking and rewarding contributions fairly, without central control.

The discussion then shifts to the concept of intersubjectivity. Bauwens references Ken Wilber’s quadrants, distinguishing between subjective (individual experience), objective (physical reality), intersubjective (shared cultural norms), and interobjective (systemic structures). He is particularly interested in whether Jialin’s use of "intersubjective" refers to qualitative, meaning-based interactions or if it remains primarily quantitative. Bauwens argues that an overemphasis on quantification can strip away the richness of human experience, which is deeply influenced by unconscious assumptions and projections—issues that are especially problematic in social media dynamics.

Intersubjective Consensus and Cultural Framing

Jialin Li introduces the idea that certain truths exist not because they are objectively true, but because social conventions dictate them as such. Language serves as a prime example of this intersubjective consensus, where shared agreements enable communication and mutual understanding.

Michel Bauwens expands on this by illustrating how cultural differences influence perception. He references a study on eye-tracking, which suggests that Chinese individuals tend to scan an entire scene before focusing on a central object, whereas Westerners fixate on the main subject first. This variation in visual processing, he argues, is linked to language structure—ideographic versus alphabetic writing systems—which shape cognitive frameworks. He suggests that language constraints affect what people can conceptualize, thereby making culture a key determinant in perception.

Jialin acknowledges this point, emphasizing that social convention is inherently intersubjective. This principle is central to HA2, as it aims to structure decentralized reasoning through intersubjective consensus. Since many aspects of blockchain environments are subjective, HA2 leverages intersubjectivity to establish agreements in decentralized settings.

Communicating the Vision of HA2

Bauwens proposes publishing this discussion on his Substack, believing that a broader audience would benefit from understanding HA2’s conceptual framework. He highlights the need for clearer, non-technical communication about HA2’s motivations to engage a wider Web3 audience. Jialin agrees, recognizing the value of producing more explanatory content on the philosophical underpinnings of HA2.

HA2’s Approach to Intersubjective Consensus

Jialin explains that HA2 constructs intersubjective consensus by leveraging causality. The protocol employs causal graphs to trace the development of ideas, showing how discussions and contributions build upon each other. If an idea has widespread participation and approval, it signifies strong intersubjective consensus. Conversely, ideas with limited engagement reflect weaker consensus. This causal mapping enables decentralized reasoning by making subjective agreement processes transparent and structured.

HA2’s Infrastructure and Ethereum Integration

Bauwens inquires about the practical implementation of HA2. Jialin clarifies that HA2 is an infrastructure project with its own blockchain, validators, and applications. When asked how HA2 connects to existing blockchains like Ethereum, Jialin explains that HA2 integrates with Ethereum via Eigenlayer, an Ethereum-based security and staking mechanism.

Bauwens, recognizing the significance of this connection, recalls meeting key figures in the Eigenlayer ecosystem. He expresses surprise at HA2’s involvement and acknowledges its place within the broader Ethereum ecosystem. He then seeks a more concrete understanding of how HA2 functions in practice, setting the stage for further discussion on its real-world applications.


Jialin acknowledges that their background is rooted in computer science and may not be as philosophically nuanced. From a computational perspective, subjectivity is often viewed as the opposite of objectivity—where objective statements have clear truth values, while subjective ones depend on interpretation. Intersubjectivity, then, refers to the process by which subjective statements gain social validation through discourse and consensus. Jialin’s approach sees intersubjectivity as a structured process of social influence, where collective agreement helps shape perceptions of truth.

AI-Focused Go-To-Market Strategy: Model DAO

To make Haytu's impact more tangible and actionable, the go-to-market strategy is centered around an AI-focused initiative called Model DAO. The core objective of this initiative is to facilitate the creation, governance, and monetization of AI models, particularly in an open-source environment where profitability has traditionally been challenging.

Addressing AI Model Monetization Challenges

Many developers and researchers contribute to the evolution of AI models, but monetizing these contributions remains difficult. The Model DAO approach provides a comprehensive platform and infrastructure for launching AI models. This includes:

Infrastructure support for deploying models, including access to necessary computational resources.

Tokenized assets that allow for seamless monetization and incentive structures.

Governance mechanisms to ensure fair distribution of value among contributors.

However, merely launching models is not sufficient. AI models are inherently aggregations of knowledge, built upon previous ideas and technologies. Recognizing and rewarding these dependencies is crucial for a sustainable ecosystem.

Evolution of Intelligence: A Networked Approach

AI development can be seen as an evolutionary process, akin to the progression of human intelligence. New models are built on foundational architectures like transformers and deep learning frameworks. The Model DAO framework acknowledges this evolutionary nature by mapping contributions at multiple levels:

Historical Contributions: Tracing the lineage of ideas and algorithms that influence new models.

Resource Contributions: Recognizing the individuals and organizations that provide training data, computing power (e.g., GPUs), and other essential inputs.

Causality Graph: Mapping Contributions and Influence

To ensure that all contributors are fairly recognized and rewarded, Haytu employs a causality graph that visualizes and traces how different contributions lead to the development of AI models. This graph captures:

Direct contributions, such as coding new model architectures.

Indirect contributions, such as providing training datasets or computational resources.

Knowledge propagation, where insights and innovations are built upon previous discoveries.

By leveraging watermarking technology, the system tracks how knowledge is transferred and evolved. Instead of analyzing the content of contributions directly, the system focuses on relationships—ensuring that intellectual and technical inputs are accounted for within the broader AI ecosystem.

Assessing Contribution Impact

One of the ongoing challenges is determining the relative importance of different contributions. While Haytu can track participation within the causality graph, evaluating the significance of each contribution remains an evolving aspect of the system. Potential solutions include:

Community-driven evaluations, where stakeholders collectively assess and validate contributions.

Automated influence metrics, where engagement and model success are factored into contribution weighting.

Hybrid models, combining subjective assessments with objective computational analysis.

Currently, Haytu's approach is to track and record contributions, with further refinements in progress to measure their impact effectively.

Model DAO is not just a technical infrastructure but a new paradigm for AI model development, incentivization, and governance. By making contribution tracking more explicit and transparent, Haytu aims to foster a more collaborative and equitable AI ecosystem.

Michel Bauwens (50:08) That's a very difficult question. A long time ago, I participated in an experiment with O Net. The Omidyar Foundation launched an initiative where instead of NGOs deciding who to fund, a community of activists and advocates would self-evaluate each other, and at the end of the process, the money would be distributed accordingly.

Jialin Li (50:39) Right.

Michel Bauwens (50:40) But within just a few weeks, the system was already completely corrupted. People were trading favors—"I'll say good things about you if you say good things about me." It became totally gamed and, honestly, pretty disgusting very quickly. It just didn't work.

And it's a complicated problem. I find myself in an opposite situation—many people tell me I've inspired them, which is great to hear, but that kind of recognition doesn’t necessarily translate into making a living. There's no direct connection between appreciation and sustainable financial support.

Jialin Li (51:32) Right.

Michel Bauwens (51:33) So far, we don’t have techniques that can make that connection real, and even if we did, we’d have to be very careful about preventing gaming. Once people understand how a system works, they’ll inevitably find ways to manipulate it.

Jialin Li (51:54) Right.

Michel Bauwens (51:55) That's why I don’t believe this can be solved purely in a digital space. In the end, a lot of these processes happen in real life—people meet, talk, and reach intersubjective consensus through facilitation techniques.

Jialin Li (52:28) Yeah.

Michel Bauwens (52:29) And while that’s different from what you’re doing, there is a lot of intersubjective consensus-building in real life.

Jialin Li (52:36) Right.

Michel Bauwens (52:36) Many people are working on ways to facilitate good meetings, draw meaningful conclusions, and ensure that agreements are actually implemented. There’s a whole field of intersubjectivity that hasn’t been digitized, and these two worlds—digital and non-digital—rarely intersect.

Jialin Li (52:53) They really don’t.

Michel Bauwens (52:53) They operate separately.

Jialin Li (52:57) Yeah.

Michel Bauwens (52:57) And you're working in the digital sphere, particularly through blockchain applications.

Jialin Li (53:02) Right.

Michel Bauwens (53:03) That said, this conversation has already been really useful for me. I’d still like to learn more at some point—specifically about the technical aspects, like how exactly you're implementing this—but I think this has been a good session.

Claire (53:40) Yeah, we’ve already been on for about an hour.

Michel Bauwens (53:46) And I need to go in about seven minutes.

Claire (53:49) Right. If you’d like to schedule a follow-up meeting, we could go deeper into the technical details, and Jialin could provide more background.

Michel Bauwens (54:02) That sounds good. You could also send me some reading materials first, and I’ll go through them on my own. Then, when we meet again, we can have a more in-depth discussion. I imagine for Jialin, a lot of this is basic knowledge, but for me, this has been a very enlightening conversation.

Jialin Li (54:20) Yeah, I found it inspiring as well. This was a really productive discussion.

Michel Bauwens (54:28) I definitely feel like I understand a lot more than I did before.

Jialin Li (54:34) Yeah. Are you planning to go to Denver?

Michel Bauwens (54:37) No, it’s too short of a trip for me. It’s a 36-hour flight each way, just for a few days. What I am looking for, though, is funding to go to Taiwan at the end of April. There’s an event—ETH Taipei, among others—and I’d like to be there.

Also, my book Peer to Peer: The Commons Manifesto has been translated into Chinese. The translation is done; I just need to write a foreword to update it since the book was originally published in 2018. The idea is to do a speaking tour in Taiwan at the end of April and then visit mainland China in the summer. I’ve been in contact with the 706 Movement—the community organizing cultural events in private spaces in China—and I plan to do a tour there as well.

But the people in Taiwan have had some difficulty securing public funding for my trip. So, if you know of any possible funding sources, that would be really helpful. And if you have connections in Taiwan, we could even organize an event together—perhaps a discussion on intersubjectivity, where I present the philosophical side and you present the digital side.

I’m also talking to Vivian Chen—she’s quite influential in Taiwan—as well as someone in the digital ministry. You know Audrey Tang, right? Taiwan has this digital democracy platform… I can’t remember the English name of it right now.

Jialin Li (57:47) Yeah, I know what you mean. That all sounds really interesting.

Michel Bauwens (57:49) Yes, and in the short term, we could start by working with the transcript from this conversation. I’ll publish it on my Substack, maybe adding some context in an introduction. That way, people can engage with our discussion.

Jialin Li (58:22) That makes sense. I think it would be a great idea.

Michel Bauwens (58:22) And beyond that, we could explore a dialogue between the digital and non-digital worlds. There are prominent thinkers in intersubjectivity from fields like philosophy, spirituality, and humanistic sciences. If you’re interested, I could recommend some people for high-level discussions with you.

Claire (59:02) Sure.

Michel Bauwens (59:03) We could even do a sponsored podcast series—discussions between these experts and one of you. It would be great for the He2 protocol’s image, showing that you’re open-minded and willing to engage with different perspectives. Blockchain solutions don’t always translate perfectly outside the blockchain world, and bridging that gap could be really valuable.

Jialin Li (59:47) Right.

Michel Bauwens (59:47) People think differently depending on their background and experiences, so if you want to reach a broader audience, it helps to engage with these diverse perspectives.

Claire (59:57) That’s a great idea. We could start planning a podcast series.

Michel Bauwens (1:00:32) We could set up a Google Doc to brainstorm ideas and take it from there.

Claire (1:00:38) Sure! I’ll also follow up on Telegram. Next week, we’ll be in Denver, so we can find a good time to connect.

Michel Bauwens (1:00:57) That sounds good. If I were to go to Denver, I’d prefer a longer stay—at least a week or 10 days.

Claire (1:01:07) That would work! We’ll be in a co-working space from February 24th to March 2nd.

Michel Bauwens (1:01:17) That’s really soon. Let’s discuss it further on Telegram and see if it’s feasible.

Claire (1:01:26) Yes, for sure.

Jialin Li (1:01:29) Sounds great. Thanks, Michel!

Michel Bauwens (1:01:30) Thank you all—it was a great conversation. I really appreciate your time and insights.

Claire (1:01:39) Likewise! I learned a lot as well.

Michel Bauwens (1:01:43) Take care, everyone!

Jialin Li (1:01:47) Bye!

Retrieved from "https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/index.php?title=Test&oldid=144261"