Design Principles for Institutions Based on Social Freedom: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
unknown (talk) No edit summary |
unknown (talk) No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Principles= | == Principles == | ||
Principles for transforming institutions, proposed by Jordan Hall: | Principles for transforming institutions, proposed by Jordan Hall: | ||
* "The Principle of Choice. Designs should be oriented towards increasing the capacity for choice and building on top of that increasing capacity. | * "The Principle of Choice. Designs should be oriented towards increasing the capacity for choice and building on top of that increasing capacity. | ||
* The Principle of Wholeness. Designs should be mindful of creating and working with well integrated wholes. | * The Principle of Wholeness. Designs should be mindful of creating and working with well integrated wholes. | ||
* The Principle of Relationship. Designs should endeavor to place responsibility on real human relationships and endeavor to support the construction of strong, trusted relationships and infrastructure around relationships. | * The Principle of Relationship. Designs should endeavor to place responsibility on real human relationships and endeavor to support the construction of strong, trusted relationships and infrastructure around relationships. | ||
* Principle of Development. Designs should strive to build capacity from the ground up, rather than over-ride failures at the ground level with top-down capacity. Make people more capable of being responsible, rather than taking their responsibility away. Build structures at the human scale that can carry more responsibility, etc. | * Principle of Development. Designs should strive to build capacity from the ground up, rather than over-ride failures at the ground level with top-down capacity. Make people more capable of being responsible, rather than taking their responsibility away. Build structures at the human scale that can carry more responsibility, etc. | ||
* The Principle of Subsidiarity. Designs should push as much responsibility and authority at the most immediate level that is consistent with their resolution. | * The Principle of Subsidiarity. Designs should push as much responsibility and authority at the most immediate level that is consistent with their resolution. | ||
* Principle of Unbundling. Designs should take care that no choice should be bound to any other choice, unless this binding is strictly required by the nature of the choice itself. | * Principle of Unbundling. Designs should take care that no choice should be bound to any other choice, unless this binding is strictly required by the nature of the choice itself. | ||
* Principle of Rights and Responsibilities. Designs should make rights symmetric with responsibilities. (e.g., the right to free speech should be replaced by the the right and responsibility of meaningful communication; the right to private property should be replaced with the right and responsibility of stewardship of property). | * Principle of Rights and Responsibilities. Designs should make rights symmetric with responsibilities. (e.g., the right to free speech should be replaced by the the right and responsibility of meaningful communication; the right to private property should be replaced with the right and responsibility of stewardship of property). | ||
* The Principle of Fiduciary Responsibility. Designs should ensure that whenever a relationship is highly asymmetric (e.g. when AI is on one side of a relationship and not the other) that the relationship be returned to symmetry by establishing a fiduciary responsibility on the part of the stronger party. | * The Principle of Fiduciary Responsibility. Designs should ensure that whenever a relationship is highly asymmetric (e.g. when AI is on one side of a relationship and not the other) that the relationship be returned to symmetry by establishing a fiduciary responsibility on the part of the stronger party. | ||
* The Principle of Network Optimization for Collective Intelligence. Designs should strive to always promote the evolution of the human social network towards increasing collective intelligence. For example: | * The Principle of Network Optimization for Collective Intelligence. Designs should strive to always promote the evolution of the human social network towards increasing collective intelligence. For example: | ||
** All nodes (people, families, communities, etc.) should be resourced so as to provide minimum viable signal. | ** All nodes (people, families, communities, etc.) should be resourced so as to provide minimum viable signal. | ||
| Line 26: | Line 18: | ||
(https://medium.com/deep-code/defund-and-redesign-everything-d1b9d674a45d) | (https://medium.com/deep-code/defund-and-redesign-everything-d1b9d674a45d) | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:Protocols and Algorithms]] | ||
[[Category:Design]] | [[Category:Design]] | ||
[[Category:Social Charters]] | [[Category:Social Charters]] | ||
Latest revision as of 09:23, 7 February 2021
Principles
Principles for transforming institutions, proposed by Jordan Hall:
- "The Principle of Choice. Designs should be oriented towards increasing the capacity for choice and building on top of that increasing capacity.
- The Principle of Wholeness. Designs should be mindful of creating and working with well integrated wholes.
- The Principle of Relationship. Designs should endeavor to place responsibility on real human relationships and endeavor to support the construction of strong, trusted relationships and infrastructure around relationships.
- Principle of Development. Designs should strive to build capacity from the ground up, rather than over-ride failures at the ground level with top-down capacity. Make people more capable of being responsible, rather than taking their responsibility away. Build structures at the human scale that can carry more responsibility, etc.
- The Principle of Subsidiarity. Designs should push as much responsibility and authority at the most immediate level that is consistent with their resolution.
- Principle of Unbundling. Designs should take care that no choice should be bound to any other choice, unless this binding is strictly required by the nature of the choice itself.
- Principle of Rights and Responsibilities. Designs should make rights symmetric with responsibilities. (e.g., the right to free speech should be replaced by the the right and responsibility of meaningful communication; the right to private property should be replaced with the right and responsibility of stewardship of property).
- The Principle of Fiduciary Responsibility. Designs should ensure that whenever a relationship is highly asymmetric (e.g. when AI is on one side of a relationship and not the other) that the relationship be returned to symmetry by establishing a fiduciary responsibility on the part of the stronger party.
- The Principle of Network Optimization for Collective Intelligence. Designs should strive to always promote the evolution of the human social network towards increasing collective intelligence. For example:
- All nodes (people, families, communities, etc.) should be resourced so as to provide minimum viable signal.
- Each node should be able to refuse an offered transaction without fear of privation.
- The generator functions of network topology should balance efficiency and resilience."
(https://medium.com/deep-code/defund-and-redesign-everything-d1b9d674a45d)