I’d like to present the defining technology for the civic net and all interactions. Sovereignty.
From trauma mitigating disaster logistics to accountable governance and vendor-customer synergy, all that’s needed is complete control over personhood and the ability to group at will. From there all needed benefits are emergent. A personal chain allows self directed life and forms the basis for locally relevant equitable interactions.
The critical technology is interoperability - we need to learn to communicate, and collaborate with each other. Yes, a personal chain is all well and good - but pretty useless if you can't communicate with anybody else.
That could have come in the form of a question and I’d have happily informed you that the purpose of the personal chain is to freely express what you need and have to offer, in a local-first network of relevance matching, and that the only other entity besides sovereign individual is the Community of consensus, and that these two structures scale infinitely.
The result is trauma mitigating disaster logistics, community resiliency, accountable governance, and commerce without extractive middle-men data brokers.
Let me suggest that sovereignty isn't a "technology" - it's a political concept. (Kind of like "right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness") - the devil is in the details.
And then, there are lots of ways to organize communities of consensus, and the key issues of those of defining consensus, making agreements, and then enforcing them. Models go all the way back to the Minyan & the Congregation. Covenants and Contracts are the fundamental elements of any kind of collaboration - and the issues become those of common language, terms, terms, conditions, and adjudication of differences.
The Iroquois Great Law of Peace - as the inspiration for the US Constitution, and Robert's Rules of Order - is the most successful example we have for organizing large scale collaboration - but it kind of fails when we get to large numbers (like 6 billion people linked by the Internet). There, we have the beginnings of some good models for large scale collaboration - the Internet Standards Process being the existence proof for global infrastructure governance by purely voluntary collaboration & market forces. Open Source software projects give some more examples - with the Linux Foundation as perhaps the most successful model for supporting large numbers of projects. DAOs (Distributed Autonomous Organizations) are starting to have some traction - but, so far, there are still a lot of details to work out (perturbations in the IPFS & Web3 arenas illustrate how far we have to go).
The devil is in the details, my friend. This is an Engineering driven effort - we're looking for things that actually work, in practice. rather than theoretical & ideological notions.
https://billdutton.me/2025/03/06/resist-trumps-actions/
Thanks for the list of hashtags! That's going to be useful for both aggregating traffic and labeling outgoing traffice.
I’d like to present the defining technology for the civic net and all interactions. Sovereignty.
From trauma mitigating disaster logistics to accountable governance and vendor-customer synergy, all that’s needed is complete control over personhood and the ability to group at will. From there all needed benefits are emergent. A personal chain allows self directed life and forms the basis for locally relevant equitable interactions.
I'd like to suggest that you're all wet.
The critical technology is interoperability - we need to learn to communicate, and collaborate with each other. Yes, a personal chain is all well and good - but pretty useless if you can't communicate with anybody else.
All wet?
That could have come in the form of a question and I’d have happily informed you that the purpose of the personal chain is to freely express what you need and have to offer, in a local-first network of relevance matching, and that the only other entity besides sovereign individual is the Community of consensus, and that these two structures scale infinitely.
The result is trauma mitigating disaster logistics, community resiliency, accountable governance, and commerce without extractive middle-men data brokers.
Let me suggest that sovereignty isn't a "technology" - it's a political concept. (Kind of like "right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness") - the devil is in the details.
And then, there are lots of ways to organize communities of consensus, and the key issues of those of defining consensus, making agreements, and then enforcing them. Models go all the way back to the Minyan & the Congregation. Covenants and Contracts are the fundamental elements of any kind of collaboration - and the issues become those of common language, terms, terms, conditions, and adjudication of differences.
The Iroquois Great Law of Peace - as the inspiration for the US Constitution, and Robert's Rules of Order - is the most successful example we have for organizing large scale collaboration - but it kind of fails when we get to large numbers (like 6 billion people linked by the Internet). There, we have the beginnings of some good models for large scale collaboration - the Internet Standards Process being the existence proof for global infrastructure governance by purely voluntary collaboration & market forces. Open Source software projects give some more examples - with the Linux Foundation as perhaps the most successful model for supporting large numbers of projects. DAOs (Distributed Autonomous Organizations) are starting to have some traction - but, so far, there are still a lot of details to work out (perturbations in the IPFS & Web3 arenas illustrate how far we have to go).
The devil is in the details, my friend. This is an Engineering driven effort - we're looking for things that actually work, in practice. rather than theoretical & ideological notions.
Great oratory, but much too long, and stops short of the plan.
Thanks! Plan is coming. Any thoughts on what stands out for you, speaks to you, motivates you to ask for more details?