Spencer: Having long-term thinking when you can, short-term thinking when you must. Scenarios - pushing hard for very long term perspectives when the short-term is unachievable. The opposite is missing the forest for the trees.
Dan: Secure a stable source of income. The community has expenses to do. Detroit used to be the largest producer of cars, it was producing more than the rest of the country.
Max: Continuing the point of stable income. We need something to generate money short-term. We need to get business involved. Real economic activity. Integrated with the local community. Get Japanese people involved. Have connections with the people around.
Byron: Longevity is optimizing for LEV in reality is what we do for the rest of time, build for eternity. Don’t assume everything will be solved by reaching LEV. The biggest issue is cleaning and handling the trash. If people are not getting their hands dirty do we really want them in the community? The minimum is are you willing to wash your own dish? Take responsibility of the community and yourself.
Victoria: Japanese people have ownership of their own block. Local governance.
Tuk: No spectators. No tourists. Everyone is coming to create the event together. Everyone is providing input, artwork, creativity into creating a community together. Structural level decisions must be made. Geeks, Mops and Sociopaths. Initial people are super nerdy and really motivated. There are some follow-ons that they are tourists, that are not deeply involved and committed. Then sociopaths come and monetize. You need some community infrastructure that monitors against it. At a certain level, original people live. We should look at how other subcultures have been created and survived. Community immune system. Tricky balance between co-creation and gatekeeping.
Byron: Anarcho-capitalist community where they had to set up rules.
Tuk: You want people that see the advantage of the regulatory framework. You don’t want people that are cowboy about regulations.
Victoria: Having experienced several communities: you want to get the balance. But people also self regulate.
Dan: You want to create a system where it pays to be honest and have a good reputation. If you rewards dishonest people, more dishonest people come. And the honest people end up leaving. If you side with people that are dishonest, good business don’t want to be associated with you. Policentric system of governance: jurisdictions compete as everything competes. Laws should be able to compete. Through the blockchain you can have reputation that is both anonymous and reliable. Payment system can have a built-in escrow and reputation embed.
Byron: Longevity biomarkers on the blockchain. Social credit scores can also be on the blockchain. How do you capture that?
Max: Use to run hackerspaces and all of these small problems are solved. My main issue was not enforcing them. If you let them run they escalate. I want to have a high-trust leadership with a strong incentive to keep things running. Edge-cases can be exploited. Representative democracy vs full-on democracy.
Dan: a private community has founders, founders decide rules. Rules attract people.
Azza: I do like the idea of a couple hierarchy people. The idea of clear communication, that once a week everyone gets together and discuss what is working and what isn’t working. There are so many points of failure so you need to communicate.
Byron: If a community is attached to the people starting it, it can also be its downfall. Radical transparency is one: transparency of what everything is for. The inception of the community not being trustworthy comes from the lack of the value.
Victoria: People are free to make their own decisions with complete information.
https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths