EthCC 2: Tim Bansemer

hi everybody I think speaking about disability covenants is it's a difficult table because it's one of the most complex topics I could imagine so everything when I was speaking about there's nothing else than try to conceptualize a direction which we might be able to use to work to horse disability covenants and yeah I just get right into it for me the original inspiration of the theme was a network which gives us the ability to create promotional systems where everybody is free to draw and where everybody can participate and where everybody is equal on the right to participate so the madness of power and I think corruption of power or say disorientation that many many many people depend on one single other human being is a risk we introduce based on the history where we come from and today we have individuals which have thousands and thousands like like immense more potential for destruction then I have what you potentially have and when I say that it's a little bit populistic but I think you're getting the idea it's the risk we have that those decision makers make bad decision decisions which are catastrophic for all of us and I think it is desirable to find new ways of decision making and the direction of disability governance is hopefully a way forward to this my background is in network engineering and IT security so I think I understand a little bit of what a Thiam is and what she is doing and when I say a little bit I find it just so amazing how much growth we had in the ecosystem how many second layer solutions are developed and it's very hard to keep up with all the innovation which is happening while at the same time take a lot of attention to the place of social governance and the human aspect I'm currently engaged in a security related project with the ETM Foundation as well as with swarm the other project which is more volunteering project which brought me here is the deagle Foundation and the companies I created last year which are operating a parking space in block IO as a disclaimer this is a vignette talk I do not claim that this is academic or objective I think it is pretty hard to do something like that so I hold strong opinions lightly and this is a state term which means that the state is as you know changing all the time and it's dynamically updated so we see us here in a year again it will be a probably a very different from now to give an overview I will speak about context in the beginning of the talk I will speak about principles which I think can help us to build the foundations for complex systems we can use to build distributed governance systems I will speak a little bit about the DIA foundation and what we do there to embody the complexity we need to be on vehicle systems I will speak about a relationship of disability governance systems and permissions portions like aetherium and I will speak obviously about disability governance and conceptualizations in this direction if you have clarifying questions just raise your arm if it's a short one if it's a longer one please collect them and let's have a straw talk after this this speech so let's start with a little bit of context we have more more technologies on the market which are actually supporting each other which means that we have more and more abilities to influence the world we have more more impact the problematic aspect of this is that if our decision-making making power it's not getting a wiser or more considerate if we just make more more we make better decisions which have a stronger impact and this is actually your cell terminal safes organization in a longer run if we don't find a way to change our decision-making to be way a fundamentally way better so we have the power of God's because we start to fly to the skies and to the stars we start to inhabit other planets in the foreseeable future but without the wisdom and laughs we make exponentially bad decisions humans some people say they don't change actually humans I think are programmed to change and to adopt they are highly adaptable that's the reason why babies when they are born are so vulnerable because they're in a very strong adoption state they are in a state where they learn a lot from the environment to be highly adapted that's the reason why humans live prettier on pretty much every area of this planet in addition to that we start to fly to space at the moment we are grown in a society which is rivals and which is playing a win-lose games which means that this is how we act by a default because we are adapted to this environment the problem is with win-lose games which were very successful in the past we come to a limit which we can satisfy anymore because we lose games we play resort potentially and catastrophic outcomes just started playing field if we speak about exponential growth then this is something which happens in nature as well if a woman is pregnant the child grows exponentially it takes exponentially more resources from the mother until the point that the child traumatic ear changes the way it's depending to become self-dependent so the child is born and then it starts to breathe on its own decided to take in food from external instead of through the mother and I think this is pretty similar to what we as a species need to do we have a planet we are exponentially extracting the resources if you're not substantially changing the way how we interact with those resources the child and the mother will die in this case it's very important for us to find ways that we can do a fundamental shift in a way how we are intact and environment so the basic underlying question which brought me into the blush in space was other solutions we can use to collaborate on a totally new level with the technology we have at hand the portion technologies I believe that developing this open source developing this with low hierarchies of let haraki's this is a expression of the wish to collaborate expression of the wish that we are actually working together to to have a win-win situation instead of a win-lose game so I think it's really the transition from being rival us as we adopted to become cooperative and only consider ative so that we try to take as much into consideration as we can before we make a decision there is this sentence or quote phone back Minnesota law you never change things by fighting the existing reality to change something build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete so it's not taking the reduce dynamics and what we know and take it on a blockchain this is creating a hyper capitalism it makes it very Moore's of like effective but I think this is not personally not what I am searching for I hope that we can make better decisions so the question is what are the nuisances we actually need to build instead of just tanking to all systems and making them even faster that's the reason why bring up principles you might disagree with those principles or you might agree with them I said them because I believe I deeply believe that they were fundamentally important we have an approach a stance in a portion space many people which actually look deeply into how they can avoid potentially a legal or prosecution and on one side I understand that on the other side I say we need to be accountable to something I don't say that we should all be accountable to certain restrictions what I'm saying is maybe we should start to hold each other accountable and to college other out on each other's and I think this is very important because when we create new digital territory where we live in then we need to think about how we can ensure that this is a territory which is for people in a way that they can actually have a predictable future in this space and then we ensure that it's not heavily abused for our cases which are not in line with principles what we see in nation-states through constitutions I think we will see similar things in a portion space and just to say that there was a reason why there was a towel fork and that reason was ethical consideration let's speak about more principles let's speak about the acknowledgement of complexity if I can acknowledge for myself that the complexity of this world is infinite or say much higher than I can comprehend as a human being then this means that I don't hold the truth I just hold an oversimplified model of a perspective and this model has never the reality this means if we build models to understand reality we always fall short and actually we as humans have a very good way of abstract thinking and taking the agency to make sense of the world in a new way but I think we are decades or even centuries away from building models because this is a paradox right which can really understand the full deepness of reality so this is actually a call for collaboration this is a call for exchange of perspectives to give us to give us the opportunity to embody more complexity as a group instead of being limited by one person complex systems you might have heard about it Hugh has a read like who has heard about complex system and read about it what it means cool it's like a little bit less than I would say 10 to 15% in the room complex systems or systems which are built out of many small aspects cells for example the human body itself is a complex system and those complex system even if you describe every cell it is pretty much impossible to describe or predict the emission behavior which is generated by the interaction between the single elements and you can ask yourself where is I whereas my intelligence where is my perception for myself in which cell is this and I believe that this is an emerging property a lot of the complex system that all our cells together create that feeling of me or this feeling of I have intelligence and I hold agency and what we say that what does it mean for building governance systems which try to embody collective intelligence and wisdom and allow massive coordination tronc we know that we need a totally entire different model of dealing with the reality a new frame of mind a collective intelligence this is an ability to come into communion with a group and act as a single unit unit of intelligence this means that we participate with a larger group without really being able to embody the whole complexity of your group which the group represents which the group is able to represent or understand through collective intelligence if we look at what collective intelligence is for Wikipedia then you come to Dec traffic and I found it quite interesting how this maps to the portion space so we have for example the area of cognition and market judgment a prediction of the future events in politics and technology some of you might have seen a slide before because they used it before but what do you think what matters here if you think about a star having elections but it's what startup name would you drop yes yes another one gnosis prediction market so just as an example I mean oversteer as well but in general prediction markets and there's this one example here we have the aspect of cooperation which is network of trust a peer-to-peer business and open source software what matches this description I would go further I would agree that this is true for them but this is also true for disability ledger technologies and protocols as well right so to build a fabric which actually allows us to transact in trust and then we have coordination at work community is coordinating collective action and this is I think what disability evidence is about it's us learning the functions which help us to coordinate collective action because we introduced the hierarchy of systems and protocols instead of the hierarchy of humans a secondary principle based on complexity is integrating maximum and incredible cognitive diversity so this means if we in this room all think the same because we have to say in worldview we don't have a lot of cognitive diversity and this means if we look at a problem together then we come up with the same opinions all the time but if we look back or think back then reality has many perspectives right so I think it is desirable that we have a cognitive serenity which gives us the ability sovereignty sorry which gives us the ability to look from different perspectives to this same problem so this is the principle of that we want to get the maximum into credible cognitive diversity and I say integratable because it creates friction every time you bring something or somebody in a group of a different perspective and a different worldview this creates tensions and then the question is how do you na cohesion between people which have totally different perspectives and that's an emotional or saying a vision thing or a culture thing but it's certainly not the aspect of having the same opinion Diigo foundation was created by by a small group of people actually Max and Anya which join me and the beginning like right after ECC last year max do you like to raise your arm onions over there they helped me a lot like over the last year with the idea that we set up a conference in Athens a conference to bring together many different people to show that NGOs and technologies which come from the parking space can actually provide in governance functions and develop them together it was very very ambitious because we were aiming for very high numbers of participants and in the end it was not that big even if we could pull pull off because it was like immense resources we had a crypto winter and we just decided to make a smaller event after ECC there was also the point where the inspiration hit me so strongly I said I need to dedicate time to this very interesting field of distributed governance and you might remember who was there who was at the stairs conversations last year ok very few but it was a discussion about what we do with the frozen funds as one aspect the parity funds and there are other aspects in this conversation it was all about governance and was super clear that this in-person communication was super important to actually get more insights about what's the state of the community currently and if there's something tangible we can act on and it showed the lack of additional coordination frameworks and as as a response to that the idea came for Athens and for having this conference in Athens and it was just a tweet to check how it will resonate there was a very strong resignation with like over 25,000 people seeing it and as a result of that it was clear that we need more work in the field of disability in general we kicked off the first event in Berlin which was focused on disability governance you find information about this online but to break it down it was an event which was self organized it's not only speaking about the supported governance but also living it and which used a lot of social technologies to create cohesion between the participants to allow to integrate a lot of diversity in opinion and I think this is something we can take as a culture stronger into our communities if you want updates about future events it's also on the website but Athens is not that it's just postpones let's speak about new concepts let's speak about the concepts we currently see rising because of also plush and technologies conversations you might have heard before who has heard about networked societies okay who has heard about that there is something like a blockchain state like a portion based society or portion base post nation-state thing are more people that's correct so if we look at in the corner there's always this X course with like this is actually travel I'm sorry for that with a person and the topic if you make notes and you're interested in the topic I highly advocate for just googling those X course links which are in the bottom he speaks about network societies as a social fellow mean that we have now and this time where we live in the opportunity to gather around ideas and about around principles globally without having the separation through porous and when we look at what portion technologies provide us then it becomes very interesting we're not there yet but we develop some digital identities which allow us to control our date and to know access this was something was usually was issued by a state or state organization so we Democrat eyes that we have money and monetary policy hell yeah we have actually demographers that as well if cryptocurrencies we have the ability to develop governance processes and set them up in organizational structures like the Owls also done now we can create a culture so everything what we usually say makes a state makes a community which can thrive is now in reach to build as a networked society so what is disability governance it's about a distribution of power it's about awarding centralized parties and the risks which they introduce it's about shared ownership and the ability to participate in a decision-making it's also about allowing that we get way more input everybody can engage with the system that means that everybody can raise issues in a very complex world which is moving very dynamically and fast we need to be able to address those topics with an increasing speed with an increasing dynamic and we can't afford to oversee your critical issues because we didn't want to listen to somebody obviously this creates a lot of questions and problems because we introduced a lot of information to the system and we need to have an opportunity to react to that right these are our sense-making functions I will speak more about that but that's the research we need to do aspects for viable distributed governance systems I think we can discuss this a lot what we think a viable system is but for my opinion is really that we are changing for example to only conservative behavior like I said before so there we actually optimize for the maximum of benefits for the maximum one of centinall beings because we are heavily depending on nature and there any monster and for the maximum amount of time and there are more there's more to that if you design complex systems we can actually build any fragile systems which allow us to scale and to integrate without the system breaking down if you think about global governance systems then we need exactly debt we need systems where everybody can take agency which can scale and which are stable and self-stabilizing because on that level stakes are too high to break but we still need to have the ability to adopt what is distributed governance for Theon how do we maintain the code how do we ensure that we introduce new features and how do we do that with the permission of our Channel how do we keep it a permission aspersion by avoiding capture how do we ensure that - do not collide so collude this is really about how are we able to scale the development of a platform like lithium if we are not able to scale the governance model for it so this is a very strong dependency let me speak about like blockchain I don't want to limit it to blockchain we are speaking actually about the infrastructure for web 3 you're actually speaking about that there are different elements which need to be considered but in general it's always about scalability sustainability and sovereignty and then we could discuss what is actually in detail means and unlike in a lot of sessions actually if we speak about the vision of the theorem there was the holy trinity in the beginning right and there was the idea that something like whisper could be a communication protocol which is unstoppable which is has censorship resistance which ensures that we are actually able to ensure that our messages are delivered while staying and in image we have to work computer hey it's there it's a little bit slower but it's there right now what is with the cloud storage layer so those things are very dependent also if we want to get there that we both systems which can serve as an alternative to existing platforms like Amazon Google or Facebook without those it's a little bit hard for it because what's the point if the we are depending still on heavily centralized other aspects of the infrastructure I want to go a little bit in a legal direction because I'm also participating in a collaborative of Primavera TV deeper and want to share my perspective which arose through those participations I actually think that we created to the territory I actually think that the miners which were distributed all over the world create an abstract level which allows us to have a rules or have rules by code and those I say if in your section it's actually a sovereign because if we ensure that the governance process for making changes to the codes stays not captured then this means that we can give ourselves rules and this means that these rules are also enforced against everybody who participates on the platform legislation is done by you pretty much poor developers at the moment because they define what the rules are and if yeah if you want to change then we need to change the code and this is exactly what happened with the tower fork but we have also a different element for execution and adoption which order miners because they can actually veto against a change of the protocol right and this means that a part of unchanged protocol continues as a hard fork or that the quad refs might not even consider to pushing it down because the miners are actually a lot interested in adopting it at all about capture I can highly recommend you to read the governance one wall I flats and fear just for my own curiosity who has read or read that article okay it gives a little bit of feedback where we are with the discussion and how quality knowledge is please read it if you find the time it is all about what's the permission is function if it's captured where is the difference to private one or two consortium shame I want to introduce the difference here the difference between a dowel and the SDL so software-defined organization every tile is a software-defined organization but not every software-defined organizations at all and this might be a distinction I want to make but really feel that there is a big difference because the towel is on a independent jurisdiction the Athenian restriction and applies to those rules while the sto lives on a private or permissioned chain which is actually subject to the restriction teh inherent so if I'm Microsoft I run my clouds service or services in the US then I will need to comply to those rules so if we make the differentiation between STS and ours we can actually have more meaningful conversations and I would be very happy if we could do that because it was a lot of confusion around we are we add with the current wall of code when we look at the systems we are currently having a team at Bitcoin and so on the state of emergency reveals the power structures we have and there's a very good paper by a hundred in a posh she actually routes about deconstructing decentralization I can highly recommend going through that paper it shows those states of emergencies and how decision we are made and she claims that we actually have pretty centralized systems right now when it comes down to the decision making who can propose changes to the code successfully to the platform so the question is do we have a metric Rossio do we have a plutocracy what do we want to have actually do we want to have direct participation with on the wing outcomes I think we need to start to ask more of those questions permission split up actions as a digital legal system which allows itself to enforce the data in the digital domain requires a little bit more things before lawyers would allow this or say consider it a your section I'm going here a little bit in the future it would require a good conflict resolution system to actually decide for example what to do with the frozen funds question is can we build this rebooted ones which help us to bring more transparency and more participation in those decision-making processes and the question is how do we process code which then goes into the protocol how do we ensure that in a distributed and scalable manner how do we validate that and how do we again come to the point that we make the best decisions we can make under the circumstances of the information which are available to us all code which is running Colleoni theum is subject to the decision making process of the people which are able to successfully Lobby and bring the code into the protocol this is a very implicit process I would advocate highly for thinking about how we make a scaleable explicit process out of it I know that this will take a long time but this would give us the ability to actually make it transparent how decisions are made and how somebody who is currently not working with atheneum on the other side of the planet which has no certian merit can actually contribute in a positive way to the protocol so reality check with the status quo I'm very critical because when we think about we have our B&B you burn a mess on Facebook multi dollar industries then the question is if we build something which can compete with those industries then this means that the stakes are getting higher this means that we have multi multi-billion dollar incentives to actually privatize or stop this platform and the question is if we check in with the Karev's today how do they feel how much they feel how much pressure that I have because we hold them accountable for being something like legislators and Guardians and stewards for the platform how much more can they take when we speak about multi-billion dollar industries if we want to withstand such a pressure we need to get way better at scalable distributed governance processes because this allows us to distribute also the pressure on the people which can propose this will decrease the power of the singleton koreff but it increase the amount of pressure they can heart held alt and it will decrease responsibility they have it's actually they will have a better life I just want to introduce this there are some projects like ocean protocol for example and there are many more which want to give their protocol to the community but they start here they start as a centralized organization some guy came up with an idea collect some friends around it forms a team gets maybe funding from an IC all or private source continues launches the test net lands the maenad goes further introduces Moore's decentralization for decision-making and participation collecting feedback from the community establishing a way to propose features establishing maybe it was something like faulty back boundary systems which allow us to develop new features outside of the core team and then we come to the point that the community takes ownership of the network but this means that the core community which actually created in the beginning steps down and then we decentralized the nodes of power this is rarely happening by the way in the past of like humankind there were some some situations where just happened but a problem is that power tends to corrupt and that it allocates right so this is the nature unfortunately I'm not sure if the three of us here I'm not sure maybe it's maybe a little bit further up there maybe it's a little bit further down there but I miss a more aspects to ensure that we keep it the way that we have a tendency to decentralization and not to centralization what are the actions we can actually take to make good progress with disability eminent systems first of all if we don't want to have decision-making based on cpu power or decision-making pace on coin whole ring then we need to find ways to actually address a human as a being and why how we can do that is we've served sovereignty identities honors and the white you actually prove that your unique human being is a very hard challenge but I think that this is something we will not go come around if we really want to have the ability to interact as a human being with those systems and I think it's highly desirable that those are standards which are cross-platform and there are D ID Stan answers the gap of trust there are other people which work on this travel legacy which can help us to get those things done did you put the boundary systems are a very good way to actually get started because you have decision-making and you have fund allocation you need to ask yourself how you can hold people accountable it's a perfect low stake environment to actually iterate and there are actually governments which are willing from democratic countries willing to take a part of their budget of their yearly budget to try it out with like portion based boundary systems so that they can increase engagement with the with the citizens so I think that there are more allies we can potentially identify and work with then we might see in the first place it's very important that we have something like it corn and other projects which help us also to build the code in a distributed way and to allow us to ensure that the tools we need to build to CC buta systems are also a supporting scaleable engagement for coders building vows which interface with the real world or something we also need to do if you want to have a real world impact which means for example renting projects are a great opportunity there I will just set okay just a moment this is just a combination of multiple of the systems so this means that we use SiC building and yappy proposals in a combination with a bounty system and github like code management and version control system and you see on the side that there are different steps so this is something I will go a little bit deeper later on as well so we need to have with every organization and with every community to ability ability together signals so this is perception do you have the ability to make sense out of this and collaborate to make better sense out this is the sense-making and we have the agency ability no we execute this is the part where we actually decide to allocate the resources and go into action and then we have the feedback function which allows us to reason again if what we are actually doing makes sense to check if it's healthy to check if what we are doing is bringing the system forward and how can we improve it further if we want to get a decentralized rbb protocol platform whatsoever let's start with the specifics let's start with renting a house and putting a towel behind it and figuring out what we need to do that not starting with building the whole platform because in the second step we can rent multiple houses and we can increase those systems but based on real-world applications serenity sovereignty is the ability to adopt we hold those systems actually on ourselves as well so if your sovereign you are able to interact with your world there are multiple definitions there are various definitions for this I will just read out the one from you via Ivanova she said sovereignty is the cognitive capacity to have clear perception sense making an agency it is the ability to be a conscious buchen concise agent in your life and take responsibility for me it's also saying that this is the ability for us to adopt because we make make make sense of our environment if you're interested in like more say context there are two podcasts which are very very nice which is future two thinkers podcast about the evolution of consciousness and science and there is collective insights post-class which is about interdisciplinary scientists out of the bio sphere and medical sphere which speak about complex systems if we conceptualize that for governance structures I think we can build a classification which we could use in the fractal way on every layer which means that we can use them on a personal level but we can use them also to ask ourselves what orders functions in a group in a towel or for civilization so for a global governance system and this are about those four steps it's about perception like I said before which creates situational awareness the better our perception is the more we can actually take in consideration to make a decision which means if I have a lot of say I hear something I see something I feel something my brain mixes this to create a situation awareness and this is very important if we want to make good decisions I will go a little bit faster because I'm running out of time but to make a very important point at this stage in this conversation talk there is this part of human agency with intrinsic motivation if we run through all the different aspects of perception sense making an agency we were actually reasoning about why we are doing something if we get very strong extrinsic incentives we jump through the first and second step and go directly to agency which means that we don't try to really make sense out of what I'm doing as long as I'm paid and this is true for also programming people through incentives so I can only say that I'm a lot a big fan of that especially not because this aligns the opinions strongly and decreases the diversity we get from a group and therefore we are not able to make very good decisions because information we get from the people or just always the same standard specifications governance is a terrible topic which has a long legacy and I think we can discover a lot of governance functions in the real world today and we are able to use them to actually encode this logic into governance systems on the portion in dollars for example and it's very helpful if we do that with specifications every stunners because then we can actually take governance functions put them into like Aragon for example and move them over to tau stack or the other way around or build a new tower and adapt those governors based on libraries so we think about that as libraries it's great because it means that we are not limited to having specific evidence functions but we can adopt what is available how are those Governors functions intersecting with our belief systems I as a human have my beliefs of this world and this means that I'm actually always biased and my ideology actually dictates me to a degree when I looking at a crowd which people I see if I'm very negative and a very negative state of mind for example I might see the negative like people interacting with each other in a crowd if I'm very positive I might see more the people which care for each other and this is very important to take in consideration that the human operation system we embody the worldview we embody dictates how we make sense and how we come to conclusions and how we give feedback about what we perceive and to reflect that back when we think about that we are grown up as rivals people that as revelers agents in a world which is revelers then this is probably what we hold so what do we need to unlearn and what do we need to learn to actually engage in a cooperative way what's this it's very hard to see and this is probably like yeah you have looked a very good perception right now Brett so if we increase that we get a little bit more contextual information yes that was fast right so the more we increase it the more context we get and with that we get more ability to reason about the situation we are seeing right so if we focus just in the first step to listen more deeply with the people we engage with then we actually can make better decisions already but if we are really really good in collaborating with each other if we are really good in listening and exchanging diverse opinions then we get a very good 360-degree perspective and I think this is what is really desirable if we really want to understand the context we operating in and this is pretty much true for like everything we engage with so I want to come back to the infinite complexity of the world we live in now what we look at is yeah these are a different perspective right this is a geostationary orbit of the earth here it's a low Earth orbit this is what the ISS sees and here is an image from a satellite which checks actually the temperature so we have an interest for good decision making to get as much possible possible input as much input as possible I need to do a short time check how much time do I have left five minutes so when we speak about governance factors is important to actually acknowledge that we have natural hierarchy and that's not a bad thing because there're hierarchies or people under the hierarchies of system we have various hierarchies we are aware of so this is a very standard hierarchy you might know and this is a very direct participatory hierarchy right everybody can engage with everybody this is a very flat hierarchy which allows the people which engage directly with each other to have a lot of advisors which help them this could be like your board actually but at the same time they are interacting in a hierarchy which is very very strong so we all are in different hierarchies all the time we form groups based on purpose goals and identity usually if we are not motivated by extrinsic incentives and when we form groups of friends then we are actually selecting our leaders in a very friendly way we acknowledge their competence and those which serve the group try to help them so for example if we go mountaineering and there's a guy called max which is actually a very professional Mountaineer then I am will agree to his leadership if I'm acting from the base of his experience and I am NOT experienced and it might be a person called Sarah which is also a little bit experienced which supports max with that leadership and that's not a bad thing I think this is somewhere we should acknowledge that this is something which is not desirable to try to eliminate that we have that the various iterations so why Allah makes this a good Mountaineer Phil is our driver so he is the friends group is the guy who races who has a lot of experience with driving so we let some traffic and we have Sarah which is a dive instructor so when we go diving she's the leader I think you get a picture so this means this you put it governance or horizontal structures allow us that we have many leaders we step up in different contexts which allow us to actually leverage the best potential available but that's a situation out of servant chip out of stewardship so hierarchies of systems actually allow us to eliminate the need for hierarchies of people which become dangerous because a lot of people depend on one person so if we try or if we are able to avoid a lot of dependencies in the hierarchy this will give us the ability to actually eliminate a risk as well but we need to have systems which give us the hierarchy we need to actually for example govern as globally we don't find some basic principles we are not able to coordinate globally but it will use subsidiary systems and the hierarchy of systems we can freely freely engage with then I think it becomes a little bit clearer of what I'm speaking about here so no on disability cabinet systems give us the ability to move freely horizontal and to engage with any other system freely but the groups we form or how many of groups we form or how we split them again this is something which is totally arbitrary which is really down to the people which want to work together and do something which is not determined by the system itself we were experimenting as well will if carbon structures we are building a town which is based on intrinsic motivation instead of incentive systems because we want to show that this is possible as well this is currently in a conceptual state and as my close to the last point a short summary and then the last point I believe that we will not have scalable governance without a scalable poor chain commissioners function which gives a substrate for building the systems but at the same time we will not see a scalable distributed Kevin and distributive options without distribute governance so this is like a loop they need each other and then rise together or fall together viable distribute governance is about building complex systems just means that we design on everything that we design the basic atomic parts of it and then we see emerging patterns which allow us to see emerging patterns of collective intelligence and wisdom and it actually starts with the way how we interact with each other so the cultural revolt are we acting rivals or are we acting as collaborators on something and how can we unlearn and learn what is required to build a social fabric required to have to embody air collective intelligence and I can only say that I participated in trainings and in events we're ahead to feeling that collective intelligence was arising and that's really weird it's like something is there but you kind of really comprehend it totally and I think it's probably very similar for ourselves what they think about us as a last opportunity to engage very closely or soonish it's big of a community sample assembly end of this week March 8th actually this is not organized by the Digger foundation but people which came to Berlin decided that they want to set something up and the Digger foundation supported it so if you're interested in those topics if you're interested in the social governance and deepening those conversations you invited and just let me know if you need link and you get it if you search it it's also on a dig of Twitter it's a little bit older check like three or four tweets behind and there's the registration link all right that's it I yeah thank you for your attention [Applause] are there any questions could you further explain myself sovereign identity standard is one of those requirements or plans of action yes if we want to do patient centric evidence then we need to be able to map a person to the portion space and set some distance these standards are giving us a protocols to actually do that without the centralized Authority so because we don't want to have a pressure by authorities we want to use open standards which give everybody the ability to credit to give credibility to others like a web of trust right but at the same time the beauty of first order today at energy protocols is that they would support giving our currently existing ID structures so the government for example could issue a claim of a government ID to itself sort of digital identity or a corporation could do the same so it's it's legacy comfortable but gives us way more opportunities for control and agency more questions there's there's okay I think if you go afterwards hi I'm just curious to do one of your thoughts would be on the the next steps the things that you think there are both important and are close to being emerging in the near future so when we speak about IT systems we usually model real-world behavior and I think the most important thing is that we get reliable emerging collective intelligence in a non digital context so that we identify the patterns which are required to model this and pull IT systems which support that alright so it starts with what is the difference if I take it down and governance functions for at all what is the difference between agents which have a human s which is rivals between patients which every human s which is cooperative and what how how different today interact with the Tao and how different is the result because I think so long or - until this point the most game theoretic thinking that we can just program the people but I think that there are way more to it and we start that we need to start to take that into consideration how people think just a question on there it sounds like to me like Nash equilibrium are you aware of any research paper linking the blockchain and the game theory can you repeat the last point as you get here we are you aware of what it is yeah game theory so because it sounds like blockchain is an operative way to which this Nash equilibrium that which is being explained by this this works for for very trivial things like if we want to incentivize the security of the network through for example running a note because you're rewarded for that but it's false very short if we want to introduce way more complexity so I'm totally fine with saying you know we use incentive structures to share costs and to reward people for providing infrastructure for us I think it is a strong fallacy to think that we are able to get the full complexity of this world into a game with theoretical model because to game theoretic model itself limits the complexity we can you know introduce so it's it's limits the ability of of you making an independent decision because you will have extrinsic motivations which tell you that's okay and that's not okay or which say I reward you for this behavior and I don't be watching for this behavior we have systems which didn't very good and for example Facebook exploits user attention through all hyper stimuli based on you know based on extrinsic incentives but just giving you what you want to have right so I think we are very good in using game theory for making people addicted but I think that this is not desirable so we I think need to differentiate between what is desirable and what is not desirable because I don't want to have my kids being programmed by some people were to think that they are honest in the world right more questions okay thank you all for your attention [Applause]