3 ms·

Hmm, point "a.3 Because governments have become parasites that are killing their host," resonates with truth, but not all of the truth. We must be in a local ma

by pgt 6y ago

Hmm, point "a.3 Because governments have become parasites that are killing their host," resonates with truth, but not all of the truth. We must be in a local maxima (minima?) at the moment - I don't believe we've found the best political system. I will think on this government-as-parasite idea, some more.

vageli 6y ago
If that idea interests you, you may also find it worthwhile to consider the more general case of ideologies. Ideologies are parasite-like and replicate, seek hosts, defend themselves against other ideologies, etc. Ideologies often have less-palatable ideas lumped together with generally-agreeable ideas to aid in defensibility, express identity (through group membership) and so much more. I take governments to be expressions of particular (or collections of) ideologies.
- agravier 6y ago
  Cool stuff. Ideologies mutate a bit, in particular when then change host. After a while, their current form may differ greatly from their original phenotype.
motohagiography 6y ago
a.3 was an attempt to summarize the terabytes of text generated by people within a few degrees of the project in a pithy statement - about which somebody else has said they "did for words what bitcoin did for electricity." It's a bunch of rhetorical logic fractals. In short, avoid.
- yasp 6y ago
  This is a reply to both you and OP, but I don't see what Urbit has to do with any government, its inventor's political opinions notwithstanding.
  - geofft 6y ago
    Urbit may not have much to do with any specific government but it absolutely has a lot to do with governance and society in general. If you do not believe there are fundamental flaws in not only the reality of the internet / online services but the structure of the system in which they grew, Urbit is not worthwhile for you. If you do believe there are flaws, but you disagree about what the flaws are and how to solve then, Urbit may even be counterproductive. Here are the first words of the intro on Urbit's home page: https://urbit.org/understanding-urbit/ https://urbit.org/understanding-urbit/ > We think the internet can’t be saved. The way things are going, MEGACORP will always control our apps and services because we can no longer run them ourselves. > The only way out of this mess is with a completely new platform that’s owned and controlled by its users. A little later: https://urbit.org/understanding-urbit/interface/ https://urbit.org/understanding-urbit/interface/ > One way to imagine Urbit is as the Western answer to WeChat: a seamless, multi-purpose, vastly extensible social network, but without the surveillance. And from their "Beliefs and Principles" page: https://urbit.org/blog/beliefs-and-principles/ https://urbit.org/blog/beliefs-and-principles/ > The ability of the engineering community to govern itself through republican forms is not an abstract theory; it's a proven fact. > Urbit should never fall under any kind of central control. All transitions in galaxy ownership should divide positions, not unite them. Galaxy and star ownership should also be separated. It is harmful for a single entity to hold both galaxies and stars. > Urbit has zero tolerance for abuse, nor does it facilitate censorship. Urbit will do everything possible to help you block content you don't want to see. It does nothing to help you block content you don't want others to see. If you are happy with the role of governments and corporations in Western society and the resulting online landscape, it's not clear you need Urbit. It's fine, but it's overhead. If you're happy with the role of governments and corporations in China, for instance, if you like WeChat and how it works and why it works, Urbit is actively useless to you. And you can oppose China (or even Western governments) and find Urbit useless too: if you believe the problem is with the holders of power but not the very concept that people can hold that much power, or you are skeptical of mechanisms to prevent people from holding that much power - perhaps because you fear covert power and collusion, or because you fear that tools that inhibit the accumulation of power are more likely to harm the powerless than the somewhat-powerful - Urbit doesn't present you with solutions that help you. I think it's entirely fair to say that beliefs about governments are absolutely a part of why Urbit was created and why it continues to get development interest from people besides the creator.

by pgt 6y ago

vageli 6y ago

If that idea interests you, you may also find it worthwhile to consider the more general case of ideologies. Ideologies are parasite-like and replicate, seek hosts, defend themselves against other ideologies, etc. Ideologies often have less-palatable ideas lumped together with generally-agreeable ideas to aid in defensibility, express identity (through group membership) and so much more. I take governments to be expressions of particular (or collections of) ideologies.

agravier 6y ago
Cool stuff. Ideologies mutate a bit, in particular when then change host. After a while, their current form may differ greatly from their original phenotype.

motohagiography 6y ago

a.3 was an attempt to summarize the terabytes of text generated by people within a few degrees of the project in a pithy statement - about which somebody else has said they "did for words what bitcoin did for electricity." It's a bunch of rhetorical logic fractals. In short, avoid.

yasp 6y ago
This is a reply to both you and OP, but I don't see what Urbit has to do with any government, its inventor's political opinions notwithstanding.
- geofft 6y ago
  Urbit may not have much to do with any specific government but it absolutely has a lot to do with governance and society in general. If you do not believe there are fundamental flaws in not only the reality of the internet / online services but the structure of the system in which they grew, Urbit is not worthwhile for you. If you do believe there are flaws, but you disagree about what the flaws are and how to solve then, Urbit may even be counterproductive. Here are the first words of the intro on Urbit's home page: https://urbit.org/understanding-urbit/ https://urbit.org/understanding-urbit/ > We think the internet can’t be saved. The way things are going, MEGACORP will always control our apps and services because we can no longer run them ourselves. > The only way out of this mess is with a completely new platform that’s owned and controlled by its users. A little later: https://urbit.org/understanding-urbit/interface/ https://urbit.org/understanding-urbit/interface/ > One way to imagine Urbit is as the Western answer to WeChat: a seamless, multi-purpose, vastly extensible social network, but without the surveillance. And from their "Beliefs and Principles" page: https://urbit.org/blog/beliefs-and-principles/ https://urbit.org/blog/beliefs-and-principles/ > The ability of the engineering community to govern itself through republican forms is not an abstract theory; it's a proven fact. > Urbit should never fall under any kind of central control. All transitions in galaxy ownership should divide positions, not unite them. Galaxy and star ownership should also be separated. It is harmful for a single entity to hold both galaxies and stars. > Urbit has zero tolerance for abuse, nor does it facilitate censorship. Urbit will do everything possible to help you block content you don't want to see. It does nothing to help you block content you don't want others to see. If you are happy with the role of governments and corporations in Western society and the resulting online landscape, it's not clear you need Urbit. It's fine, but it's overhead. If you're happy with the role of governments and corporations in China, for instance, if you like WeChat and how it works and why it works, Urbit is actively useless to you. And you can oppose China (or even Western governments) and find Urbit useless too: if you believe the problem is with the holders of power but not the very concept that people can hold that much power, or you are skeptical of mechanisms to prevent people from holding that much power - perhaps because you fear covert power and collusion, or because you fear that tools that inhibit the accumulation of power are more likely to harm the powerless than the somewhat-powerful - Urbit doesn't present you with solutions that help you. I think it's entirely fair to say that beliefs about governments are absolutely a part of why Urbit was created and why it continues to get development interest from people besides the creator.