It's a governance concept based on the idea that votes should be tradeable. The concept is quite simple, but it leads to some truly hairy game theory problems. Code here: https://github.com/evronm/marketDAO
I'm no fan of e.g. Jeff Bezos. But here are a few things he doesn't do with his money:
- Kill People
- Torture people
- Lock people up
So I'd much rather have him keep his money than have to hand it over to people who will use it for these purposes. Yeah, I know, I know, they build roads and it's absolutely impossible to build roads without extorting the entire population.
And innuendo and deniability is just as common a past time.
The UK's Carry On films and other TV programs like the BBC Are you being served tv sitcom were heavily into innuendo, in as much a way as some jokes in Disney Pixar films fly over the head's of kids, but is understood by most adults perfectly well.
Not only is it a way to quantify peoples mental abilities by whether they laugh in a cinema watched by a secret camera and AI or whether documented on social media, or listened into by our phones and then adverts, its also an in plain site way for some people in society to identify people for exploitation and manipulation, just like teenagers are dedicated followers of fashion.
Its quite interesting really, just like the changes in slang language is a stealth form of working out the age of someone typing online, by the use of their vocabulary and interests. In some respects humans are just lemmings and very people actually come up with original content, not that the original content is necessarily any good.
But mainstream trends happen for a reason, in much the same way as you wont really see anything go viral like they used to on the internet in the early 00's.
Peoples reactions whether culturally or legally correct or not are also telling.
Its all psychological and biological mind games, because histidine and carnosine as two amino acids, which could get alot of males into trouble if they are not careful!
I found the recent ambulance strikes in the UK quite telling, they would attend cat 1 or level 1 people who basically had an over active immune system ie allergic reactions, but refused to attend to cat 2 or level 2 people who had an under active immune system which groups the elderly into that group automatically. In other words the recent UK ambulance strikes were a stealth form of eugenics on the elderly, but most of the british population wouldnt have known this.
And that is my point, there is alot more going on that meets the eye, but if Freud was right, what does that make many parents?
