I Feel Like Scott Lemon....
>>Some questions:
Individuals have power - does that equal anarchy? If not, then how so? Because don't we each become a world unto ourselves and therefore every man/women/child becomes an island whereby each of us creates/dictates rules involving the interaction of others to ourselves?>>
Our natural inclination is to leverage our egos, secure opinions and build walls which define our view of the world.
>>How do I ensure isolation doesn't become a factor in my life since people will have to accept my rules (laws) to interact with me. This fact alone would alienate me from some people no? Doesn't that then close the scope of what I can do and with whom?>>
Sure does. From the time we are born most of us gradually move toward the common guidepoints of isolation and fear.
>>Next question:
Virtual tribes/kingdoms/communitites will all have some rules or protocols by which each entity (person) will need to adhere to. I mean what are tribes/groups other than several people agreeing to certain terms of civility et al.>>
Groups have many unwritten rules and a general supportive collective spirit or purpose which guides and channels their energies.
>>The word KINGDOM equates with an authoriative power that judges/rules subjects.>>
Poor choice of words. I was trying to create this sense of abundance.
>>So how who is going to write those rules?
Who will enforce them?
Will we substitute software/technology to do the enforcing of these rules (or laws take your pick of semantics) and if so, don't we have to trust the people who write the software (or create the technology), implement the software/technology and maintain it?>>
Going forward INDIVIDUALS will have more control, flexibility and power to write and secure basic rules of personal and commercial engagement.
>>Isn't that just re-inventing the wheel in the logical space of the Internet and if so, why would this be better?
Different doesn't always equate to better unless in its practice, the new way proves that to be the case. Something we won't know until it's upon us. But I do share your enthusiasm and optimism that it will be better. I'm just not sure exactly HOW it will be better.>>
It's better for there are fewer boundaries, limitations and restriction on the virtual domain. Thought gets transmitted much faster. New ides, creativity and innovation become commonplace. Time accelerates. Much more collective good is achieved.
>>Wouldn't EVOLUTION be a better form of change than revolution especially in the Internet arena since there are so many people who just don't get it? People react differently to radical change which upsets their "comfort" zone. Revolution is a necessity when the people are denied many liberties necessary in our civilized world today. We'd need to look outside our country for examples in the real world.>>
I don't think we have to look very far and I do think this is a Revolution, not an Evolution.
>>Would we need a period of "fuedalism on the Internet" until most people found a place to call home? Would "colonies" sprout up with basic protocols (or laws) governing the interaction of those who agree (vote) to join? Again, in all these models, there needs to be authority figures and whether or not we substitute technology for people, we can't be assured of perfection.>>
Did your ancestor go by "Lord Strifas?"
As far as colonies on the net, I refer to them as colonies of thought. The net is one giant audit trail of our thoughts. I don't think the world is long on authority figures.
>>Just because technology may seem to give us control over various things doesn't mean it will. I only "gain control" because I have a certain degree of understanding/knowledge regarding the system on which that control is based. Without that, why would the average person in the world care/want to "revolutionize" things based on blind faith alone?>>
People naturally gravitate to the energy of control. I just think control will massive move to the net.
>>Also, I feel that the same people who become involved with "government" or public service will also become involved with the same duties and responsibilities in the virtual world. In that sense, the revolution will only occur on the level at which it exists (virtual vs physical) and not in the same essence in which we would expect.>>
The Internet is speeding up our physical and virtual worlds. People will mirror what they are good at, what they know.
>>What I'm wrestling with is the unanswered questions regarding the proposed revolution in power structure. The dynamic of public opinion unleashed can be as destructive a power as it can be an enlightening one. We have to be careful and mindful of all things.>>
Being careful and mindful is a requirement in life. But I like to see ACTION.
Peace.
GO!!
|
