Doesn’t seem like employers actually do the decreasing returns calculation when they decide their employees’ salaries… is there data that this is actually happening?
- Glen: Well, I mention the theoretical case only to show that since the world is full of increasing returns, and many companies are out there making profits, the returns of that economic activity must not be distributed inefficiently or the companies would all be bankrupt.
I work in optimal use of health records. We model self-sovereign communities and patients and doctors to vote on how data is used and the like. We’ve been struggling to figure out how to introduce a business model into this setup. How would a nonprofit encourage this non-linear social graph sort of business?
- Glen: I don’t think these ideas are relevant to very small organizations that can rely on interpersonal relationships. Once the organizations scale up to where these tools are useful, you have to put really sharp boundaries around the community.
- If this model works as well as we think it will, one of these orgs is going to swallow up the whole world because of its extreme productivity and growth.
- As for nonprofits, the move is to bring together charitible or government funding with the management of the community, so you can use these funding mechanisms to allocate resources within the community
Degree of coupling graph is very powerful thing to show
- There are life partners, close friends, aqaunintnces… what should we do with that information if we could track it all? If we start building things on top of that info, does it mess up the graph?
- Glen: Well these are all still quite experimental. Quadratic Funding and the like I expect to see in use in ~15 years maybe. Harnessing the social graph iteslf, even further out. BUt I will speculate.
- you want to find an eigenspace of that fgraph, and then set up an economic system where you’re doing some kidn of quadratic voting on that eigenspace rather than ont he actual social space
- you want to do something where basical the whole setupof the problem is about the issue of difference
- taxes and profits would be recycled to subsidize cooperation across distance in the graph, which would transform the graph
- how we usually think about it are atomic indiividuals acting in a market, but that’s silly. We are in a big dyanimcs always evolving social graph of people with all h
- what are acutallt the underlying factors out there hat determine cooperation? races? affilliations? These are driving ther est of the system
- when people cooperate, see how similar they are
- constant ecological evolution of relationship and cooperation
- this graph of relationships replaces money as a the reputation system for the world
I’m concerned with the idea of this monitored, constantly updated social graph. There seems to be a pretense of knowledge, central planning fallacy here. The idea that theres any kind of external objective measure that not going to be gamed, that’s just not a workable idea.
- Glen: Agreed! Any version of this should be decentralized and this information should be stored privately. The strenght of my connection to someone is like money. I’m incentivezed to have strong connections. But the weaker my connection, the more subsidy I get from the system to cooperate with this perons. So these forces may combine to generate incentive-compatible information.
- Because it’s a graph of social forces and not individuals, we have to really play with what incentive-compatibility means in this context.
This is dynamic social graph thing seems like a system that requires information you’d never be able to get. I don’t see how you can model it in a way that doesn’t do violence to the underlying reality. How does this translate into policy suggestions or other actionables?
- Glen: I have a range of horizons to think about Social Technology. I’m really in a theoretical and speculative place here. Some tools we’ve built and work today, but the rest is very much a speculative probing into the future. I see dearth of focus on these technologies, and I’m taking a crack at potential solutions.
Gitcoin uses Quadratic Funding: how is it working? Some people claim it allows for “invisible corruption”,
- Glen: As Gitcoin has scaled, it’s run into THE problem of Quadratic Funding: the model of people as individuals that are making contribution decisions in isolation is just not how the world works. People have relationships, they work together. This isn’t “collusion” really, it’s just how people work.
- How do you overcome that? There will need to be a culture around its use, tools and best practices and all sorts of supporting infrastrcuture like we’ve built around our current models for voting and funding.
- When you scale up to huge size, you have to start putting in tighter and tighter controls to maintain community quality and prevent attacks and corruption.
How does AGI play into this?
- Glen: First off: I don’t think that AGI is a useful concept that warrants analysis. I think that an alternative to reaching for what folks call “AGI” is the reach for some sort of system that allows for massively increasing our ability to cooperate across lines of differences and to allow for an ecology of increasingly differentiating and divergent agents to cooperate. I think that social technology could be a core part of that vision.
- “There is a competition and contestation between ultra-optimizing agents and systems that want to promote pluralistic cooperation.”
What is the most exotic representation of social relationships that you’ve seen?
- Glen: I really like Max Flow. It’s a computer science concept of mapping a fluid system of resources flowing through pipes that can be used to reason about social connections.
Seminar summary by James Risberg.