Abstract, Dedication, Ways of Looking
hiveism.substack.com/p/ways-of-lo...

About, Context, Table of Contents
hiveism.substack.com/p/ways-of-lo...

The title image is a collage of Three Aspects of the Absolute, from the Shri Nath Charit and Escher's Spirals. For obvious reasons.

If you replace voters with any form of power over the real world, then it still holds. (If I'm correct) then this implies that there is *always* a non-violent equilibrium option for interaction. And this equilibrium is recursive alignment.
hiveism.substack.com/p/recursive-...

That, of course, is all purely hypothetically, *just in case* anyone of you stumbles upon the definite theory of everything.

However, the idea works for all highly valuable pieces of knowledge that aren't also poisoned (info hazards). Lets call those, "info gems".

Those who understand the solution to alignment will also be aligned with it. To proof to someone else that you are aligned, you teach the solution to each other until you are sure you reached the same level of understanding.
This means alignment can only be confirmed relatively.

For the conspiracy to work they have to solve alignment and only share the information with people who can proof that they are aligned.
The info wouldn't be secret, it would just be only available through understanding and implementing alignment.

It's like the inverse of an information hazard. It's information *too good* to release in the public without benefit.
Now imagine everyone smart enough to find the TOE is also smart enough to come up with this reasoning.
They could - purely hypothetically (!) - form a conspiracy.

...with the other neurons so they can update their part of the world model even if it seems locally coherent.
This means, to learn as a collective, you need to be open to the suffering of others, i.e. have some simple form of compassion.

This, plus a broken voting system.

The name is a joke, but my sense of humor fails to be funny 🤷

It should use real money. So we can't do the St. Petersburg paradox.

Better method of decision making (voting systems) are also obvious. You would want to make optimal decision to allocate resources optimally. It's a cooperation game.

Show me a single argument against this that isn't motivated by misunderstanding or power grabbing.