Governance and Democracy within Safe Society


So for example if I we met and I took a photo of your face and your finger prints I could upload that to the network and the system would have a record of everyone’s face and finger prints. If your finger prints and face were already on the system you would not be permitted another account.

This information could only be known to the decentralized network to prevent any single person from having access to all that data.


Thanks for the reply Happybeing,

I understand what you say and I kind of agree on some level. The other option I’ve played with is that a person’s trust grows over time as they interact with others and do things on the system; from this we can have good belief they are a real person. This method could possibly work well and we could maybe even give access to parts of the system for free if a person reaches a certain trust level because they have given so much value.

I think a lot of thought should be done on this method as it may turn out to be the best way


This still assumes the ideal situation and not one where people are trying to subvert it. I have not yet seen anything that doesn’t allow me to subvert and have multiple personalities. If I can do it, just think of organized people who plant their own “trusted people” which then makes subversion real easy and widespread.

Any how I leave this for others to discuss now since I am just being negative now.


I think your points are valid… up to a point :slight_smile:. I come back though to what I said about it not needing to be perfect, depending on the use / context. Pretty much anything can be subverted, but any system can still be fit for purpose even with holes. So make it not worth the effort for each particular use / context and we’re ok, so long as people are capable of making use of the systems appropriately (e.g. different levels and costs of verification etc.). For some things I may want to fly to Australia and meet you personally, for others a phone call, or check you out with friends or a trust service, for others check a SAFE Profile and scores.


So as long as I have somebodies fingerprints and picture of their face. I can not only use them as a false identity but also stop them from getting an account, so they cant say “that is not me”.
Yes I dont see anything wrong with that.


So when you meet a trusted user and maybe you have to meet more than one you are going to fake your face and finger prints to them? The whole point of you meeting a user on the network is so they can verify you. You can’t just show up with a picture of a persons face and finger print and say that’s me. The other user has to be the one that takes the photo’s and data.



AI increasing, automation and the masses choosing to expend most of their attention in VR as a pressure realease valve and getting in return a high indexed birth to grave GAI I think will lead (plausible) to the post public and post private (typical) sector and to distributed automated collectives that bring us back to small flat organizations based around non coercion:

Self-mediating, open, and completely flat, sans board, management/supervisors, no one, including its members owns it- no shares although total members could liquidate and close out but not sell entity itself. No investment in other entities, pays as it goes even on retirements, that is if retirement were needed its wouldn’t be investment based retirement but pay-as-you go alienable to surviving spouse or minor child. Charter aimed at constantly eliminating conflicts of interest and fitting system to people. Presumably small, 10 to 200 people. Not-for-profit, self-funds, is its own customer at times supplying product or service to its own members. If need be can fit with other organizations like legos- is cellular.

Decentralized automated collective, real time blinded decision making systems i.e., anonymous group text system, casts lots on deadlock threshold to choose member decider or flips coin at behest of members or wait (recognizing that sentiment is still central)- low cost /low overhead one click shrink wrapped foss phone app, intent to use a pending server-less network, i.e, SAFE network?

We dont want dependence-coercion (even if its an execise machine for ethical development) and to survive we must be free of any version of slavery, try to controll another is to enslave yourself, control is projective. We go flat because the key ingredients of non develiomental hierarchies are dependence-corecion-censorship-exclusion-exhibition-theft of attention- violation of self determination.

These would be pretty colligiate so not much may get done at times but that is an advantage because means are ends in themselves.


I was just thinking of another way to prove real world identities. Basically web of trust combined with biometrics. You would have a mobile app that for signing trust that would be very easy to use like simply opening the app and scanning a QR code and clicking approve or something like that. If I meet a person that I know I could sign his public key, basically certifiying that I know that this person is the person of that identity. When a person has lots of signatures of other trusted people, it could be assumed that it is likely a trustworthy id. Biometrics would be used to prevent duplicates so that people won’t assume multiple identities. Since it would be done with a mobile app, biometrics would be something like the face id on new mobiles. I guess face ids between for example Samsung and Apple phones might not be compatible though, so that would be one issue to solve.

Identities could have a trust score. The more signatures an identity have the higher the trust score of that id and the trust score could also flow through the network, so being signed by a highly trusted user might increase your trust score with 10, while a less trusted user might increase it by 1.

If the identity were to be used for voting, then for votes on issues of different importance there could be different threshold levels of trustscore required to vote.