nick (c) on quantification ness
nick carus on quantification ness
via his reply tweet [https://twitter.com/nick_carus/status/2102423680030519362?s=20]:
The interesting design question is not simply what should we tokenise – but what flows does a community need to become capable of “seeing” itself with sufficient coherence in order to steward itself more intelligently – and what should remain deliberately outside quantification?
all the things that are organism as fractal (aka: alive)
nick reply’s to me [https://x.com/nick_carus/status/2102698172384469465?s=20]:
Yes, but perhaps the boundary is *less what we quantify & more what we allow it to stand in for.
**Measurement can help a living system perceive itself without representing the whole.
***The danger is when the map becomes the territory & we optimise life around what is only legible.
*even if ‘standing in’ for self.. graeber violence/quantification law.. saw it in the year 2 – the be you house – and can’t unsee it
**to me.. (warning ness) .. this is a huge huge cancerous distraction
again.. findings from on the ground ness deep dive on why we need tech w/o judgment even to a person.. since we are so intoxicated.. ie: if still measuring.. if still perceiving.. not the dance
and to me.. nothing to date (ever since that day) has gotten to that root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
the trick.. the red flag in your ‘Measurement can help a living system perceive itself ‘ is that again.. we’re so intoxicated (ie: imagine a turtle et al.. maté trump law et al.. almaas holes law et al.. khan filling the gaps law et al.. hari present in society law et al).. that we can’t stop thinking we need some measure.. some visible perception.. but naming the colour et al.. keeping blinding us from us (de saint-exupéry essential law et al)..
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. of part\ial ness.. perpetuating survival triage.. for (blank)’s sake..
***again.. from on the ground ness.. esp in year 2 – the be you house.. the danger is thinking we need a map .. when that very thinking sets us up for bondage (spiritual violence) to the legible.. a cancerous distraction to the dance
(ie: carhart-harris entropy law et al.. aziz let go law.. let go... graeber can’t know law.. graeber unpredictability/surprise law.. embracing uncertainty.. et al)
________
reply was to michel bauwens tweet [https://twitter.com/mbauwens/status/2102066805464310031?s=20]:
(not all tokens are meant for market exchange, there are non-market tokens) A concept you should know about: * Current-Sees, Reacting to our latest substack article, Gamily Life writes: (https://4thgenerationcivilization.substack.com/p/towards-a-society-protocol-from-the/… “Any tokenization is by all means a market approach. There is no market without tokens. It’s like fighting fire with fire. For me any movement, idea, concept should be first and foremost open to debate and critique. If it neglects that and simply aims for expansion it’s 100% faux.” Our answer: There is no market without tokens, but there can be plenty of tokens that are not meant for market exchange. The basics: There can be tokens without markets. The statement that “any tokenization is by all means a market approach” conflates two distinct concepts: tokens as symbolic systems for tracking and coordinating value flows, and markets as specific institutional arrangements for exchange. The Holochain project, and specifically the concept of “current-sees” developed by its founders, provides a robust counterexample. * What Are “Current-Sees”? The term “current-see” is a deliberate play on the word “currency.” It was coined by Arthur Brock, a lead visionary behind Holochain, through his earlier Metacurrency Project. The core idea is that currencies are not fundamentally about money. As Brock puts it, “Currencies are not just about money. That’s like a fingernail on the animal of currencies”. Instead, a current-see is any symbolic system that makes flows of value visible, shapes them, and helps to organize them—whether those flows are tangible (goods, services) or intangible (care, reputation, contributions). The purpose is to “see” and “shape” the current of value in a system, not necessarily to price it for market exchange.”
notes from michel’s tweet here: michel on tokens ness
______
______
of math and men et al
_____
_____
_____
_____
______
______
