🪴 Quartz 4.0

pPolis2023-04-15

Oct 21, 20244 min read

Considerations on integrating Polis with external brain-like systems

from pPolis pPolis2023-04-15

nishio Next I think the direction of Scrapbox+Polis as Twitter and this Polis federation looks rather good. I’m looking forward to it.

  • nishio In the end, it was better to have “a loose association of small communities” rather than “one big SNS”. The former was promoted simply because it was more convenient for customers (i.e., people paying for the SNS, i.e., advertisers). It is more efficient to harvest eggs by gathering chickens.

  • nishio Polis creates “questions” in short sentences, and these “questions” enrich Scrapbox by encouraging verbalization, and then new questions are created. Cycle

  • nishio I’ll try to verbalize more while I’m waiting for lunch to arrive.

  • If 100 people were trying to have a productive discussion, of course each individual would have to listen to 100 times as much as he/she speaks. But this did not work. Most people’s cognitive abilities are so low that they cannot read a timeline that flows at 100 times the volume of what they write.

  • nishio So some form of “machine digest” is necessary. Depending on how this digest is done, for example, a filter bubble could occur, or it could recognize people who are saying things that have a high cost of understanding for them as the “enemy camp” and start a battle with them

  • nishio The reason why “battles with people who say things that have high cognitive cost to you, perceiving them to be in the enemy camp” occurs is because people with close opinions clump together in close proximity and when you see many of their The reason why “battles with those who say things that have a high cognitive cost to you” occur is because people with similar opinions are grouped together in close proximity, and by seeing many of their opinions, they falsely believe that they are the majority, the orthodoxy, and the righteousness. Opinions that are not understood are seen as heretical.

  • nishio It is important to get an overall picture of the distribution of opinions. For this purpose, it is not necessary to see the detailed opinions of each individual. Polis divides the opinion expressing behavior into two parts, one as cheap as Twitter likes and the other higher than Twitter.

@nishio: maybe the best thing about Polis is that it is short text. If a human tries to reach a consensus with 100 people without the assistance of a machine, he/she would have to read 100 times as much as he/she wrote, and most humans cannot stand that. Opinions that are close to their own are easier to understand and opinions that are far away are harder to understand, so they feel more close to their own.

  • The granularity of the postings is about one line of Scrapbox
    • Some people can’t sum it up in one line.
      • You can write it in Scrapbox and link to it, but there’s no guarantee people will read it.
      • You can write the link in the comments section below.
        • The temptation to do the “because of” in “the opposite, because of -” creates an incentive to verbalize the theme.

Maybe there could be a comment section for the agenda. - Cotonoha çš„

  • We just need a consensus that it’s okay to vote without reading the comments section.

Votes can be revised later to reflect others’ opinions.

A distinction should be made between default “unvoted” and “pending decision” votes.

  • If, for example, 100 people voted and 60 withheld judgment, that’s a meaningful voting result.

Improvement ideas, write them down first

  • put a time-limit on

    • @nishio: if you are active on Polis for a long time, you get speaking credits, which you can save up, and when you have something to say, you can I wonder if it would be possible to prevent the problem of having too many agenda items if we use the credits to throw agenda items, and the order of display is determined by the credits used.

    • @nishio: since the vTaiwan case study had a time limit, I’d like to do my Polis experiment with a time limit once, and then give the first time participants a second time. I like the idea of giving credit to the first participant the second time.

  • machine translation
  • Data will be made public.

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/pPolis2023-04-15 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.

Graph View

Backlinks