I finally got around to looking at your site Chip. Interesting, but I have some questions for you if you have time.
"A social sample includes a total population and relative populations of classifiably distinct categories of occupation. "
1. How is it possible to categorize distinct occupations, is there not a continuous variety?
2. What do you mean exactly by dropping proper nouns. Could you give some examples?
"In anarchy, the lawless state of being, circumstantial power and prestige decide policies and actions."
3. What about choices, i.e. human action? Circumstances certainly effect our choices, but do we not have choices?
"the entire process is not serving constituents successfully (and never has)"
4. How do you measure the degree of success in serving?
"most science has been devoted to weaponry"
5. How do you determine this?
"Humanity does not have a society. What we have is anarchy. Nations and corporations are not societies, they are frozen and stagnating information blocks that are structured to serve those who by circumstance have power."
6. It seems that a real society then diverges to infinity in its difficulty to implement. Or do you disagree?
"If a person feels they know what reality is without doubt then they are most likely self-deceiving and can be quickly seen as one of the psychotic."
7. Do you detect anything ironic about this sentence?
"Sharing observations in a trustworthy manner is not in accordance with the "might makes right" base line that often requires both great degrees of secrecy, inordinate compromise of the secrecy of others and dissemination of misinformation. Because of this inherent conflict much is done in the name of science that is purely deception, actually just "business as usual," continuing to force mass dependency and ignorance to keep those who feel they are in control to remain in control. But the concept of control is part of the many forms of self and mass deception. No one is in control. We are a population of thinking and growing entities who share a finite space and yet we have no true guidance. Who wants to ride a vehicle with no steerage? Well, this is what we have. Our planet is a vehicle that spirals us onward through space and yet we are without any one at the helm. "
8. This isn't a question, I just particularly like this paragraph, well said.
"The class transition probability vectors of the mess of human interactions is precisely that, a mess."
9. This on the other hand, I don't like. This sort of cryptic statement is meaningless to me and is where you lose me (and probably most people). What does it mean?
"It needs to be voluntary, with each potential participant having the ability to judge merits of the process on their own."
10. What happens if some people refuse to join the game?
"Okay then, we can expect that a global social game would have to offer equal chance for reward"
11. Private property is incompatible with completely equal opportunity. Inheritance for example. So does your 'game' require private property to be abolished? Does that mean that all wealth is to be distributed uniformly? And if so, how can you 'win' this game, if private property doesn't exist what do you win?
"By using money we invest in a system of non-control, basically the system of the powerful dominating the weak, a zero-sum game. "
12. Could you explain how this is true, rather than just stating it as fact. And please, keep your english as simple as possible. It seems to me that the amount of wealth in the world is increasing, not constant...
