Source Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgyBwdAWXo5_FoYtwhF4AaABAg
2:35:31 No, no, you have all of that as libre-licensed alternatives (Ekiga, Diaspora, OpenID), and now please explain why you're not using it nor libre-license your own stuff to a shared commons of a self-defined, self-selecting, open community.
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=Ugyt1DLhBSY82aw3yGh4AaABAg
2:05:05 They're a symptom of the current AI hype, one can doubt that they work properly or ever will, and even if, you don't have them. They're made by big companies who invested a lot of money to make this their proprietary capability, and they can only do so because they sit a lot of data (including history that is not recorded elsewhere) they own, and you don't. So the question would be: how to get it, if possible at all?
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgzNEinctvuUM5B561x4AaABAg
7:55 If there are many models to "predict" the future, which ones to pick to be a realistic projection of the potential future, which models to trust as a basis for agreement? What if the data and model is used for bad (not that this can be avoided, but it can be made harder or easier)?
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgxFzZx-4xAaIu8FpkV4AaABAg
7:50 The prediction depends on what all the others will do in the future, decisions they may make based on the prediction. See the problem here? Future can't be predicted as every prediction has its own feedback loop. You can't create a hash of data that includes the very hash that's supposed to be generated from it, because that would change the hash so it can't be incorporated any more. Might have something to do with group theory. It might be the barber paradox, P/NP, Gödel or something else of the same problem category, for which humanity doesn't have any logical/consistent solution for because those problems are defined and posed and observed in nature in a way that they preclude their own solution. The universe might not solvable in general, or maybe only theoretically, or maybe both or none or whatever, certainly of other spheres than what can be discussed in a video comment.
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgyYc9YBhmfAlzlTek94AaABAg
5:48 On the global scale, the individual contribution will look insignificant, either creating doubt that it was incorporated or the impression that individual improvement is pointless, even more so: people and politicians adjust their actions on what all the others do, so if you can see the real data and there's strong indication that nothing changes, you're way more inclined to ajust your little contribution to it or to go against the well-established agreement that's apparently in place in comparison to get active based on "values" or agenda or whatever other mechanism.
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgzYf_49vmZWPReOXbR4AaABAg
5:41 As those data sources by the citizens are distributed, how do you ensure that they're not fake data?
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgyFvELnDFHmyVDJFkl4AaABAg
5:30 How? I guess we can't look into the future, can we?
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgxrC50SaJlXPse-HYJ4AaABAg
4:20 "Access to power" is access to people who grant that power.
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgzYp7cyK10mZoGCQ_J4AaABAg
4:05 Government and parties are not there to represent people in terms of every single individual, they're very broad, general directions that get represented (and the representation of the broad direction can be better or worse). That's the only thing we can do, to have some general agreement directions, because if not, we could as well not have every single individual represented, but actually there, which has other unfavorable implications.
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgzSqwHciHMqsRz_pfN4AaABAg
3:47 The authority and power is ultimatively with the people. If people don't tolerate and support the government, it can't persist. If single individuals should enact their own individual power directly, there are many of them and therefore a lot of conflicting interests. Agreements are needed to balance the interests, so there's always some form of common denominator, and be it the localized agreement group as opposed to those who are outside or elsewhere for the moment in anarchist communes as the state form. Therefore people will feel that they don't have direct influence where agreements are established that balance their interests with the interests of others to their personal disadvantage, and as every agreement can be re-negotiated, the other parties will do as well in doing so reduce the direct influence of every participating individual.
Comment Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzR53PUY-D4&lc=UgyE5t5v1LfaFBVo7KF4AaABAg
2:36:01 Isn't argument mapping kind of dead by now?