Bloop E0

Stephen Pinker, in his book Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress, refuted much of this. He also described why and how this happens. Alas, I tend to trust him : ) I modelled the following model a long time ago: The local price of "Index of a Civilization’s Development" directly affects the pricing of "Ìndex of a Civilization’s Strength" at a national level. Therefore, a significant fall in the index invariably captures the attention of the whole community for local events in other regions and cities. Here's what this looks like in practice: Wengerberg is home to 2 million people, living across four districts (10 towns). In general, Wengerberg is more or less a free state. However, bad things do occasionally happen. In the city of N, a journalist writes an article in the local newspaper, about the mayor of the city stealing a significant sum through shell companies and transferring it to an offshore account. N is one of the most depressed towns in the country, adherence to human rights is poor and, before the emergence of Index of a Civilization’s Development, the population behaved very passively. Therefore, the mayor is able to teach this journalist a lesson and imprison him on false charges. But, in this case the entire local community sticks up for the journalist because people see that the index of their region has become significantly smaller and, consequently, their income payment from Index of a Civilization’s Development is be much less than the tremendous amount that are used to and rely on. Moreover, disgruntled citizens of the capital of the country and other cities also openly express their dissatisfaction with the events taking place in the city of N. In order to prevent a fall in their ratings, the governing authority comes up with a solution: free the journalist and start an investigation into the mayor. The journalist, understanding that he is now protected by society's shield and that the authorities will no longer be able to encroach on his freedom, will continue his work eradicating government corruption, which will lead to the normalization of all processes: from the economy to the observance of rights and liberties. And that's how it would work in every city of every country on the planet. Yes. You have correctly identified the problem. This is something to think about. I've always had a problem with brevity. But I will work on it. Also, everyone can write their own terminological definition.

Do you know what the original definition of project/research was? It is a decentralised social mechanism of motivational influence with direct action against challenges in the areas of rights and liberties around the world. Therefore, it is easy to see the dominance of the human rights theme. Later on, the idea grew. I completely agree that art should be added. In order to implement a comprehensive idea, I have identified three main areas: • Self-regulating social mechanism in the area of human rights and environment • Global support system for citizen and professional science • International Emission Centre for Digital Currency The algorithm for this vicious circle is not fully worked out. There is only an outline of the organisational structure. The structure includes a blockchain platform. The important thing is to follow this idea: Project is a widely available mechanism that does not have a private management centre or a decision-making centre. This project does not have an owner or a small group of people who make all the decisions on behalf of everyone. This is why the project is so ramified. Ultimately I see an orchestra of billions of people, and the conductor is a self-regulation which is adjusted by the Index. I have no idea what it will sound like : ) But you help set up the tools. Absolutely. The system of self-regulatory checks and balances is a separate topic. This is a very academic approach. The formula is worth including in the overall algorithm. The data we take from NGOs is the most vulnerable part now. It is a compromise solution. But there has to be a start. In the initial stages we are using the data from universally recognised organisations that are experts within their field. Each organisation presents comprehensive information for deciphering the indicator. Quite a good start. What next? There are two approaches. 1) When international organisations that have a direct impact on Index receive the funding from [International Emission Centre for Digital Currency?], the relevant committees of the UN Treaty and Charter bodies will monitor this process to maintain impartiality and to avoid conflict of interests. 2) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was written 70 years ago. Ìndex of a Civilisation’s Strength is about developing the most important document in the history of mankind using technologies that did not exist at the time of its writing. Personally, I think it is the self-regulatory mechanism (public money) that should fund the UN, global medicine, etc. (but this is a huge topic, let's leave it out for now). We make the interest of civilisation an absolute. There is no room for narrow lobbyism there. Maybe it's the UN 2.0. I once tried to formulate thoughts on the subject of: “By being a part of the “self-regulating mechanism”, you are indirectly helping a huge number of things”. Among many other things there was this: • As a result of mechanism developing with your help, there will be financing of global medical programs. This not only relates to health of people you have never met and are unlikely to meet, for example, a 47-year-old citizen of Lao or a 5-year-old girl from Chili, but it also directly relates to the health of your loved ones; • This is a fundamental solution to the problem of forced and illegal migration directly in the source countries, and protection from populism. We must remember that people leave their homeland not because their life is good, but because they are fleeing from inequality, poverty, lack of rights, and more importantly because they do not feel optimistic that things will change for the better; • This is an increase of trust towards the main social entities and reduction of concerns for your future; • This means access to relevant education at any age and an opportunity to dedicate more of your time towards sciences, spirituality and creativity; • Lastly, you are eradicating the fear of job loss from yourself and millions of other people and get an opportunity to plan a family without fear of having means of income to support it; I see that we are thinking in the same direction : ) There's a big block: “The State’s Interests in the Official Recognition of Efficiency Civilisation Index. This paragraph already describes the basic postulates. While creating self-regulating mechanism, i could not ignore the interests of the states, since we are not countering governmental institutions with the it but rather, we are striving to do everything so that every state becomes our ally. I am not the final truth. You can make a suggestion and everyone will discuss it. You can even propose a criterion for checking: which offer can be considered good and which can't. I wrote above about the fact that no one has the right to appropriate the Efficiency Civilisation Index. We'll see what happens in the end. And yes, I am no expert either. No more than an amateur researcher 😶

Thanks to that phrase, I realised that there must be a "doomsday clock" in the Index formula. If someone detonates an atomic bomb, that is a problem for civilisation. The question is the coefficient of influence. Reducing the likelihood of a negative event = development Let us ask ourselves: what good does Somalia, Afghanistan or Bolivia now do for civilisation? I do not believe that Somalis do not want to live in a Germany-like economy. They can have whatever mythology in their heads, but if the Somali economy overtakes the Chinese economy, we will all take it into account and feel it. This is a basic, albeit trivial, indicator of progress. You may not like the Chinese worldview, but you have no right not to consider China's influence on humanity. You may not like the Russians. But energy from Russia has powered the most advanced part of the planet... all these processes are now collapsing. Tell me - is our overall civilizational effectiveness suffering from this? Perhaps the efficiency of civilisation should be calculated using the formula: how much have we lost? We have all reduced our effectiveness. We have reduced the effectiveness of civilisation. Everyone has been made worse off. Planet Earth is the only home for us in this huge universe, no one should ignore the global challenges. This is an absolutely universal value. The World Happiness Report can be included in our interdisciplinary index! This definitely requires reflection. The thoughts in the last paragraph are priceless. Seriously. It's an interdisciplinary index from the beginning. The beta version of the index years ago looked like this: 1) Gender inequality index: 0.922 (max-1.000) or [92.2%/100%] = 92.2% Info: United Nations Development Programme - Human Development Reports 2) Human Rights: 86 (max-100) or [86%/100%] = 86% Info: Freedom House - Freedom in the World 3) Press Freedom: 23.73 (max-1) or [№1_Norway: 7.63/32.15%) = 32.15% Info: Reporters Without Borders - World Press Freedom Index 4) Poverty/inequality: 41 (max-1) or [№1_Azerbaijan: 16.6/40.49%) = 40.49% Info: World Bank – poverty data the GINI index 5) Civic engagement: 6.8 (max-10) or [68%/100%] = 68% Info: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) - Better Life Index Index = 63.77. Who can name a country? 63 out of 100. Is that a lot or a little? But it is very primitive and simple. That's why a lot of opinions are important to me. Yes, about the U.N. One of the most important goals of ‘Index’ is to reflect the level of progress made with regards to recommendations and decisions made by international and regional judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, including committees of the UN Treaty bodies, as well as reports and recommendations made by UN Special Rapporteurs. The mechanism for implementing research is very simple: For example, if your research into gender or global inequality exerts corrective action on the algorithm, it will certainly be noticeable in the Human Development Reports. Therefore, the majority of your research results can be used to formulate conventions within the "subsystem Index" framework: - international treaties at the universal level - international treaties at the regional level - national application of ‘Soft Law’ instruments Aim: use data confirmed by research, implementing these results more quickly and applying them to practical areas. “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses” – Henry Ford : ) . We can also be guided by the creation/destruction ratio (a very effective but very creepy mechanism). And go crazy : ) In this area, the Index is institutionalised as follows: we should welcome the achievement of social impact not only through new treaties, but also through the adoption of ‘soft law’ instruments. Since revealing the content of certain provisions of international treaty articles, those instruments provide concrete arguments for: progression of Human Rights during the course of various actions performed by individuals and the state. Moreover, a number of instruments of ‘soft law’ include standards of those rights and freedoms, without which the formation and development of democratic legal systems would be impossible. The national application of soft law instruments is an effective transitional step towards making these instruments legally binding (opinio juris) In the first post I wrote about accessibility heuristics. Don't try to legislate against it. Only soft law that speeds up the evolution of ethics and morality.

The basic meaning of the index and the mechanism behind it: One Planet – One Team. It takes into account not only the internal situation. E.g. ìndex of a civilisation’s strength - global index; worldwide. The index is calculated annually. The sum of all states' progress (UN – 193). A universal, long term parameter, which participates in the formation of the main body of the Decade Index. index of a civilisation’s development - local index; the impact of an individual state on global progress. The index is calculated [monthly (?)] The technical part is standard and trivial: Index is the product of numerous evaluations and reports, and compliance with international conventions. The data and indexes of international organisations that have been refining their methods for many years, together with the ICS algorithm (i mentioned briefly above about the two-tier system), allow us to create a universal interdisciplinary index. Why reinvent the wheel? But further on, for example, a decentralised financial system guarantees financial support for the social mechanism using issuances in the form of a global unconditional basic income which is based on a “index of a civilisation’s development” that has been calculated for each country and not in the form of bank credit or investments in the stock market like the central banks are currently doing. For the first time in history (?), the monetary unit will not be tied to economic wealth but will be supplied by indicators of the attitude towards persons, dignity, progress, etc. Thanks to the start of mass implementation of automatised processes of artificial intelligence, we can take the non-manufactured indicators as a benchmark. Why not? Even the Taliban will bring women back to universities. Because it is a manifestation of progress. And the manifestation of progress is reflected in the pockets of every Afghan. Today, here and now. Every underdeveloped state becomes an instrument of global progress. @Peterkin maybe this is what the transition looks like into a group of active creators? 😐

@joigus of course, we're talking about today. We don't need to rank everything at all. It is enough to rank the main areas. There is definitely something in your formula Your list is very good and very similar to mine. I adhere to a possibly unattainable interdisciplinarity. Thousands of scientists and researchers have unique competencies in extremely disparate areas. Aim is to make this knowledge part of the Index. But again, the ultimate goal is not the Index itself. Through self-regulating mechanism, their specialist skills will need have a direct impact both on the global agenda and local changes in countries.

One component of the index takes into account regional discrepancies and constitutes a two-tier system. 1) A system that uses UN as a reference point 2) A system that uses regional conventions as a reference point, such as • Council of Europe (represented by European Court of Human Rights) • Organisation of American States (represented by the inter-American system for the protection of human rights) • African Union (represented by African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the recently-established African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights) Self-regulating mechanism itself is not attempting to impose international order or human rights standards. Based on the minimal permissible level of implementation of human rights, it allows each country individually to adapt the standards to its national context influenced by socio-cultural, economic and other characteristics. All of these issues have already been taken into account. Of course it will capture their imagination 🤨 We're not talking about the Index, we're talking about turning the Index into action. The basic (grassroots) condition for self-regulation is not only in the field of preserving rights, freedoms and environment, but also lies in the financial interest of billions of people (ex. algorithm: “basic income” in exchange for civil engagement, education, self-enlightenment, participation in the network of independent scientists, etc.). We all know that the human brain needs to be motivated : ) … offer your options for motivation. Human of the Future – a human who is a researcher, who is motivated by education and enlightenment, who daily creates influence by his actions, research, self-enlightenment and self-education on the formation of the civilization efficiency index and the civilization development index, and ultimately directly affecting the socio-economic mechanism and progress. The point is that every state must participate in civilisational progress. And all the more reason not to prevent its citizens from participating in this process These were very good recommendations in the "it's not possible" format. Now it would be nice to move on to "maybe this is how" recommendations 🙃

I'm working on an independent research of social technology “civilisation efficiency index” and “index of a civilisation’s development”. Interesting to hear opinions on the issues: - What can/should be present in this index? (ex. integration of the algorithm which is making it difficult for politicians to use the “demagogy of pessimism” (regulatory function in relation to accessibility heuristics) or finally start teaching quantum physics from the first grade of primary school) -How do you see the algorithm for the Index? General recommendations. Proceed on the basis of the following assumptions Main aim is not only to create and calculate the Civilisation Efficiency index, but also through multi-stage, varied and decentralised social and financial mechanisms to allow billions of people to influence the Index. Let's call it a "self-regulating social mechanism". The aim of the self-regulating social mechanism is to convert the Index into tangible action and measurable progress. A self-regulating social mechanism is a people’s (and humanity as a whole) against a potentially dangerous imbalance in institutions and the political structure that can threaten not only an individual state but the whole world. It's like a stabilisation system in a car to reduce the possibility of driving into a ditch. Or a kernel protection system in computer and or decentralisation in blockchain. And of course is the development of resilient societies, as well as mechanisms for these societies to transition into a group of active creators (evolution of "inertial progress" societies) I have some material and thoughts on the subject. But first I would like to hear outside opinions.