this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2024
4 points (56.2% liked)

Asklemmy

44173 readers
1446 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Before anyone gets the wrong idea, no, I'm not talking about the movie/show The Watchmen. I'm referring to the ancient philosophical question "quis custodiet ipsos custodes" or "who watches the watchmen". Go read up on that elsewhere.

For those of you who don't know and need a summary here, it's a question often posed in reference to the fact that the person or people in charge of making sure the rules are honored have nothing preventing them from disobeying the rules. There's never anything preventing the person guarding your treasure from stealing some of the treasure, for example.

What's the best remedy to this that you can think of?

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] iii@mander.xyz 16 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Don't put all your eggs in one basket. Spread your treasure over multiple watchman, each holding only a part. Keep a public reputation system for each watchman. Make the loss of reputation more costly than treasure to could steal.

[–] InfiniteFlow@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

More than one group of custodians, ideally with conflicting interests, watching one another? Essentially some system of checks and balances?

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)
[–] Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Can you give a link or description how anarchy counts be implement in a easy there is resilient to a subverted centralization of power that does not truly on an active majority?

Because we don't have that, sadly. And I've never seen a concept that takes a silent and passive majority into consideration.

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Dual-power structures, consensus-based democracy, and federated communes. Between those three are most of your answers.

And obviously we don't have the conditions necessary for anarchism at present, or we'd already be living it.

[–] Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Yay a rabbit hole! Thanks for the key words :)

No problem!

Honestly, one of the best introductions to anarchism is The Conquest of Bread by Petr Kropotkin. It's a century old and still very relevant and approachable. You can find it for free on The Anarchist Library.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

And one thing to understand about anarchism is that it’s very much a goal oriented philosophy more than most other political philosophies. What that means is that you get a lot of different approaches and concepts from people trying different things to attempt to achieve similar goals. And this often involves practical differences between different situations. Rojava is necessarily going to do things differently from how the maknovists did things and they’re both very different from how some punks who bought some land for a commune in the American Midwest will handle it.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Group with most weapons takes all, then infighting begins?

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Tell me you don't know anything about anarchism without saying it

[–] NewNewAccount@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What’s your definition of anarchism? How do you see it playing out?

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The same as everyone else's - a society without hierarchy.

I see it playing out perfectly fine, just like it has throughout human existence in numerous societies across the globe. But it takes a lot of work to get there.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago
[–] BreadOven@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Dr. Manhattan, obviously.

[–] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 weeks ago

Smoke weed everyday

[–] Num10ck@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

full accounting transparency helps.. according to the blockchain believers.

[–] locuester@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

Nakamoto Consensus, the mechanism by which Bitcoin is protected, is the original digital solution to this problem. Several others exist in modern cryptocurrency chains/ledgers.

With regards to protecting digital treasure, I think this fits the bill.