- Mar 2023
-
venkatesh-rao.gitbook.io venkatesh-rao.gitbook.io
-
Protocols often mediate evolving relationships, especially ones with a natural adversarial element and endemic potential for conflict. These relationships often involve agents with long-term memories, creating an evolving historical context the protocol must handle. How do protocols accomplish such complex mediation?
I like the Underlay solution to conflicting information, which is that all old and new versions are retained and the individual must set constraints and filters to determine 'truth'. May not be useful for more technical applications. It does however point to the fact that there will be bias, perhaps it's about making the bias transparent — favouring first truth or more prolific or higher status, etc?
One gap I don't know how to solve is the continued making of meaning that condenses vast quantities of discussion and thinking data into a symbolic representation like squishing a concertina that can be built on in the future in a very constructivist way. How can computers do this in the sticky way humans do?
-
How do protocols mutate, and what are the limits on the mutability of a protocol beyond which it begins to lose coherence, identity, and utility?
Initial hunch is that this is related to 'good protocols' and 'bad protocols'.
Reminds me of Deep Laziness, where structure preserving figures are indefatigable?
Would also look at 'play'. Perhaps this is a feature of good vs bad protocols? If play can overlap with protocols then mutation might happen to satisfy continuation desire by augmenting to enable continued challenge (as skill improves so complexity continues — challenge and skill as the axes for Flow) see Good Business
Would need it to become more embodied over time? (see Problem of Embodiment in the Sociology of Knowledge letter)
-
What is the structural relationship between small-p protocols, in the sense of specific atomic behaviors like handshakes, and big-P protocols in the sense of entire behavior complexes, such as the one governing diplomatic relations among countries?
maybe come back to this - would this be dialectical? - would it be anthropologically traceable? - would attributing behavioural expressions to some underlying value systems be too hermeneutical?
easiest answer for now might be that small-p could be used as an archetype to explain big-P, but it would be a story or myth to help understand, like Zizek's toilet joke?
-
emergence of a good protocol is the recognition and diffusion of good solutions that are also easy to imitate
- do all protocols emerge or can some be designed?
- are solutions kind of like patterns?
- is there a difference in quality that can be assumed about designed or emergent solutions?
side note: relates to "How to meme your data" idea. In that it is easily reproducible and iterable, maybe overlaps with composable
potential link to Stigmergy too?
-