Opportunity's Engine
(Development ongoing)
ABSTRACT
Opportunity’s Engine (OE) is a global platform for a language of ideas which is also designed to generate inspirational yet concrete collaborative solutions and the political clout necessary to apply them. It is a platform which invites those among us with solutions or vision or simple common sense, and sometimes even wisdom, to enter ideas and solutions concerning the issues that surround us so that they may be evaluated against similar ideas in a never-ending search for optimal and wise solutions to Humanity’s never-ending problems without undue influence of power and politics. It is a platform which is available to all from anywhere and every walk and level of life who wish to participate.
It is driven by four underlying perceptions:
The language of public discourse in most societies is largely a brain stem-based and binary language which tends toward polarization.
During this high-tech twenty-first century, this language has proven increasingly incapable of expressing or even discussing the solutions to some of humanity’s most important problems.
Transcendent solutions, however critically necessary, will be resisted by any society in direct proportion to. the degree to which they threaten existing survival architectures.
Wisdom exists in human society even in the worst of times but is usually marginalized by power and wealth in pursuit of individual or group self-interest. To gain enduring influence, Wisdom must develop its own power structure.
OE is structured like a global lottery except that its prizes are partly based on the quality of participant thought and degree of participation rather than happenstance or luck. It is designed to percolate ideas within any category/sub-category and location/sub-location from best to worst through the application of weighted opinion in four Thought Domains: Creative, Analytical, Organizational, and Investigative.
Solutions and Ideas entered by participants with Creative Minds will be subsequently organized within OE by participants with Organizational Minds so that they can be rated against similar ideas by participants with Analytical Minds. Participants with Investigative Minds compare results against reality over time to determine to what degree the ideas succeed and which Analytical Minds have accurately anticipated that result.
When solutions favored by specific participants with Analytical Minds prove over time to be effectual, those participants' subsequent opinions will carry greater weight when applied to incoming ideas than those whose choices over time proved less effectual. Thus the relative weight of Analytical opinion is determined by outcomes, not opinion.
The weight of individual participant activity of Organizational and Investigative Minds is determined on the other hand by a combination of accuracy and volume of activity as compared to norms of activity derived from the ongoing operation of OE itself.
Depending on this automated weighting system, participants at the top of each Thought Domain will receive recognition on a monthly basis and will also be eligible for cash prizes in a lottery as well, which will be weighted in favor of those participants who are most successful.
To add allure to our platform, these digital dialogues will be influenced by the immensely popular language of the digital games, puzzles and treasure-hunts that mesmerize us now—and thereby harness our apparent addiction to digital devices to the service of humanity. Each Thought Domain scenario will feature games designed to appeal to that specific Thought Domain while accomplishing the larger objectives of OE.
Opportunity’s Engine
The basic justification underlying the development of Opportunity’s Engine is tied to the argument that Humanity’s current solutions for many big problems either don’t exist at all, or are seriously inadequate and just create further conflict both locally and globally. In today’s techno-nuclear age the inability to solve Humanity’s global problems and reduce conflict risks eventual annihilation.
To reduce conflict, and recapture Humanity’s future we must encourage the development of truly effective solutions based, not on top-down political structures and mere accommodation, but on inspired creativity and technological possibility, and which are specifically designed to limit negative social and environmental consequences.
But history suggests that it is unlikely that this can happen within the context of politics and our binary language of public discourse—that in order to survive we will ultimately need a language that can evaluate ideas and solutions rationally and express them accurately. Then, in order to implement those ideas, we must be able to:
Endow them with the political clout necessary to overcome the powerful barriers to transcendent change
Develop the strategies which can implement them without destroying society itself.
One might suggest that this is what occurs on the internet even now—that it provides a platform for ideas and that real and wise solutions are out there even today—and this is probably true. But the internet alone provides no means to decide which of the billions of ideas have merit, and no systematic way to apply them or give them clout or modulate their implementation.
The difference with Opportunity’s Engine is that it’s alive and doesn’t just sit there passively and allow millions of ideas to accumulate in a great indecipherable pile. As ideas are entered they are automatically evaluated using the software underlying Opportunity’s Engine so that the best ideas constantly percolate to the surface.
But who or what gets determine which ideas are the best ideas within Opportunity’s Engine?
This of course is the core of the problem—so let’s just say that the process is analogous to the process that sends you the results in Google when you ask for the best route to Timbuktu, or for the best way to build a henhouse.
But let’s first take a giant step back and see how Opportunity’s Engine fits into our larger universe.
***
In the beginning life oozed from the primordial mist in the form of tetra-zillions of single-celled creatures each in competition with the other for the resources which made survival possible. A billion or so years passed and some of these single cells found ways to trump the competition by working together in multi-celled organisms each cell of which agreed not to eat its neighbor.
Little by little, the complexity of these organisms grew and the need to coordinate the whole became paramount. Distributed nervous systems like that of the jellyfish and the carnivorous sea slug developed, and then came the central nervous systems of fishes and later lizards and so on.
But then the fishes and some of the birds and insects discovered that even better protection was afforded by coordinating their activities through schooling, flocking, hiving, and other kinds of groupings from which other advantages were also gained. And though competition between these multi-being structures proliferated, inside these structures everyone agreed to acknowledge the importance of the others and not to eat them; and to work together for mutual advantage often against competing groups of the same type.
So by the time cave man emerged, connective social mechanisms were already well developed as was the competition for resources between groups.
In time, with the advent of new technologies involving agriculture, transportation, and communications, the size of humanity’s social groups and the scope of their interests just kept getting bigger. But the conflicts just kept getting bigger too, until we reached the point where both our interactions and our conflicts became global. At that point Humanity began to threaten its own continuance, and even that of other life on the planet.
So what’s next?
We seem to have two alternatives:
To stay with the current ancient social dynamic, a pecking order involving endlessly competing and see-sawing human subgroups—and risk annihilation on a global scale, or
To develop an alternative social dynamic which involves a central nervous system linking all of humanity so closely together and connecting our actions and our consequences so closely together that we think communally and become one single creature that feels in its head the pain of a blow delivered to its foot. A creature that will react to the implications of an attack on any part in terms of the survival of its entire body.
And, though it may sound crazy, we’ve actually already developed the means through which just this kind of a transformation becomes possible: an omnipresent nervous system called the internet. What’s lacking here is only a structure capable of processing and coordinating all the trillions of ideas and actions and reactions generated by the billions of human individuals in a way that creates a unified creature that we may as well call Humanity.
Nature managed to build a structure to service the combined needs of trillions of cells in the chicken and in the platypus and in the tiger so that these creatures don’t eat their own feet, and we call that structure—a brain.
But the brain necessary here is not the kind of brain that science is currently attempting to develop as an independent thinking entity. This brain is more like the brain coordinating, evaluating, and integrating all the thousand independent CPUs of the supercomputer, except that it will evaluate, coordinate, and integrate the thoughts of 7 Billion units instead of the 7 trillion in the chicken.
And though one might think that processing a thousand units in a supercomputer isn’t the same as process 7 billion, actually it’s very similar. The difficulty lies mostly in the fact that we don't have an automated way to evaluate even one thought—and this brings us to the question Who gets to decide which are the best ideas?
***
The software predecessor to Opportunity’s Engine was an implication engine built by my company in the late 1990s and called MetaMapper. It was designed to analyze and understand massive corporate technological environments so that the implications of change to those environments could be understood instantly. We built the predecessor to MetaMapper in 1979 and called 1984 (after the book by George Orwell) because of its uncanny ability to track human activity, Both could process data structures and link them to the logic driving the computer systems that processed them, to the specifications which created them, to the documents and activities which resulted, and finally to the human activity that benefited from the whole—and then organize and prioritize the results so that the user would not be overwhelmed. You can read about the genesis of both of them in Tiller for Tomorrow.
Google Search does something similar as it processes your request against the vast data resources residing on the internet. As it tracks your own preferences, as well as the preferences of previous searchers, it continuously improves the prioritization of your results—and this prioritization of information has been going on long enough now that it yields pretty impressive and consistent results. With Google you end up getting pretty much what you asked for.
But without this prioritization process, the information you ask for would be pretty useless because it would instantly overwhelm you.
The same is true for ideas. Humanity is overflowing with billions of ideas which may include great solutions to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, the need or lack of it for a local highway, the best way to guide genetic engineering toward healthy results, or the wisest strategy to deal with the growing replacement of human labor with machine labor.
But not only do the best of these ideas suffer from the smothering socio-economic forces typically resisting disruptive technology, they are also overwhelmed by the pure volume of ideas out there. Nobody knows about all of the competing ideas or where to find them, or which ideas might best benefit humanity in general, or even how to evaluate them dispassionately. And simply placing these ideas on the internet won’t solve the problem because that will only overwhelm us even more.
But what if we could do with ideas something similar to what we do with information? What if we could percolate millions and billions of ideas so that the very best ideas—the very wisest ideas in every sphere—percolate to the surface?
For some, this has been a holy grail of computer technology, and this is the first objective of the software that underlies Opportunity’s Engine. We must accumulate billions of ideas and then combine the strengths of our distinct individual kinds of mental capacities to help evaluate them—but we cannot use democracy to do so. And we must consider the following factors:
Polls don’t yield wisdom, and an idea’s popularity is no true measure of its worth.
Ideas cannot be separated from perspective. The best idea for the lion, is the worst for the rabbit; the best solution for Israel may be the worst for Palestine—but the ideas that shift both perspectives simultaneously in order to build common ground, we call wise ideas.
Ideas exist in context—we must enlarge that context to be as inclusive as possible and our percolation process will require the presence of ideas from as many perspectives as possible
We must bias the software toward certain fundamental objectives such as non-violence, human survival, inclusiveness, environmental health, etc. so that ideas and solutions which support these objectives will more likely percolate to the surface than ideas and solutions that don’t.
Wisdom is not the exclusive domain of the highly educated and our software must process ideas from every level of society—from copy clerk to nuclear physicist.
We must encourage as many opposing views as possible.
There must be strong incentives for as many people as possible to participate from as many places as possible and from as many socio-economic strata as possible.
Since the operation of our own brains tends toward different strengths and weaknesses, we must harness these accordingly and reward individuals who participate according to their strengths.
But there is another important objective. We need to give the wisest of the ideas, those that percolate to the very top of the pile, political and cultural clout.
How it works
The overall structure of this “brain” will be that of an intellectual lottery that operates not on the basis of luck, but on the basis of successful thought. Individuals will participate because they will encounter within the structure the opportunity to exercise whatever specific mental strengths they possess (organizational, creative, analytical, etc.) and they will gain substantial rewards depending on the relative merits of their contributions.
Those who enter Opportunity’s Engine on the internet will be presented with the opportunity to choose the mental characteristic which represents their greatest strength and which will become the focus of their involvement with the brain.
Creative – enter ideas
Organizational – organize ideas
Analytical – evaluate ideas
Investigative – validate results
Each of these thought domains will operate a separate percolation process so that the most effective participant in each category surfaces and receives his reward.
Percolate How?
Idea percolation is to information percolation as the real David is to Michelangelo’s statue—and it can only be accomplished by harnessing a cellular dynamic similar to that which evolves life.
The underlying dynamic which will drive our idea percolation and eliminate the effects of mere popularity is similar to the dynamic that gradually reinforces successful thought patterns on the neurons within the biological brain—a dynamic which is also analogous to that which eventually finds food sources for foraging ants and prioritizes the paths leading to that food source.
That ant dynamic is based on scent preference and the binary logic of the scent trail:
One ant among many randomly meandering ants will stumble upon a food source and will grab some and head back along his own scent trail to the ant hill. This will double the scent message on his trail and incline other ants to follows that trail. Each of these will add their own scent as they also carry food back to the ant hill until the trail becomes heavily scented and motivates more and more ants to travel on it.
Elsewhere other ants continue their random meanderings and one of them finds a much shorter path to the same food source. The same scent accumulation process occurs for this new path but this time at a much faster rate because the distance is shorter. Soon the scent level of this alternative solution exceeds that of the original and attracts more ants—and becomes the smarter solution.
A similar process in the human brain involves random thoughts, some of which reflect reality more than others and become more and more preferred as they are reinforced by repeated exposure to that reality. Thoughts which don’t reflect reality will not be reinforced and gradually be abandoned like the longer ant trail.
Of the billions of random ideas that enter our Opportunity’s Engine, those that prove over time to be best or most effectual (in the context of our built in biases) will confer more weight on the opinions of those who are most responsible for their upward percolation.
Ideas that ultimately prove incorrect or ineffectual, however, will have the opposite effect and diminish the value of the opinions of those whose actions favored those least correct ideas. Repeated success adds more and more weight to participant opinion, and repeated failure subtracts more and more weight.
Over time, the systematic application to submitted ideas and solutions of these now weighted opinions representing diverse elements of thought will thus bias percolation toward ideas more likely to succeed in the real world.
The process will require the participation of the full range of human mental capacity—idea initiation, idea organization, information organization, result verification, etc.—and will become increasingly accurate with use. As within the ant dynamic, the participation of millions and millions will more accurately weigh the opinions of the successful participants and consequently the value of the conclusions.
Conversely low initial participation levels will generate suspect initial conclusions and diminish reliability. We must be aware of this during our installation phase and not attempt to tackle too complex problems.
This means that our brain, like that of a baby’s, will require time and use to become functional.
But over time, as in Google, increasing participation in the millions and tens and even hundreds of millions of participants will so reinforce successful patterns that they become increasingly reliable so that we will increasingly be able to tackle more and more complex problems.
Our ultimate objective is to link all of humanity together in such a way that actions reflect both collective and individual needs. Therefore, Opportunity’s Engine will exclude no idea or solution from consideration, nor will it exclude any class or level in society from participation, nor any political or economic position.
Of course there are many obstacles to a goal of this nature—corruption of the process, attempts at vote stuffing, initial errors in the system itself, technological and logistical problems, and many other unanticipated obstacles. But none of these will be insurmountable because we will use the self-interest of the very participants to guarantee the effectiveness and integrity of the whole.
Rewards
As is evident in America’s lotteries today, the desire to win is big in all of us. Therefore, in order to attract participation, Opportunity’s Engine will offer lots of rewards at many levels, most of them small but some of them huge. The rewards will take two forms,
The recognition of excellent individual performance within the brain as evaluated by the brain itself, and
Financial compensation.
Equally important will be the actual enjoyment of participants in the process itself which will be designed to allow game-like interactivity among participants at every level while preserving their anonymity. Analysts and organizers for example can challenge the decisions of other analysts and attempt to overturn their decisions. Whoever wins (as evaluated through the accumulation of weighted opinion) will receive instant recognition within the category/locality involved (note that the actual weight of their opinion will only be affected later when the efficacy of their view is validated or invalidated by its relationship to the ultimate outcome).
Also the language of the brain will be multidimensional. Ideas may be expressed in print, or on video, or use game technology to express central themes and concepts. In this way participation becomes not only potentially profitable but also enjoyable in much the way hundreds of millions are enjoying digital technology today.
It should be noted that the nature of success when organizing ideas is obviously very different from the nature of success in analyzing ideas so our dynamic must reflect and account for this reality.
The Economics of Opportunity’s Engine
Some of the specifics of the Opportunity’s Engine dynamic will evolve with its development, but the following should give a general idea of the function of the economic component.
During the early development stages, participation will be free for all and the costs will be absorbed by the developers. Additionally, during the first year of development, participants will be rewarded with ownership interest in Opportunity’s Engine in proportion to the amount and effectiveness of their involvement.
After the first year the ownership incentive to participate will end and instead, an annual membership fee will be charged which will automatically entitle members to receive cash prizes depending on their levels of success in their corresponding areas of expertise.
Those unable to afford the membership fee will nevertheless be welcome as non-paying members eligible for prestige prizes, but initially ineligible for cash prizes. They can nevertheless automatically qualify for cash rewards by completing target loads of tasks roughly double the average task load of paying members.
Fifty percent of membership revenues each month will be distributed as rewards to ten percent of participants according to the value of their contributions. A top few each month will receive significant cash rewards, but the rest will receive lesser prizes which diminish in value to a level where the reward is mostly nominal.
Ten percent of membership revenues each month will be allocated to administrative, maintenance, and operations cost.
Forty percent of membership revenues will be allocated to support the development of the best 0.1% of ideas in Opportunity’s Engine that month as determined by the always-weighted votes of the membership itself.
Opportunity’s Engine will thus finance the development some of the best ideas itself, and retain a financial interest, as well, in any originating on its platform.
Gradually, over time, revenues deriving from these sources will allow OE to offer salary-based rewards within its structure and thereby begin to address the conflict between computer technology and job creation.
Cultural Implications and Political Clout
Let’s assume for a moment that Opportunity’s Engine becomes successful. Let’s assume that through fair and inclusive evaluation of humanity’s predicaments and solutions in a universal context, individuals and families and enterprise and government begin to reference it and to depend upon it. As with any other human dynamic it will develop its own cultural implications and gradually becomes a respected and powerful influence within society.
That accuracy and respect will involve all levels and sectors of society and will incline those societies over time to depend more and more on the conclusions generated—and as a consequence give Opportunity’s Engine political clout. And if we organize the solutions and ideas demographically, we can apply that clout to specific political issues in any participating locality.
For example Opportunity’s Engine might conclude that a contemplated project to build a bridge over a certain river is actually a boondoggle, or that the project objective might be better realized by a different approach—say a tunnel, or by moving certain key activities to another location. Or Opportunity’s Engine might conclude that a contemplated educational objective could better be accomplished by a better method.
Given its presumed popularity, this would mean extensive exposure in the local media and the social pressure generated would hold politicians accountable and force them to choose more reasonable alternatives, or not get reelected.
Opportunity’s Engine will sound fanciful to many, and this being only a general description designed for general consumption, I haven’t touched on many of the obstacles that confront it. But the ingredients necessary to the development of such a dynamic are here today and the continuing development and implementation of the supporting software, while undeniably difficult, will be a crucial step towards a dream of global harmony and a world that might be able to shape its own healthy future.
Opportunity’s Engine is designed to give political clout not only to the value of wise ideas, but also to the importance of wise solutions—perhaps to solutions like Kaimókara, or our Global Educational Initiative (also entered in Opportunity’s Engine). And this political clout, coupled with wise and evolutionary implementation strategies, will go a long way to overcoming the, until now, insurmountable barriers to our best ideas.
Read the complete story of its genesis in the adventure tale/memoir Tiller for Tomorrow.