<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Information Trust - Direct Democracy - tribe.net</title>
    <link>http://directdemocracy.tribe.net/thread/da65f1eb-bd2c-415f-941d-64fedc56dc0a?format=rss</link>
    <description>Tribe.net. Local Connections</description>
    <item>
      <title>Information Trust</title>
      <link>http://directdemocracy.tribe.net/thread/da65f1eb-bd2c-415f-941d-64fedc56dc0a#aa764baa-401a-4e0d-8349-8bdc085b41f9</link>
      <description>This is a follow up post to my Drafting an internet constitution post.  It is more directly applicable to Direct Democracy as Steve has categorized it as well:&#xD;
&#xD;
Given that most information is received from remote sources either literally and/or pragmatically beyond our control &#xD;
AND &#xD;
this aspect of information will tend to increase as the amount of information and the sophistication of its collection techniques increase. &#xD;
WHAT &#xD;
are the best defenses against 'malicious information servers'? &#xD;
&#xD;
To ground this question somewhat, consider it in the context of possible deliberate deception by govornment. For example: &#xD;
&#xD;
-govornments such as the historic USSR and China sought/seek near absolute control of media sources. &#xD;
&#xD;
-it is generally believed that our govornment possesses some level of direct control of mass media channels. &#xD;
&#xD;
&#xD;
*A primary defense against malicious (counter)information is a citizen's ability to verify information through a consensus of multiple sources. &#xD;
&#xD;
*if a govornment attains a dominant level of control of media sources, how should information sources be selected? &#xD;
&#xD;
I suggest that a modern hyperpower such as the United States has a motive, opportunity and capacity to attempt such a dominant level of media control. &#xD;
&#xD;
In such a scenario, classically trusted information sources such as scientists and universities would be evident targets of priority during the mid to later stages of a media dominance attempt as reasoning citizens turned increasingly to them as sources. Most of these sources are majority or significantly govornment funded. &#xD;
&#xD;
International information sources would appear to gain an increased expectance of trust/validity...Except that those govornments too would possess similar motive, opportunity and capacity. The possibility of beneficial collusion would exist in the abscence of significant inter-govornment competition as well. &#xD;
&#xD;
If the media dominant state is achieved, would it be a self stabilizing structure? ie actually a more stable form of that govornment than the non media controlling form?</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:01:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://directdemocracy.tribe.net/thread/da65f1eb-bd2c-415f-941d-64fedc56dc0a#aa764baa-401a-4e0d-8349-8bdc085b41f9</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nevre</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-11-14T16:01:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>



