[P2P-F] what the p2p foundation is about: shifting from Generative Adversarial Networks to Generative Cooperative Networks

[Michel Bauwens]

I think this author, John Ringland, really nailed what we are about , what
we are trying to achieve and how to do this, see
https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Generative_Adversarial_Network_vs_Generative_Cooperative_Network

Generative Adversarial Network vs Generative Cooperative Network
<https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Generative_Adversarial_Network_vs_Generative_Cooperative_Network#mw-head>
<https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Generative_Adversarial_Network_vs_Generative_Cooperative_Network#p-search>
Discussion[edit
<https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/index.php?title=Generative_Adversarial_Network_vs_Generative_Cooperative_Network&action=edit&section=1>
]From GAN's, via GHN's, to GCN's ?[edit
<https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/index.php?title=Generative_Adversarial_Network_vs_Generative_Cooperative_Network&action=edit&section=2>
]

John Ringland:

"It is no accident that as a civilisation the sophistication of our
adversarial capacities far exceeds the sophistication of our cooperative
capacities. Our historical path and current situation have made it this
way, but the balance is changing.

There are two main generative processes underlying biological and cultural
evolution and more broadly the evolution of any population of interacting
adaptive agents.

A GAN (generative adversarial network) generates more sophisticated means
of coercing and exploiting each other; based on the capacity to control.
E.g. a nationalist arms race generating advanced military-industrial-media
complexes, and all that comes with these.

A GCN (generative cooperative network) generates more sophisticated means
of understanding and supporting each other; based on the capacity to
nurture. E.g. a peaceful society generating harmonious networks of unified
groups aligned around common needs and goals, and all that comes with these.

GAN → power over, held together by competitive interactions.

GCN → power with, held together by common needs and goals.

Real world systems are a complex mixture of these two principles. For
instance, in a forest each multi-cellular organism is a highly refined GCN
comprised of trillions of cells. Advanced organisms also live in complex
family or social groups which are also GCNs but less tightly integrated.
There may also be weak inter-species cooperative networks. Aside from
these, all organisms and species are engaged in a competition to satisfy
their basic needs; resulting in a wider context GAN within which the many
GCNs are embedded.

Throughout biological evolution the primary integrating principle was GCNs.
It was cooperative networks that gave rise to higher levels of
organisation, eventually resulting in tightly integrated collectives such
as multi-cellular organisms.

However *in a human cultural context a new integrative principle has
emerged, which is primarily GAN with a veneer of GCN. I will call these
GHNs (generative hierarchical networks). These were famously described by
Machiavelli but had been evolving for aeons before him. This principle
creates organisations based on internal competition rather than
cooperation.* It is a structure formed from interlocking fear and distrust,
leading to coerced conformity to ‘authority’. There need be no shared goal,
in fact the collective may act against the interests of most of its members
because lower levels of the hierarchy are controlled by the upper levels.

Much of the human world is a complex tapestry of GHNs, such as empires,
monarchies, governments, armies, bureaucracies, corporations, etc. A GHN is
a GAN based organising principle, through which we have organised into a
GAN dominated world, wracked with conflict and strife. A GHN can induce
conformity but it has side effects, such as breaking social solidarity,
weakening the ability to align around common goals and thereby destroying
our capacity to engage cooperatively.

The phenomenon we call ‘capitalism’ is a decentralised GHN, pitting
everyone against everyone in a competitive struggle for survival. Most
people spend most of their lives engaged in adversarial interactions and
this has become the norm, thus GCNs such as local communities and families
steadily weaken and decay in such a climate.


Most of our language (and culture as a whole) is a product of adversarial
competition. The field of NVC (Non violent communication) sheds light on
just how adversarial our language and communication styles are. In NVC this
is referred to as speaking ‘jackal’. This is the language of a culture that
has evolved via primarily GAN processes. It is a language of judgement,
projection, denial of the other’s perspective, imposing one’s own
perspective, coercion, deception, manipulation, etc. It is a language born
from power struggle.

In a GAN any predictable behaviour will be used against you. Your virtues
if you are known to be virtuousness. Your deviousness if you are known to
be devious. Your lust if you are known to be lustful. Your trauma coping
strategies if you are known to be traumatised. In particular, what is most
predicable is basic needs and the various strategies we use to meet these
needs. These get ‘gamed’ the most.

In a GAN based society, one generation's model citizen is the next
generation's tool. If a society encourages patriotism, this becomes a point
of leverage to drive populations into war. If a society encourages hard
work, these hard workers become more and more enslaved. If a society
encourages trust and faith, these become gullible fools for all kinds of
deceptions. Etc. With each experience of exploitation we adapt our
behaviour to protect ourselves, but soon this too becomes predictable and
is used as a point of leverage to control us.

Due to this arms-race-effect within GAN’s, our interactions have become far
removed from the level of basic needs and what it takes to meet these.
Hence most people in this world strive endlessly and yet remain deeply
unsatisfied. Satisfying basic needs becomes the hardest of all for many: on
the physical level this results in mass starvation amidst plenty of food,
on the social level in mass alienation in a crowded world, and on the
psychological level in mass despair amidst so much potential hope.


A GAN based culture arises from an arms race of tactics for exploitation
and control. The more sophisticated such a culture becomes the more
exploitative and controlling it becomes, and the more casualties there are.

Thus a GAN culture sows the seeds of its own demise.

The oppressive situation breaks the solidarity that legitimises the power
structure, leading to fracturing and polarisation of the collective.


A GCN based culture arises from a cooperative sharing of tactics for
understanding and supporting each other.

The more sophisticated such a culture becomes the more understanding and
supportive it becomes, and the more beneficiaries there are.

Thus a GCN culture sows the seeds of its own thriving.

The nurturing situation strengthens the solidarity that legitimises the
relational structure, leading to unification and alignment within the
collective.


*An extremely overbalanced GCN can also sow the seeds of its own demise, by
losing the capacity to engage effectively in adversarial situations (which
will inevitably arise). For example, a tribe becoming so peaceful they
forget how to fight, and are soon attacked and destroyed by another tribe.*

A dynamic balance of GCN and GAN is required. For instance, in a rational
discussion, i.e. a collaborative working towards ‘truth’ (and many other
situations):

GANs put things to the test.

GCNs give things what they need to exist.

Too much GAN and we end up with a rigid dogmatic structure, where
alternatives are stamped out.

Too much GCN and we end up with a profusion of incoherent structures, where
energy is wasted exploring every conceivable alternative no matter how
improbable.


Shifting from GAN to GCN turns conflict into creative tension, and
power-over into power-with.

The old world has been primarily a GAN, but there is the potential that the
new world may be primarily a GCN. This shift from GAN to GCN may be a
useful way of understanding the approaching transition. The process of
navigating and traversing the transition phase is Uplift. Uplift raises us
out of the GAN we are in and into a higher order GCN.

The central question is: how can we enable and encourage the formation of
GCNs within the existing GAN? How could these bubbles form, grow, merge and
eventually shift the whole civilisation towards a more cooperative
generative process.

Another important question is: what is it that GANs create in abundance,
which can be used as a resource to enable future GCNs? They create
disillusioned, alienated, frustrated individuals who know there is
something wrong with the world but feel powerless to do anything about it;
creating a dire lack of meaning, belonging, trust, hope, etc. This is a
growing motivation for change." (email, January 2018)

-- 
Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org


P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

<http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20180114/56f20d10/attachment-0001.html>