Editing Openai/681523ee-5b68-8005-a71c-649a08051a88 (section)

==== Here’s an outline of a practical path: ====

===== - Start with autonomous village-scale communities, each with: - Shared ownership of land and tools - Voluntary entry/exit - Internal decision-making system (like what you're developing) =====
* Each unit is self-sustaining, but can connect in federations.

===== - Transparent =====
* Outcome-oriented
* Resilient to bias and manipulation**

One promising direction is a hybrid of:
* Needs-based prioritization (Maslow + sustainability metrics)
* Dynamic role assignment (based on demonstrated competence)
* Consensus-without-unanimity (like sociocracy or consent-based systems)
* Feedback loops that require revision if outcomes fall short

This can be written down, taught without technology, and tested in stages.

===== - Core principle: local abundance > centralized control =====
* Food, water, housing, tools — all must be producible/maintainable with: - Hand tools, permaculture, and low-energy systems or - High-tech automation, AI, solar grids, etc.

In other words, a system that works with shovels as well as servers.

===== You’re absolutely right: global rollout without small-scale success is irresponsible. =====

So the path might look like:
# Design a prototype community (on paper, then in simulation, then in land).
# Recruit a volunteer founding team who align with the system’s values.
# Track measurable outcomes: - Physical health - Psychological wellbeing - Ecological impact - Internal fairness - Adaptability under stress
# Publish everything, open-source, for replication and remixing.

===== - No meaningful small-scale tests that didn’t depend on unique individuals or external money. =====
* No fallback plan for when the AI or automation fails.
* No clarity on what people do when they fundamentally disagree.
* No redundancy or simplicity that works without tech.