Post by Steve CoffmanCould you tell me where you heard they are "broadening the scope" of The Challenge?
The only email update I’ve received is the one talking about the extended deadlines.
Hmm, I didn't get that email. The broader scope interpretation is just
from memory: They've rewritten the criteria page and my recollection
was that there was no allowance for general governance systems in the
last version (which I took to exclude my AutoMatch proposal).
Unfortunately they *added* a sentence that I think directly
contradicts the statements above it, specifically rejecting "models
that postulate that all states should be democracies". This is of
course a recipe for failure (e.g., the only way to get North Korea to
participate in a climate change agreement is to get rid of its
dictator). No guts, no glory, I say...
Post by Steve CoffmanAlso, I’m curious what you think of "Rule 5 a.” in the, [Rules for Participation]. Does the term “non-exclusive" mean a registrant will still have an equal right and license to implement their own entry, regardless of what GCF might do with it?
I've no concern about stuff like this: If you're in this for the money
or for proprietary interest in any form, you're in the wrong business.
I'd go so far as to propose that the first thing The People should
vote on if faced with a choice like this would be to strip all
intellectual property rights from anyone who tries to claim them on a
product or service that The People need. But maybe that's just me: I'd
probably vote to eliminate *all* patents and also severely restrict
copyright protection (limiting it to maybe 5 years or something). The
common conception of the purpose of these systems is completely
backwards: The purpose of these things is to ensure The People have
access to cool new stuff, and granting a monopoly to the creators is
merely an incentive. If enough cool stuff gets released without a
patent or copyright system, these should just be eliminated, and any
existing copyright or patent holders can pound sand if they think it's
our obligation to facilitate them getting rich by imposing artificial
scarcity (I'm talking to you, Bill Gates).
Post by Steve CoffmanAnd, is it clear to you whether the GCF intends to fund and/or otherwise direct the implementation of the Challenge winner(s) proposal?
No, and I'd guess they left that vague on purpose. I doubt they're
going to try to interfere with the operation of a functioning system,
but probably would be willing to provide some infrastructure or
facilitation to help get an idea bootstrapped. I think they'd have
been better off organizing this as a grant proposal competition where
working prototypes would be given a huge advantage over handwaving
proposals (something I also suggested to them, but which they
apparently decided not to do).
Post by Steve CoffmanFinally, have you seen anywhere where it describes the formatting required for entry, other than the number of words per each document? Does the entire entry need to be in text, or can there be diagrams, Power Point, etc.? Hard copy or digital?
I’m registered but haven’t gotten the memo on any of this.
Me either. But I consider the formatting requirements they *have*
stated to be unnecessarily restrictive. I'd recommend taking
everything they say as merely being suggestions: You don't change the
world by following a bunch of rules ;-)
Regards,
Scott