(haven't thought yet if any analogy with NFTs can be useful)
2. Money is a common denominator. A scallar. You can use money to compare, exchange and rank different things. Autonomy is a vector, and even that is an oversimplification. It's maybe a fractal. Even if we use Ashby's variety, which, unlike autonomy, is at least a metric, the counting options don't make sense. Ten trivial options are less than one that is life-saving.
3. Money is a token for a zero-sum game. That's not the case with autonomy-cohesion, not in all areas anyway. Your use of HTTP doesn't consume mine.
4. No autonomy market. So autonomy cannot be priced by exchange.
And yet, an exercise might be worth it.
Autonomy credit can be defined as consequential autonomy advanced to you now, against a claim on your future (usually participatory) autonomy. Maybe the best candidates, then, are actual credits, like student credits.
Yes, and there are two strong candidates. The first one, which is in the direction you pointed to, I shared in a note last year: https://substack.com/@velitchkov/note/c-114694816 . It has some issues, but they look solvable.
The second might come from the autonomy-cohesion tension itself.
But besides that, the use of "second" comes from a mirror-symmetry: According to the second law of thermodynamics, a system left on its own tends towards evenness. According to the second law of technodynamics, a socio-technical system left on its own tends towards the opposite, concentration of power.
If there is autonomy lease, is there autonomy credit or autonomy futures? Can you short autonomy?
Is the autonomy macroeconomics, autonomonetary policy, fiscal conservatism and quantitive easing?
Excellent questions. The meta question is: what can we get from the analogy without being carried away?
So, let's start with some obvious limitations when making a monetary analogy:
1. Fungibility. A euro is a euro. Consequential autonomy is preference-relative. See this clarification about nominal vs effective autonomy https://www.linkandth.ink/i/195606810/nominal-and-effective-autonomy
(haven't thought yet if any analogy with NFTs can be useful)
2. Money is a common denominator. A scallar. You can use money to compare, exchange and rank different things. Autonomy is a vector, and even that is an oversimplification. It's maybe a fractal. Even if we use Ashby's variety, which, unlike autonomy, is at least a metric, the counting options don't make sense. Ten trivial options are less than one that is life-saving.
3. Money is a token for a zero-sum game. That's not the case with autonomy-cohesion, not in all areas anyway. Your use of HTTP doesn't consume mine.
4. No autonomy market. So autonomy cannot be priced by exchange.
And yet, an exercise might be worth it.
Autonomy credit can be defined as consequential autonomy advanced to you now, against a claim on your future (usually participatory) autonomy. Maybe the best candidates, then, are actual credits, like student credits.
Autonomy credit: priority boarding
Autonomy debt: delayed prison time
Autonomy futures: 1 year of compulsory army service
Is there first law of technodynamics? What is of constant volume? Agency to handle "objective" complexity/variety?
Yes, and there are two strong candidates. The first one, which is in the direction you pointed to, I shared in a note last year: https://substack.com/@velitchkov/note/c-114694816 . It has some issues, but they look solvable.
The second might come from the autonomy-cohesion tension itself.
But besides that, the use of "second" comes from a mirror-symmetry: According to the second law of thermodynamics, a system left on its own tends towards evenness. According to the second law of technodynamics, a socio-technical system left on its own tends towards the opposite, concentration of power.