Peter Suber – Nomic

“Peter Suber is an American philosopher known for his work in the philosophy of law and open access to knowledge. He leads the Harvard Open Access Project and is a Faculty Fellow at Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society. In the appendix of his 1982 book The Paradox of Self-Amendment, Suber described the concept for a game called Nomic. In the description of the game, Suber writes, “if law-making is a game, then it is a game in which changing the rules is a move… While self-amendment appears to be an esoteric feature of law, capturing it in a game creates a remarkably complete microcosm of a functional legal system.” Suber’s initial ruleset outlines two types of rule changes that may occur in the game: mutable and immutable, the difference being that immutable rules must be changed into mutable rules before than can be amended or repealed. A mutable rule may be added, amended, or repealed. It can also transmute into an immutable rule. An immutable rule may become mutable….”

Game jockey as an intermediary between DJ practice and video games

Abstract:  The game jockey is a new practice between DJing and video gaming. This study underlines the difficulty to hybridize these two creative cultures. Game jockey implies a person, who will mix games during a live performance, by adapting to the players’ feelings. We will present key concepts of the DJ practice and the similarities to the game universe. Based a Jockey – Game – Players triangle, we offer a creation research that tries to evaluate the possible figure of the jockey and the use of game samples. Our triangle model opens on cultural practices that are to invent.

Tezos talks about its self-amending blockchain

“Tezos presents a self-amending blockchain, addressing the ironic fact that consensus systems often become hamstrung when their own rules need to change.

 

The Tezos team first proposed its “seed protocol” back in 2014, a blockchain protocol offering a voting procedure for stakeholders to approve amendments to the protocol, including changes to the voting procedure itself. In this respect, Tezos is related to the work of philosopher Peter Suber and Nomic, a game he invented which includes mechanisms for players to change the rules, usually beginning through a system of democratic voting….”

Nomic: Interactive Gaming Online and Off | Brainstorm in Progress

“I am looking at games that can be used in online classes that are interactive, engaging and promote collaboration. In online classes, the research says that there is a direct correlation between interactivity in an online class and student success and retention. Games are one way to address the student success and retention issue. Nomic, a game I used in my English classes, is definitely one of those games that are very engaging. The game is very useful at the beginning of the semester because students learn a lot about one another, how to work together in groups, self-organization, and what skills one needs to work effectively in groups. They also learn a little bit about politics and creating decision making processes. There are Nomic games that start out with a lot of rules and there are those that start out with a minimal set….”

Tezos — a self-amending crypto-ledger White paper (Sept 2014)

“We present Tezos, a generic and self-amending crypto-ledger. Tezos can instantiate any blockchain based ledger. The operations of a regular blockchain are implemented as a purely functional module abstracted into a shell responsible for network operations. Bitcoin, Ethereum, Cryptonote, etc. can all be represented within Tezos by implementing the proper interface to the network layer. Most importantly, Tezos supports meta upgrades: the protocols can evolve by amending their own code. To achieve this, Tezos begins with a seed protocol defining a procedure for stakeholders to approve amendments to the protocol, including amendments to the voting procedure itself. This is not unlike philosopher Peter Suber’s Nomic[4], a game built around a fully introspective set of rules….”

Puzzle WINGS. Series # 2: Control systems and solutions markets – Wings.ai DAO blog

From Google’s English: “WINGS DAO self-governing. It is inspired by the ideas of the philosopher Peter Suber (Peter Suber), who created the game Nomic . The game consists of immutable and mutable rule, it illustrates the power and logic systems samoispravlyayuschihsya priorities when setting rules of the game. (can be compared with the inviolability of the Constitution and the periodic change in regulatory laws). We suggest using a combination of Futarhii (prediction markets) and Liquid Democracy (power redistribution forecasting) for TAO with a view to the selection of key decisions, such as the placement of a new or updated DAO smart WINGS platform contracts….”

Puzzle WINGS. Series # 2: Control systems and solutions markets – Wings.ai DAO blog

From Google’s English: “WINGS DAO self-governing. It is inspired by the ideas of the philosopher Peter Suber (Peter Suber), who created the game Nomic . The game consists of immutable and mutable rule, it illustrates the power and logic systems samoispravlyayuschihsya priorities when setting rules of the game. (can be compared with the inviolability of the Constitution and the periodic change in regulatory laws). We suggest using a combination of Futarhii (prediction markets) and Liquid Democracy (power redistribution forecasting) for TAO with a view to the selection of key decisions, such as the placement of a new or updated DAO smart WINGS platform contracts….”

When Do Rule Changes Count-as Legal Rule Changes?

Abstract. Institutions regulate societies. Comprising Searle’s constitutive counts-as rules, “A counts-as B in context C”, an institution ascribes from brute and institutional facts (As), a social reality comprising institutional facts (Bs) conditional on the social reality (contexts Cs). When brute facts change an institution evolves from one social reality to the next. Rule changes are also regulated by rule-modifying counts-as rules ascribing rule change in the past/present/future (e.g. a majority rule change vote counts-as a rule change). Determining rule change legality is difficult, since changing counts-as rules both alters and is conditional on the social reality, and in some cases hypothetical rule-change effects (e.g. not retroactively criminalising people). However, without a rigorous account of rule change ascriptions, AI agents cannot support humans in understanding the laws imposed on them. Moreover, advances in automated governance design for socio-technical systems, are limited by agents’ ability to understand how and when to enact institutional changes. Consequently, we answer “when do rule changes count-as legal rule changes?” in a temporal setting with a novel formal framework. 

When Do Rule Changes Count-as Legal Rule Changes?

Abstract. Institutions regulate societies. Comprising Searle’s constitutive counts-as rules, “A counts-as B in context C”, an institution ascribes from brute and institutional facts (As), a social reality comprising institutional facts (Bs) conditional on the social reality (contexts Cs). When brute facts change an institution evolves from one social reality to the next. Rule changes are also regulated by rule-modifying counts-as rules ascribing rule change in the past/present/future (e.g. a majority rule change vote counts-as a rule change). Determining rule change legality is difficult, since changing counts-as rules both alters and is conditional on the social reality, and in some cases hypothetical rule-change effects (e.g. not retroactively criminalising people). However, without a rigorous account of rule change ascriptions, AI agents cannot support humans in understanding the laws imposed on them. Moreover, advances in automated governance design for socio-technical systems, are limited by agents’ ability to understand how and when to enact institutional changes. Consequently, we answer “when do rule changes count-as legal rule changes?” in a temporal setting with a novel formal framework.