On 6/5/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Using a non-existent AGI to rate contributions... is not a realistic
idea.
Ok, I'll bite. Why not?
It seems that you're just using the promise that there'll be a future AGI (and so presumably credits can be assessed more objectively, which I agree) but in reality you're using traditional, opaque managerial practices to run the company. This is not the way to attract a large number of participants. The point of my proposal is recruit *many more* participants than traditional companies. I believe AGI will need the collaboration of many individuals. In a traditional startup the founders can exercise much more control but they also need to work much harder to be a competent leader. If their startup is successful they usually get disproportionately rich because the non-linear effects that Bill Gates so famously talked about, while the rest of the regular employees receive a "linear" wage. Under my proposal, basically all participants can enjoy the nonlinear leverage of the project's success, depending on the amount of their contributions (and the attribution mechanism). Anyway, I see this as an improvement over traditional startups / partnerships. Let's do a joint project -- I need people to help me ;) YKY ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415&user_secret=e9e40a7e
