September 23, 2023 • 62 mins
Imagine living in a world where borders are nonexistent and nations operate in a network state. A world where technology not only interprets human will, but enacts it with sophisticated accuracy. This awe-inspiring idea is no longer a figment of imagination but a reality taking shape in our midst. In this episode I dissect the intricate relationship between centralised and distributed authority, exploring the paradox of desiring both intervention and non-interference from government. With the aid of technology, I breathe life into the concept of a borderless nation, examining the empowering potential of a black box with delegated authority.
What if machines could evolve emotions? Yes, you heard it right. I continue to delve into the fascinating world of technology, discussing its implications on civilisation and its role in interpreting our wills and enacting them. Further on I ponder how a trusted black box, holding a nation's constitution, could communicate on behalf of a disabled person. Furthermore, I assess the profound impact of such advancements on humanity's future, considering how the purposeful constraint of possibilities can be harnessed as a tool to perpetuate motion (Perpetual Motion).
However, with great power comes great responsibility - and potential disruptions. I share my perspective on the importance of regulation in this context, casting light on scenarios where technology could unlock dormant wealth and reconcile historical treaty claims. Using examples like the fractionalisation of landlocked commodities, I critically examine the potentially disruptive nature of such advancements, emphasising the need for a balance between regulation and innovation, and the crucial role of collaboration and cooperation for a unified purpose. So, are you ready to step into this thrilling journey into the future of humanity, technology, and nationhood? I hope you join me.
Contact David Ding
Thanks for listening!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Okay.
So this is going to be a bigone, so prepare to go down the
rabbit hole on this one.
This is a humongous vision andI want to preface it by saying
that normally I talk aboutfuturism.
However, this what I'm going toshare with you now.
(00:20):
It may seem futuristic, howeverit's, it's ready now.
This technology and thisblueprint is already here and it
has already been stood up as aproof of concept at its very
base layer, as a platform.
(00:41):
But it's important tounderstand what this technology
is going to become in future, sothat we can plan ahead and
imbue grace into the system, sothat, as it's ushered in the
disruption, it should beseamless.
It should be seamless.
(01:02):
It's profoundly innovative andit's going to catapult us
forward in many, many differentaspects of civilization.
But it's important tounderstand that you know if
something is leapfrogged, ifsome form of technology is
leapfrogged, if some industry isleapfrogged, there are people
(01:24):
actively working on projects inthat space that is being
superseded who still have validtechnology that can become part
of this.
But what we want, in an idealscenario, is to identify what
that is so we can absorb andassimilate it into this new
(01:48):
platform and carry it forward.
So this is about the nature ofa borderless nation, or what's
called a network state.
But I am going to share withyou an example of this that is
coming through now, and I'mgoing to talk through what the
(02:08):
implications of this are.
Because at the moment we've gota scenario within which it seems
as though there are governments, so we have centralized
authorities who are carrying theburden of the collective body
(02:30):
of the people prospering.
The collective will of thepeople empowers the governing
body to enact their will, andagencies are engaged to fulfill
that will through enactment.
So this is a centralizedauthority, a centralized agency,
(02:55):
and the centralized agenciesthen delegate that agency out to
other agencies.
So the agency does becomedistributed, but often only with
other government agencies.
So this is a common structure,part of a structure I'm involved
(03:16):
with with Callaghan Innovation,and so the authority that we
have, the agency that we have,is delegated to us, and so we
are the agents to enact, tofulfill the will, basically,
that's delegated to us throughan enactment.
(03:38):
That enactment is constitutedto represent the will of the
people and that the will of thepeople is entrusted to those who
we elect to represent us, torepresent our collective will,
and we vote for that.
So it's important to understandthere is a hive mind process
(04:03):
that harvests the collectivewill of we, the people, and
through the elections, wedelegate the authority to enact
our will and enactments happenand the agency to fulfill the
will is delegated.
That's how it works right now.
So, as much as we, ever as anyhuman being wants to say, oh the
(04:26):
government this and oh thegovernment that, understand that
we've made it this way, we arethe ones who've willed it into
being.
And so, very important tounderstand if you are, if you
are of the nature that believesthat it is government's duty to
(04:50):
protect and to XYZ ABC, thenyou're imbuing that authority,
that centralized authority, withthat agency, even through the
intention, even through speakingit, posting it on LinkedIn,
posting it on Facebook.
That's what you're saying, thatyou want.
You want someone else to takeon responsibility for that.
(05:12):
And so if that centralizedagency, if you want that
centralized agency to takeresponsibility for that, then
you're giving it the power tointervene.
You're saying you want it tointervene in your life.
However, most of us, or mostpeople that I know, when they're
(05:33):
speaking of the government,they are also saying they don't
want the government to intervene.
Now, you can't have both.
You can't have a centralizedauthority that you're imbuing
with the authority to intervenein your affairs, in the affairs
of the state, the nation state,and then to say that you don't
(05:58):
want it to interfere.
You can't have both.
You can't have both.
However, we do need scenarioswithin which we can have both.
So, you see, in this and thisis the hypothesis that I really
see I'm vested in holy, and thatis it's a hybrid of both
(06:25):
Centralized, distributedauthority, or you may want to
call it consolidated distributedauthority, consolidated
delegated authority.
And I often use the example ofsomeone who is completely
disabled and they can't evenspeak, but they can blink.
Now they have the ability toshare their will, but they need
(06:50):
to delegate the agency to enacttheir will, all of it, the duty
of their care.
They have to be able todelegate that.
They need to be able todelegate the duty of their care
to a trusted third party.
It has to happen.
So we need the mechanism ofdelegated agency and delegated
(07:13):
authority.
But what remains sovereign forthat human being who is disabled
?
Their will, it's immutable.
It's immutable.
You can't take that from them.
You can't take that from them.
And as long as they have thepower to share their intent and
(07:41):
to express their will.
It is my will that ABCDEF todelegate the agency for ABCDEF
to XYZ Trusted Party, so that Ican thrive in these areas of my
life, so that I can write a bookone day, through blinking to
(08:02):
someone who can translate it, sothat I can create a legacy, so
that I can find meaning in theworld, so that, but their
interpretation of what mattersmeaning is all that matters.
And so expressing your will isnot enough.
Expressing your will is notenough.
(08:23):
It is my will that ABC Okay,that's it, but the so that the
so that is how you can findmeaning in your life.
It is my will that ABC so thatDEF and the so that means that
(08:46):
you can delegate the authorityand that the enactment of your
will is in alignment with whatit means, with what meaning
means to you.
And so you know, we, a lot of us, think that we compare.
We compare the ideal scenariothat we envisage in our minds.
(09:10):
We often compare it to theConstitution of the United
States, where all, where therights are in an alienable, but
the rights are to, the rightsare to live.
I think it is a habit to pursuehappiness, something along
(09:32):
those lines, the pursuit ofhappiness, that it's happiness,
that's not, that's missing themark.
It's meaning, because offulfilling life, what the
meaning of that to me is muchdifferent than it is to you.
The pursuit of meaning for meis very, very different to you
(09:55):
and the next person and the nextperson and the next person and
so that is what we need toprotect and preserve is the
meaning, the interpretation ofour will.
So, in that scenario, this is,this is really where we want to
(10:19):
get, and the reason I'mconveying this to you first is
because in a borderless nationor a network state I'm going to
call it a borderless nation forfor the purposes of this podcast
, because it makes more sense toa human being and it's more
inclusive than it is a networkstate, which is kind of a, you
(10:42):
know, it's kind of a web three,blockchain kind of thing.
However, like with all forms oftechnology, eventually we're
going to push the technologyinto the background until it's
invisible, so that it doesn'tmatter.
So, once we understand thesefundamentals, once we understand
(11:02):
these fundamentals, we come tothe realization that, yes, we
need centralized authority, weneed trusted third parties, we
need the capability and thecapacity for a human being to
delegate the agency andsometimes they may, depending on
how incapacitated they are,they may need to delegate the
(11:25):
authority to interpret theirwill, to interpret the meaning
of their will.
But if they can interpret themeaning of their will themselves
, it is my will that ABC, sothat DEF.
The DEF means you'reinterpreting your own will.
But if you were to say it is mywill that ABC and I'm
(11:52):
delegating the authority tointerpret my will ABC to trusted
third party, and trusted thirdparty determines the, so that
and we see that with humanbeings, when they create a will,
it is my will that ABC, def,abc.
And then they trust theinterpretation to a trusted
(12:16):
third party, a lawyer, tointerpret and enact the will.
Well, to interpret the will,but also delegate the agency to
fulfill the will as well asenact it.
And so very fundamental, basicstuff.
(12:39):
Once we separate out all thesepowers and these mechanisms for
distributing authority, then youcan then create a structure
whereby the full gamut ofpossibilities are catered for.
So on that end of the spectrumyou've got a completely disabled
(13:00):
human being, almost whollyincapacitated, but because they
can blink and therefore useMorse code to communicate, they
do have the power to expresstheir intent, to interpret the
meaning and to delegate agency.
(13:23):
And now this is where.
So I want to just go a stepfurther than this, because if we
can go a step further than this, then we can.
You know those of you that knowme that I'm very staunch on
nobody gets left behind.
(13:44):
Nobody gets left behind, andit's one of the bugbears that I
have with web 3 and blockchainis that it's leaving most people
behind, so it's not an allencompassing solution and
everyone, everybody knows thatpeople are trying to solve the
onboarding issues, to solve thatproblem and for credit, and
this is kind of what's bringingus to this point now, where the
(14:06):
technology that I'm going totalk about soon becomes relevant
and is actually rising to thesurface because of this pressing
to solve the problems ofonboarding, so that inclusivity
is the default.
So if we go a step further thansomeone who's completely
disabled and who is in a whollyvegetative state they cannot
(14:32):
blink, move so the power forthem to delegate their agency we
know they don't have that.
So do they have the power toenact their will?
No.
Do they have the power tointerpret their will?
No.
And do they have the power toexpress their intent to express
(14:57):
their will?
It is my will that, no, theydon't.
So what do we do in thisscenario?
What do we do?
And this is the fundamental,this is the, this is the fulcrum
of all progress that we need tomake if we to build a
(15:19):
civilization on top of.
This is the kernel, is theabsolute fulcrum, fundamental
principle that is the mostimportant pillar of any
civilization we build.
From this moment on, this isthe fundamental, the crux of the
matter.
So what is the crux of thematter?
(15:41):
That if we want, if this personis to live any kind of
fulfilling life, then we need,we have to intervene on their
behalf, and so we have to makeassumptions, you see, so we have
to, we have to assume absolutepower, we have to embody
(16:12):
dictatorship.
Understand this, understandthis Dictatorship is a valid
aspect of civilization.
It's a valid aspect ofcivilization, and this is why
reality is mirroring to us thatdictatorship exists.
(16:33):
Now we like to see in a blindeye.
We're all fully aware of thenations on the planet who have
varying degrees of dictatorship.
We frown upon them for obviousreasons, and valid reasons, of
course.
So we're aware, everything innature is valid, everything in
(16:53):
nature is valid.
And so, in this scenario, wewillfully deploy a dictatorship,
a benevolent dictatorship,benevolent dictatorship.
And so how do we apply this?
(17:13):
So we look at the scenario andwe say all of the powers need to
be, we need to dictate, we needto dominate and control this
human being, holy, holy.
Every aspect of its care needsto be the responsibility of a
(17:40):
benevolent, trusted third party.
And so we have to makeassumptions, and so we look at
the mechanism that we have now,where we have the expression of
intent.
The expression of intent, then,which is how we share our will
(18:01):
it is my will, that ABC.
Then we have the interpretationof that will, which means that,
and then we have the enactmentof the will, and that is the
fulfillment of the will.
So, imbued into this, thefundamental principle of the
system, the de facto standard asit is now, is the assumption
(18:25):
that meaning, meaning is thefundamental principle, that's
the unified intent of purpose ofevery human being, that's the
core pillar.
And, in truth, if we apply thisat every level, at spiritual
(18:47):
level, mental level, scientific,logical and even at an
emotional level, meaningtranscends all of these things,
because what life means, whatmeaning means to me is, it's
(19:08):
different from everyone.
So for me to live a life ofmeaning, it means that ABC.
For you to live a life ofmeaning, it means that DEF.
And so what is the thing thattranscends everything?
(19:30):
That is?
That is wholly ubiquitous.
It's wholly ubiquitous.
What is the dependency that wehave on meaning being possible?
So, and this is where what I'mposing is the fundamental
(19:51):
principle Upon which we canbuild a civilization, upon which
we can set standards for thedevelopment of AI, that we can
embody and embrace as thefundamental principle for
(20:13):
civilization, and that is fromwhere they are now.
From where they are now, ourunified intent of purpose is to
take them from where they arenow, is to enable them to
(20:33):
accomplish the mission of beingcapable of expressing their
intent.
It is my will to ABC, so that X, y, z that's how devoted we are
as a civilization, that we'regoing to meet you where you are
(20:59):
now and we're going to puteverything that we can and to
enabling you to accomplish thatmission, and we're going to
accomplish that mission together.
A shared mission, and winning,winning means to us that you've
(21:25):
gained the agency to expressyour will.
You see, and those of you thatknow me, or especially those
that work with me know that I'mvery, very devoted to
mission-led, mission-driven waysof developing a strategy, so I
(21:49):
always break it down into what'sthe mission, what is the
critical path, and it's alwaysbased on the accomplishment of a
mission, and so this isubiquitous.
You can apply it to absolutelyanyone.
And so, if you think aboutinnovation as innovators, what
are we wholly devoted to?
(22:10):
We're devoted to theaccomplishment of a mission for
every human being, whether it'sgetting to Mars, whether it's
getting to the moon, whetherit's being able to express your
will, to share your intent.
Then that's where we focus anddirect innovation, and there are
(22:34):
a number of innovations I canthink of right now that have the
power to take someone who is ina vegetative state from where
they are now, so we can meetthem where they are now and we
can accomplish a shared missionfor them to be able to express
their intent, express their will.
(22:55):
This is true empowerment, and Italk about this in a group that
I'm a part of.
It's kind of like a think tank,and I've talked recently about
this opening and closing ofopportunities.
(23:16):
So when you have an infinitearray of opportunities, there's
no reason to make a choice, andso it can have the tendency to
create inertia, and so nature'sway is to constrain
possibilities.
So if you imagine the wallsclosing in, the opportunities
(23:38):
becoming less and less and less,the pressure is increasing,
more and more, less and lesspossibilities are available.
Now, if inertia still exists,then nature constrains those
possibilities until there's onlyone choice, you see.
And then that so they're leftwith one choice and they're like
(24:01):
shit.
So they make that choice andthen motion happens.
So this is the nature of nature, and so in this scenario, we
want to imbue this method.
We need to constrainpossibilities, we need to create
(24:25):
pressure, and this is thebeauty of time, and what a
mission-led and mission-drivenapproach does is it takes
something that's nebulous andmakes it linear and gives you
the capability and the capacityto constrain it to time so that
(24:48):
you can actually accomplish thatmission.
So I want to it's going to makesense why I've shared that to
preface the next part of thispodcast.
So we're in agreement.
As civilization, we're whollyvested in this as a blueprint
(25:11):
for the new blueprint ofcivilization.
So now I'm going to talk abouttechnology and a network nation
or a borderless nation.
So it's quite simpleconceptually, if you consider
that a country right now isconstrained to a fixed point in
(25:36):
space, so it's landlocked.
So my country is.
It's pinned to the land andthat's immutable.
New Zealand, australia, isAustralia and if we are to, new
Zealand is an island.
But if we want to increase ourborders, if we want to grow and
(25:58):
make our borders bigger, then wehave to go and invade Australia
, which is obviously never goingto happen.
There's no reason for us to dothat.
We're extremely, we're veryrich in resource.
However, we do have some kindof crippling dependencies that
(26:22):
we formed out of a desire tocontinually evolve and expand
and become more.
That really do need to beunraveled.
However, fundamentally, if wewant to expand as a nation, then
we have to grow our borders.
We have to proliferate lifewithin those borders, of course.
(26:42):
But the nation of New Zealandis the land.
We consider it to be, the land.
It's landlocked.
So a borderless nation isbasically a nation where the
will of the people has beenimbued into, let's say, a piece
(27:03):
of technology, and we talk abouta black box quite often.
Now, a black box there areactually a few different
interpretations of this, so I'llshare the interpretation I'm
meaning.
A black box is something that'sgot a bunch of technology
inside it that no one can seeand that no one understands.
(27:24):
So it could be an AI model, itcould be a stack of technology,
it could just be a bunch of data, could be structured data,
could be unstructured data.
Nonetheless, what's inside theblack box is not visible to
anybody other than thetechnology that's governing it.
(27:47):
And so, in that scenario, thetechnology exists now whereby we
can.
It's so good that we can trustit.
We can trust the black box withdelegating our authority to it.
(28:11):
So let's say I'm completelydisabled and let's say I've been
on a mission this human beinghas been working with, let's say
, callahan Innovation, theInnovation Agency, to help them
to express their will.
Let's say they've accomplishedthat mission and so now they're
(28:32):
blinking.
They couldn't blink before.
We've got an alternative toblinking whereby we've mapped
their electromagnetic field andthe fluctuations in the
electromagnetic magnetic field,and we've figured out that they
can use their emotions as analternative to a sense of Morse
code.
We can map it so they cancommunicate now.
(28:55):
So now they can express theirwill, they can delegate their
authority, and now they say thatthey don't trust human beings
to interpret their will or toenact it, but they do trust a
black box because it's a system,a piece of technology that is
(29:19):
devoid of human intervention,that is wholly autonomous.
So it's rendered humans humansobsolete as intermediaries.
It's got an AI model in it andthat AI model is empowered as
(29:39):
the spokesperson to speak onbehalf of or to express what's
in the trusted black box.
And so, in that scenario, we'venow got the ability for the
disabled person to communicate.
(30:03):
We can capture the data in astructured or an unstructured
way inside the black box, andwe've empowered an unbiased
language model to interpret themeaning of that data.
You see, so now you've got aspokesperson on their behalf.
So now this person can speakusing their emotions, and it's
(30:28):
unbiased because it's drawingfrom the information in the
black box.
That black box we know it's notbeing tampered with, it's in
the data is unstructured.
So even if a human being wentin there, would it mean anything
?
And so now this person canutilize an avatar to communicate
(30:52):
and empower them to speak ontheir behalf.
And here's this is wheretechnology is taking us With a
borderless nation, what aborderless nation basically
means.
We can develop a black box, atrusted black box.
(31:14):
We can make it immutable, andthis black box can contain the
constitution of one human being,multiple human beings, and it
can have rules and it can havean AI avatar that speaks on
behalf of the unified intent ofthe human beings involved, if
(31:40):
they want that, if they trust anAI avatar, some people will
have a human being as thespokesperson, you see, because
they trust a human being morethan they trust an AI avatar.
But lots and lots of peopledon't would trust an unbiased
piece of technology to speak ontheir behalf.
You see, so this is the natureof a borderless nation is the
(32:07):
nation is borderless, trulyborderless, because the black
box contains the shared intentof the people and that becomes
the nation.
So now I want to zoom out ofthat for one second, zoom out of
(32:30):
that.
And now let's see, assume theproliferation of the black boxes
.
So it's kind of like a what Iimagine in my mind.
It's kind of like imagine afireworks display, there's a
rocket, the rocket shoots upinto space, then it explodes and
(32:53):
proliferates, and so now youimagine that and the
proliferation of the black boxes.
It's kind of like it flowers,and so connected to those black
boxes you have avatars, humanbeings, combinations of both,
(33:15):
and each black box is a nationunto itself.
It's borderless because it'sdigital, but it's sovereign.
So the only constraint to itbecoming a nation unto itself is
the ability to transact andinteract between human beings
(33:39):
who are bonded, unified inintent, by that trusted black
box, and they can exchangewithout borders.
So that technology exists rightnow.
That technology exists rightnow and it's emerging through
New Zealand.
In fact, there's a profoundtechnology that is emerging
(34:02):
through New Zealand.
I won't speak about it freelyjust yet because there are
people who have entrusted me tobe discreet, who are developing
what I perceive as keycomponents of it.
But let's call it for want of abetter phrase, let's call it a
(34:27):
borderless nation in a box.
So you know, subscribe for ablueprint for borderless nation
and you've got a borderlessnation.
But ultimately it's theunderlying stack that enables
(34:48):
the borderless nation to existand proliferate.
That's profound.
In that scenario, you have allof these borderless nations, the
nations unto themselves.
They now have the power tointeract with each other.
Those interactions areverifiable and therefore the
(35:13):
verification is contained withinits own tiny black box.
We know that black box istrusted because it's immutable
and you have a trustless system.
You have a wholly trustlesssystem.
Now, over time, when youinteract with a human being, as
(35:36):
long as you've got a mechanismwhereby their risk profile so
they have a risk score attachedto them that that fluctuates
over time, so that a human beingunderstands the potential risk
of engaging with another avatarIf it's speaking on behalf of
another human being or anotherhuman being, then you can
(36:02):
determine for yourself whetherit's the risk versus the reward
of interacting with that humanbeing.
Now, in this scenario, thetechnology for this is
ubiquitous, because you can haveyour own constitution, you can
have your own economic structure, you can have your own rules,
(36:25):
you can have your own laws.
One person's laws and rulesmake sense to them.
Sorry, one nation, their lawsand rules, their interpretation
of what it means to be a nation,a borderless nation, is valid
to them and another nation isvalid to them.
They can form their owneconomic structure, they can
(36:47):
incentivise their own we call ittokenomics in W3, their own
economic system.
Now, but the beauty of theseborderless nations is that they
can interact with the formaleconomy.
They can interact with theformal economy and the reason
(37:10):
for this is because when youhave a borderless, when you have
a container, let's say, you'vedelegated the authority to
express your will, to expressyour intent to a piece of
technology, and that piece oftechnology is under the
(37:31):
stewardship of a trustrefoundation that is constituted
in civil law or common law.
Even Then, all of thoseinteractions, the expression of
your will, the expression ofyour intent, it happens outside
of statute, it happens outsideof statute, so it's all based on
(37:55):
the word.
Your word is, your bond, yourwill is stands above everything.
So you have that as the basefoundation of all of these
interactions.
And then the layer on top isempowered by the unified intent
(38:16):
of the trusted black box.
Or if you want to be a nationunto yourself, which every human
being will be as well, ofcourse, you can bond to the
formal economy through you,through the agency that you have
(38:36):
as a legal person.
You see.
So underneath, the interactionor the expression of intent
happens in common law or civillaw.
Let's say, if the foundationsare constituted in Switzerland,
and then by expressing your will, you empower the agency to
(38:58):
enact your will or to act onyour behalf.
You bond that to your legalperson, and that's the legal
entity represented by yourdriver's license, by your
passport, but that can berevoked at any time, so you can
give yourself the agency tocarry forward your will.
(39:19):
If you have the capability toenact your will, to delegate
your authority, to delegate youragency, or if you're disabled
and you can express your will,then you can empower another
agent to enact your will Atrusted third party, a trusted
(39:43):
black box, another human being,and then that person operates in
the formal economy as it is now, using fiat currency, using
web3, using crypto currency orwhatever you want.
Now this means that anycontract or bond you have in the
(40:10):
formal economy, it standsbeneath your sovereignty.
You see, it stands beneath it,not above.
Now the challenges we have isin the formal economy and in the
formal legal system.
We say things like you know, wecreate a contract and it says
(40:32):
you have to sign to say that youunderstand Well that in legal
terms, you're willingly choosingto stand under that contract.
That's the reason that itexists, because, by default, you
actually stand above it.
So it's important to understandthese things.
But ultimately, as long as yourealise and you understand the
(40:56):
power of your will and yourintent, you can revoke that
authority at will withoutquestion.
You just have to know that youactually have that power rather
than accidentally, you know,assuming that you stand under it
, but you can revoke thatauthority at any time.
(41:16):
So it's just a matter of timebefore this information
proliferates anyway, and italready is.
Hence why nation states nowexists and are proliferating
behind the scenes.
So in this scenario, it's very,very important now.
(41:37):
But because this technologyexists and this is part of the
reason I'm with a governmentagency now is because I am
really concerned about thedisruption of this technology,
and I'll give you an example.
So I'm working with a founder.
They've developed a profoundpiece of technology.
(41:58):
They've developed a nativeblockchain.
This native blockchain is basedon electricity, so they've
built a solar array, so a pieceof hardware that connects to
Starlink for redundancy.
It harvests energy from the sun, stores that energy and breaks
(42:21):
the electricity down into unitsthat can be measured, and those
units are then used to back anative cryptocurrency.
That value is it reserves is acommodity, which is electricity.
So if you bond these solararrays together, these solar
(42:46):
nodes, you obviously have awireless grid and you're
creating a cryptocurrency thatderives its value based on the
price of electricity, which is,you know, it's like creating a
reserve currency out of thin air.
When you think about it, thathas value Now because it's a
(43:09):
layer one cryptocurrency.
You can create layer two tokensthat are backed by the base
cryptocurrency and you canfractionalize that base
cryptocurrency to proliferateyour token.
But here's this is the reasonthat we really need to get more
(43:32):
sophisticated with regulationand legislation, especially in
New Zealand is because, in thecontext of this technology of a
borderless nation, theproliferation of it will be, so
it'll just be.
It's kind of beyond viral.
(43:54):
It's almost it's like a deluge,because there are no barriers.
You can't stop it, you can'tregulate against it, so you
can't keep people safe from thatproliferation.
You can't.
It's too.
It's not contained.
(44:14):
There's nothing that cancontain it.
So this is really important,because this venture they've
just they're in the process of aproof.
Well, it's actually not proofof concept.
They're going to have productmarket fit.
They've already got proof ofconcept.
They've got working versions ofthe hardware.
The software platform works.
(44:36):
They've got a marketplace whereyou can fractionalize
commodities and exchange them onthe exchange, and they're just
about to finish their deliveringproduct market fit with their
alpha tester who have graphitemines and they have graphite in
(44:59):
those mines and that graphite.
They've developed a process forde-risking this, first and
foremost, but also forfractionalizing the graphite in
the mines and then convertingthe fractionalized graphite into
(45:19):
a digital asset, putting it onthe marketplace where it can be
traded.
And they've got a businessmodel whereby retail investors
which is like normal people canpurchase the fractionalized
ownership in the graphite andthen there's a liquidity event
(45:40):
down the track with a guaranteedyield.
Once the mine has thenleveraged the investment in
those digital assets to mine thegraphite, there's a liquidity
event down the track wherethere's a guaranteed yield.
So they're going through thisright now.
(46:07):
And why is this important?
Because the reason this isimportant is because they've
stood up and delivered productmarket fit for a blueprint and a
method with their company andtechnology for fractionalizing
landlocked commodities.
So I'm working with someone inSouth Africa right now and
(46:36):
they're the spokesperson for aconsortium over there who they
collectively have 800 billionestimated tons of coal
landlocked in the earth.
Now the value of that attoday's prices is $98 trillion
(46:58):
worth of coal $98 trillion.
So just think about that for asecond.
And so in New Zealand we have afounder who's developed a
blueprint and a method forderisking that exact process
where you can fractionalize thecoal in the earth, issue it onto
the exchange.
(47:18):
All this is already done, it'salready built and make the
fractionalized ownership in thecoal available to trade on the
exchange without ever mining thecoal.
So when you consider that thisis just one consortium who has
(47:44):
commodities landlocked oneconsortium granted, it's a
ginormous consortium.
How much other landlockedcommodities are there whose
value can be leveraged?
Now, what this does?
It creates a lever for thedormant value, for the dormant
(48:07):
wealth that exists.
Another example in New Zealandwe have a lot of outstanding
treaty claims, treaty ofWaitangi claims.
They're taking forever to getwound up in court.
They go on and on for years.
Meanwhile, the iwi, the tribes,they have programs they want to
(48:30):
execute commercially viablesocial programs to empower their
people and they're just waiting, waiting, taking forever.
Now, in a scenario like this,the iwi can fractionalize
ownership in an outstandingclaim so you can constitute the
(48:54):
entitlement to the payout, youcan constitute it in law, you
can fractionalize thatentitlement and then you can
exchange.
You can fractionalize them,issue them onto the exchange and
trade them and create liquidityfor iwi, now With a guaranteed
liquidity event once the claimis finished and reconciled, but
(49:20):
the shared risk of whether theclaim is valid.
There's a process for that.
There's a process forde-risking it.
There's a process for giving ita risk profile.
So the people who invest infractional ownership of that
outstanding claim, they know therisk up front.
But here's the thing how manyNew Zealanders just want to have
(49:41):
a hundred bucks?
They'll just buy a tokenbecause they want iwi to
reconcile this.
They want to bring unitybetween Pakeha and Maori and the
Crown, this imaginary divide,it doesn't exist.
How many New Zealanders want toreconcile this?
(50:04):
We want to bring that healing,we want to mend that rift.
You know, $1,000, $5,000.
I don't care whether the claimis valid.
I want to bring healing and Iwant to close that gap.
I want to collapse the axis oftime so we can come together in
(50:26):
unity.
You see, so understand theproliferation of dormant locked
value that comes from somethinglike this.
And now imagine that on aborderless nation network that
(50:47):
is impervious to regulation.
Now, this is part of my role.
What I do at CallahanInnovation is I'm very fortunate
I have a stand up with all theregulators Every two weeks.
We talk about things and theirremit is do not harm.
But the assumption built in tothe way they regulate is that
(51:11):
it's not possible to operateoutside regulation.
But that is the challenge thatwe face now.
Either this kind of technologyis going to come through and
proliferate on a trustlesssystem that's founded in civil
law and therefore can't isimpervious to regulation.
(51:32):
So the FMA have no power,government legislation has no
power and therefore we can'tunderwrite the transactions.
We can't create a buffer or asafety net for people.
If harm is caused, like if aproper duty of care wasn't
(51:55):
disclosed and so someone youknow, a vulnerable person,
didn't realize the risk ofpurchasing a treaty, bond or the
equivalent of.
They lost all their money.
Where's the?
Where's the compensation?
So understand, we needregulation and I am of the mind
and, trust me, a lot of peoplearen't Don't agree with me on
(52:18):
this they want to disrupt.
I'm of the mind we have to cometogether willingly and
willfully, understanding thatthe potential exists for this to
proliferate, with or withoutregulators.
But then we come togetherwillfully to sandbox this thing.
Now the liquidity it's going tounlock is profound when you
(52:42):
think of $98 trillion just fromone consortium of landlocked
coal.
Now all that liquidity is goingto flow into New Zealand.
This is a New Zealand venture.
So now consider all of the restof the dormant liquidity that
can and will be unlocked.
And these tokens are, you know,they're backed by tangible
(53:06):
value, so very important tounderstand.
We have to do this togetherbecause $98 trillion of
liquidity is going to totallydebase the value of any currency
.
So, whilst we see absoluteabundance in front of us,
there's profound consequences ofdiluting a currency to that
(53:32):
degree Profound.
But if this is the thing,regulators have to understand
this.
This is why we have to cometogether now.
The sandbox has to come now hasto, because this will happen
with or without regulation.
That is, that is the reality.
(53:53):
So borderless nations, they'regoing to be a thing, but with
regulation, it's going to be achoice that's down to a human
being.
In future, they will be able tochoose to transact under the
regulatory framework or outsideit, understanding that they bear
(54:17):
the risk of facilitatingunregulated exchange.
And here's the, you know the.
The linchpin to all of this isthat there is going to be an
aspect of civilization movingforward where there are
(54:40):
transactions that are happeninganonymously and trustlessly.
And for civilization to work infuture, we have to come to
understand and accept thereality that that level of
(55:02):
privacy is an entitlement.
It is an entitlement to a humanbeing.
It is an entitlement to a bankrobber, to a thief?
It is, it is.
It is an entitlement to everysingle human being, and the
(55:23):
platform has to be agnostic tothat, has to be agnostic to that
so we can see it, we can detectthe problem, we can see that
there is, we can see thatthere's a black market, but we
use that as to detect a symptomof something that has to happen
(55:47):
out in the real world, not onthe platform, you see, because
you cannot impinge upon thatfundamental right to privacy.
It is a right and human beingsknow it and we want it.
(56:08):
This is why we need a trustedblack box.
This is why human beings willnever be wholly trusted as
intermediaries.
That's why any system that isdependent upon a human
intermediary cannot and neverwill be wholly trusted.
Understand this, so, borderlessnations.
(56:28):
The implications are profound.
In truth, the technology thatis enabling us as we speak is
it's like a.
The best way to think of it isas it's like a nervous system.
So it's the next evolution ofAI.
If you consider AI, if youconsider a neural network, you
(56:50):
consider the evolution of thatwhere, where it's evolving Into
an oracle whereby it can ingest2D images or stacks of 2D images
and videos, interpret thatinformation and act based on its
interpretation of thatinformation.
So that's the evolution ofvision, and we know this, that
(57:12):
you know.
If you cultivate a brain in adish, in a Petri dish, the first
thing that happens is it growseyes.
So the same thing is happeningwith artificial intelligence
it's evolving to create vision,and the next evolution of that
is, of course, the nervoussystem, and we're seeing this
now emerging out in New Zealandis the capability of a nervous
(57:36):
system that then distributessovereignty to an individual
cell.
You see, and that that'sliterally how this works.
There is a.
The nervous system is, you know,the, the, the people developing
this.
They talk about it like it'smycelium with the earth, which
(57:57):
is really, to my mind, that'swhat that is.
The nervous system of the earthis the mycelium, and so in that
scenario, it's thendistributing intelligence, and
that's literally what it does.
(58:17):
So you have a hive mind and youhave sovereignty.
You have both.
The mycelium or the nervoussystem carries what's required
and it enables cells to emergethat are wholly sovereign and
(58:40):
are literally a nation untothemselves and, however, they
still are part of a singularity,of a hive mind.
And so this is the evolution ofthis, and I can tell you right
now the evolution of thisnervous system.
(59:01):
Technology has the potential tointerpret chemical reactions,
and so you know, the bigquestion is is our machines
going to be able to evolve tohave emotions?
And what I would say is basedon what I'm saying.
It seems inevitable to me now,in time In time, but it's very,
(59:26):
very clear to me that we'recoming into the elbow of a curve
and yeah, it's, it's.
It's it when this, when thecompounding impact of this
technique, technology kicks in.
It's a good.
(59:48):
I don't think we will have everseen such a rapid evolution and
advancement of technology, ever, ever.
So now is the time.
How can we, how can we bringthis technology through together
?
It is emerging in New Zealand.
How can the founders of the keycomponents of this platform
(01:00:13):
come together to absorb andassimilate each other's tech
with a unified antenna purpose?
And how can we bring, how canwe work with the regulatory
system, the regulatory framework, so that we do know how?
So that is, it is all inclusive, but the solution works for
(01:00:39):
everybody involved, and that theproliferation of this
technology and of borderlessnations Happens in a way where
harm is minimized and thatanything that is rendered
obsolete because of thisinnovation, that the value still
locked within those venturesthat are in the process of
(01:01:03):
becoming obsolete is captured,absorbed and assimilated so that
there's no waste and, of course, that the legacies of the
people who have built venturesor applied thinking to solving
problems that are going to besuperseded Are valued and
(01:01:27):
incorporated and so that nothingis lost.
That's my hope for this venture.
And so, yeah, that's the natureof a borderless nation, this is
the nature of technology andhow it's evolving, this is the
reality of how the law works,and so my hope is that you can
(01:01:49):
see where your power is, whereyour sovereignty is.
If we're all mission alignedand if we're all collaborating
to help every human being toaccomplish the next stage, the
next mission, to help them towin, then that's really how we
(01:02:12):
can align ourselves, withcooperation and collaboration
and a unified and ten of purpose.
So how can we Okay, that's itfor now for the nature of a
borderless nation and or anetwork state, talk soon.
Okay.
So this is going to be a bigone, so prepare to go down the
rabbit hole on this one.
This is a humongous vision andI want to preface it by saying
that normally I talk aboutfuturism.
However, this what I'm going toshare with you now.
(00:20):
It may seem futuristic, howeverit's, it's ready now.
This technology and thisblueprint is already here and it
has already been stood up as aproof of concept at its very
base layer, as a platform.
(00:41):
But it's important tounderstand what this technology
is going to become in future, sothat we can plan ahead and
imbue grace into the system, sothat, as it's ushered in the
disruption, it should beseamless.
It should be seamless.
(01:02):
It's profoundly innovative andit's going to catapult us
forward in many, many differentaspects of civilization.
But it's important tounderstand that you know if
something is leapfrogged, ifsome form of technology is
leapfrogged, if some industry isleapfrogged, there are people
(01:24):
actively working on projects inthat space that is being
superseded who still have validtechnology that can become part
of this.
But what we want, in an idealscenario, is to identify what
that is so we can absorb andassimilate it into this new
(01:48):
platform and carry it forward.
So this is about the nature ofa borderless nation, or what's
called a network state.
But I am going to share withyou an example of this that is
coming through now, and I'mgoing to talk through what the
(02:08):
implications of this are.
Because at the moment we've gota scenario within which it seems
as though there are governments, so we have centralized
authorities who are carrying theburden of the collective body
(02:30):
of the people prospering.
The collective will of thepeople empowers the governing
body to enact their will, andagencies are engaged to fulfill
that will through enactment.
So this is a centralizedauthority, a centralized agency,
(02:55):
and the centralized agenciesthen delegate that agency out to
other agencies.
So the agency does becomedistributed, but often only with
other government agencies.
So this is a common structure,part of a structure I'm involved
(03:16):
with with Callaghan Innovation,and so the authority that we
have, the agency that we have,is delegated to us, and so we
are the agents to enact, tofulfill the will, basically,
that's delegated to us throughan enactment.
(03:38):
That enactment is constitutedto represent the will of the
people and that the will of thepeople is entrusted to those who
we elect to represent us, torepresent our collective will,
and we vote for that.
So it's important to understandthere is a hive mind process
(04:03):
that harvests the collectivewill of we, the people, and
through the elections, wedelegate the authority to enact
our will and enactments happenand the agency to fulfill the
will is delegated.
That's how it works right now.
So, as much as we, ever as anyhuman being wants to say, oh the
(04:26):
government this and oh thegovernment that, understand that
we've made it this way, we arethe ones who've willed it into
being.
And so, very important tounderstand if you are, if you
are of the nature that believesthat it is government's duty to
(04:50):
protect and to XYZ ABC, thenyou're imbuing that authority,
that centralized authority, withthat agency, even through the
intention, even through speakingit, posting it on LinkedIn,
posting it on Facebook.
That's what you're saying, thatyou want.
You want someone else to takeon responsibility for that.
(05:12):
And so if that centralizedagency, if you want that
centralized agency to takeresponsibility for that, then
you're giving it the power tointervene.
You're saying you want it tointervene in your life.
However, most of us, or mostpeople that I know, when they're
(05:33):
speaking of the government,they are also saying they don't
want the government to intervene.
Now, you can't have both.
You can't have a centralizedauthority that you're imbuing
with the authority to intervenein your affairs, in the affairs
of the state, the nation state,and then to say that you don't
(05:58):
want it to interfere.
You can't have both.
You can't have both.
However, we do need scenarioswithin which we can have both.
So, you see, in this and thisis the hypothesis that I really
see I'm vested in holy, and thatis it's a hybrid of both
(06:25):
Centralized, distributedauthority, or you may want to
call it consolidated distributedauthority, consolidated
delegated authority.
And I often use the example ofsomeone who is completely
disabled and they can't evenspeak, but they can blink.
Now they have the ability toshare their will, but they need
(06:50):
to delegate the agency to enacttheir will, all of it, the duty
of their care.
They have to be able todelegate that.
They need to be able todelegate the duty of their care
to a trusted third party.
It has to happen.
So we need the mechanism ofdelegated agency and delegated
(07:13):
authority.
But what remains sovereign forthat human being who is disabled
?
Their will, it's immutable.
It's immutable.
You can't take that from them.
You can't take that from them.
And as long as they have thepower to share their intent and
(07:41):
to express their will.
It is my will that ABCDEF todelegate the agency for ABCDEF
to XYZ Trusted Party, so that Ican thrive in these areas of my
life, so that I can write a bookone day, through blinking to
(08:02):
someone who can translate it, sothat I can create a legacy, so
that I can find meaning in theworld, so that, but their
interpretation of what mattersmeaning is all that matters.
And so expressing your will isnot enough.
Expressing your will is notenough.
(08:23):
It is my will that ABC Okay,that's it, but the so that the
so that is how you can findmeaning in your life.
It is my will that ABC so thatDEF and the so that means that
(08:46):
you can delegate the authorityand that the enactment of your
will is in alignment with whatit means, with what meaning
means to you.
And so you know, we, a lot of us, think that we compare.
We compare the ideal scenariothat we envisage in our minds.
(09:10):
We often compare it to theConstitution of the United
States, where all, where therights are in an alienable, but
the rights are to, the rightsare to live.
I think it is a habit to pursuehappiness, something along
(09:32):
those lines, the pursuit ofhappiness, that it's happiness,
that's not, that's missing themark.
It's meaning, because offulfilling life, what the
meaning of that to me is muchdifferent than it is to you.
The pursuit of meaning for meis very, very different to you
(09:55):
and the next person and the nextperson and the next person and
so that is what we need toprotect and preserve is the
meaning, the interpretation ofour will.
So, in that scenario, this is,this is really where we want to
(10:19):
get, and the reason I'mconveying this to you first is
because in a borderless nationor a network state I'm going to
call it a borderless nation forfor the purposes of this podcast
, because it makes more sense toa human being and it's more
inclusive than it is a networkstate, which is kind of a, you
(10:42):
know, it's kind of a web three,blockchain kind of thing.
However, like with all forms oftechnology, eventually we're
going to push the technologyinto the background until it's
invisible, so that it doesn'tmatter.
So, once we understand thesefundamentals, once we understand
(11:02):
these fundamentals, we come tothe realization that, yes, we
need centralized authority, weneed trusted third parties, we
need the capability and thecapacity for a human being to
delegate the agency andsometimes they may, depending on
how incapacitated they are,they may need to delegate the
(11:25):
authority to interpret theirwill, to interpret the meaning
of their will.
But if they can interpret themeaning of their will themselves
, it is my will that ABC, sothat DEF.
The DEF means you'reinterpreting your own will.
But if you were to say it is mywill that ABC and I'm
(11:52):
delegating the authority tointerpret my will ABC to trusted
third party, and trusted thirdparty determines the, so that
and we see that with humanbeings, when they create a will,
it is my will that ABC, def,abc.
And then they trust theinterpretation to a trusted
(12:16):
third party, a lawyer, tointerpret and enact the will.
Well, to interpret the will,but also delegate the agency to
fulfill the will as well asenact it.
And so very fundamental, basicstuff.
(12:39):
Once we separate out all thesepowers and these mechanisms for
distributing authority, then youcan then create a structure
whereby the full gamut ofpossibilities are catered for.
So on that end of the spectrumyou've got a completely disabled
(13:00):
human being, almost whollyincapacitated, but because they
can blink and therefore useMorse code to communicate, they
do have the power to expresstheir intent, to interpret the
meaning and to delegate agency.
(13:23):
And now this is where.
So I want to just go a stepfurther than this, because if we
can go a step further than this, then we can.
You know those of you that knowme that I'm very staunch on
nobody gets left behind.
(13:44):
Nobody gets left behind, andit's one of the bugbears that I
have with web 3 and blockchainis that it's leaving most people
behind, so it's not an allencompassing solution and
everyone, everybody knows thatpeople are trying to solve the
onboarding issues, to solve thatproblem and for credit, and
this is kind of what's bringingus to this point now, where the
(14:06):
technology that I'm going totalk about soon becomes relevant
and is actually rising to thesurface because of this pressing
to solve the problems ofonboarding, so that inclusivity
is the default.
So if we go a step further thansomeone who's completely
disabled and who is in a whollyvegetative state they cannot
(14:32):
blink, move so the power forthem to delegate their agency we
know they don't have that.
So do they have the power toenact their will?
No.
Do they have the power tointerpret their will?
No.
And do they have the power toexpress their intent to express
(14:57):
their will?
It is my will that, no, theydon't.
So what do we do in thisscenario?
What do we do?
And this is the fundamental,this is the, this is the fulcrum
of all progress that we need tomake if we to build a
(15:19):
civilization on top of.
This is the kernel, is theabsolute fulcrum, fundamental
principle that is the mostimportant pillar of any
civilization we build.
From this moment on, this isthe fundamental, the crux of the
matter.
So what is the crux of thematter?
(15:41):
That if we want, if this personis to live any kind of
fulfilling life, then we need,we have to intervene on their
behalf, and so we have to makeassumptions, you see, so we have
to, we have to assume absolutepower, we have to embody
(16:12):
dictatorship.
Understand this, understandthis Dictatorship is a valid
aspect of civilization.
It's a valid aspect ofcivilization, and this is why
reality is mirroring to us thatdictatorship exists.
(16:33):
Now we like to see in a blindeye.
We're all fully aware of thenations on the planet who have
varying degrees of dictatorship.
We frown upon them for obviousreasons, and valid reasons, of
course.
So we're aware, everything innature is valid, everything in
(16:53):
nature is valid.
And so, in this scenario, wewillfully deploy a dictatorship,
a benevolent dictatorship,benevolent dictatorship.
And so how do we apply this?
(17:13):
So we look at the scenario andwe say all of the powers need to
be, we need to dictate, we needto dominate and control this
human being, holy, holy.
Every aspect of its care needsto be the responsibility of a
(17:40):
benevolent, trusted third party.
And so we have to makeassumptions, and so we look at
the mechanism that we have now,where we have the expression of
intent.
The expression of intent, then,which is how we share our will
(18:01):
it is my will, that ABC.
Then we have the interpretationof that will, which means that,
and then we have the enactmentof the will, and that is the
fulfillment of the will.
So, imbued into this, thefundamental principle of the
system, the de facto standard asit is now, is the assumption
(18:25):
that meaning, meaning is thefundamental principle, that's
the unified intent of purpose ofevery human being, that's the
core pillar.
And, in truth, if we apply thisat every level, at spiritual
(18:47):
level, mental level, scientific,logical and even at an
emotional level, meaningtranscends all of these things,
because what life means, whatmeaning means to me is, it's
(19:08):
different from everyone.
So for me to live a life ofmeaning, it means that ABC.
For you to live a life ofmeaning, it means that DEF.
And so what is the thing thattranscends everything?
(19:30):
That is?
That is wholly ubiquitous.
It's wholly ubiquitous.
What is the dependency that wehave on meaning being possible?
So, and this is where what I'mposing is the fundamental
(19:51):
principle Upon which we canbuild a civilization, upon which
we can set standards for thedevelopment of AI, that we can
embody and embrace as thefundamental principle for
(20:13):
civilization, and that is fromwhere they are now.
From where they are now, ourunified intent of purpose is to
take them from where they arenow, is to enable them to
(20:33):
accomplish the mission of beingcapable of expressing their
intent.
It is my will to ABC, so that X, y, z that's how devoted we are
as a civilization, that we'regoing to meet you where you are
(20:59):
now and we're going to puteverything that we can and to
enabling you to accomplish thatmission, and we're going to
accomplish that mission together.
A shared mission, and winning,winning means to us that you've
(21:25):
gained the agency to expressyour will.
You see, and those of you thatknow me, or especially those
that work with me know that I'mvery, very devoted to
mission-led, mission-driven waysof developing a strategy, so I
(21:49):
always break it down into what'sthe mission, what is the
critical path, and it's alwaysbased on the accomplishment of a
mission, and so this isubiquitous.
You can apply it to absolutelyanyone.
And so, if you think aboutinnovation as innovators, what
are we wholly devoted to?
(22:10):
We're devoted to theaccomplishment of a mission for
every human being, whether it'sgetting to Mars, whether it's
getting to the moon, whetherit's being able to express your
will, to share your intent.
Then that's where we focus anddirect innovation, and there are
(22:34):
a number of innovations I canthink of right now that have the
power to take someone who is ina vegetative state from where
they are now, so we can meetthem where they are now and we
can accomplish a shared missionfor them to be able to express
their intent, express their will.
(22:55):
This is true empowerment, and Italk about this in a group that
I'm a part of.
It's kind of like a think tank,and I've talked recently about
this opening and closing ofopportunities.
(23:16):
So when you have an infinitearray of opportunities, there's
no reason to make a choice, andso it can have the tendency to
create inertia, and so nature'sway is to constrain
possibilities.
So if you imagine the wallsclosing in, the opportunities
(23:38):
becoming less and less and less,the pressure is increasing,
more and more, less and lesspossibilities are available.
Now, if inertia still exists,then nature constrains those
possibilities until there's onlyone choice, you see.
And then that so they're leftwith one choice and they're like
(24:01):
shit.
So they make that choice andthen motion happens.
So this is the nature of nature, and so in this scenario, we
want to imbue this method.
We need to constrainpossibilities, we need to create
(24:25):
pressure, and this is thebeauty of time, and what a
mission-led and mission-drivenapproach does is it takes
something that's nebulous andmakes it linear and gives you
the capability and the capacityto constrain it to time so that
(24:48):
you can actually accomplish thatmission.
So I want to it's going to makesense why I've shared that to
preface the next part of thispodcast.
So we're in agreement.
As civilization, we're whollyvested in this as a blueprint
(25:11):
for the new blueprint ofcivilization.
So now I'm going to talk abouttechnology and a network nation
or a borderless nation.
So it's quite simpleconceptually, if you consider
that a country right now isconstrained to a fixed point in
(25:36):
space, so it's landlocked.
So my country is.
It's pinned to the land andthat's immutable.
New Zealand, australia, isAustralia and if we are to, new
Zealand is an island.
But if we want to increase ourborders, if we want to grow and
(25:58):
make our borders bigger, then wehave to go and invade Australia
, which is obviously never goingto happen.
There's no reason for us to dothat.
We're extremely, we're veryrich in resource.
However, we do have some kindof crippling dependencies that
(26:22):
we formed out of a desire tocontinually evolve and expand
and become more.
That really do need to beunraveled.
However, fundamentally, if wewant to expand as a nation, then
we have to grow our borders.
We have to proliferate lifewithin those borders, of course.
(26:42):
But the nation of New Zealandis the land.
We consider it to be, the land.
It's landlocked.
So a borderless nation isbasically a nation where the
will of the people has beenimbued into, let's say, a piece
(27:03):
of technology, and we talk abouta black box quite often.
Now, a black box there areactually a few different
interpretations of this, so I'llshare the interpretation I'm
meaning.
A black box is something that'sgot a bunch of technology
inside it that no one can seeand that no one understands.
(27:24):
So it could be an AI model, itcould be a stack of technology,
it could just be a bunch of data, could be structured data,
could be unstructured data.
Nonetheless, what's inside theblack box is not visible to
anybody other than thetechnology that's governing it.
(27:47):
And so, in that scenario, thetechnology exists now whereby we
can.
It's so good that we can trustit.
We can trust the black box withdelegating our authority to it.
(28:11):
So let's say I'm completelydisabled and let's say I've been
on a mission this human beinghas been working with, let's say
, callahan Innovation, theInnovation Agency, to help them
to express their will.
Let's say they've accomplishedthat mission and so now they're
(28:32):
blinking.
They couldn't blink before.
We've got an alternative toblinking whereby we've mapped
their electromagnetic field andthe fluctuations in the
electromagnetic magnetic field,and we've figured out that they
can use their emotions as analternative to a sense of Morse
code.
We can map it so they cancommunicate now.
(28:55):
So now they can express theirwill, they can delegate their
authority, and now they say thatthey don't trust human beings
to interpret their will or toenact it, but they do trust a
black box because it's a system,a piece of technology that is
(29:19):
devoid of human intervention,that is wholly autonomous.
So it's rendered humans humansobsolete as intermediaries.
It's got an AI model in it andthat AI model is empowered as
(29:39):
the spokesperson to speak onbehalf of or to express what's
in the trusted black box.
And so, in that scenario, we'venow got the ability for the
disabled person to communicate.
(30:03):
We can capture the data in astructured or an unstructured
way inside the black box, andwe've empowered an unbiased
language model to interpret themeaning of that data.
You see, so now you've got aspokesperson on their behalf.
So now this person can speakusing their emotions, and it's
(30:28):
unbiased because it's drawingfrom the information in the
black box.
That black box we know it's notbeing tampered with, it's in
the data is unstructured.
So even if a human being wentin there, would it mean anything
?
And so now this person canutilize an avatar to communicate
(30:52):
and empower them to speak ontheir behalf.
And here's this is wheretechnology is taking us With a
borderless nation, what aborderless nation basically
means.
We can develop a black box, atrusted black box.
(31:14):
We can make it immutable, andthis black box can contain the
constitution of one human being,multiple human beings, and it
can have rules and it can havean AI avatar that speaks on
behalf of the unified intent ofthe human beings involved, if
(31:40):
they want that, if they trust anAI avatar, some people will
have a human being as thespokesperson, you see, because
they trust a human being morethan they trust an AI avatar.
But lots and lots of peopledon't would trust an unbiased
piece of technology to speak ontheir behalf.
You see, so this is the natureof a borderless nation is the
(32:07):
nation is borderless, trulyborderless, because the black
box contains the shared intentof the people and that becomes
the nation.
So now I want to zoom out ofthat for one second, zoom out of
(32:30):
that.
And now let's see, assume theproliferation of the black boxes
.
So it's kind of like a what Iimagine in my mind.
It's kind of like imagine afireworks display, there's a
rocket, the rocket shoots upinto space, then it explodes and
(32:53):
proliferates, and so now youimagine that and the
proliferation of the black boxes.
It's kind of like it flowers,and so connected to those black
boxes you have avatars, humanbeings, combinations of both,
(33:15):
and each black box is a nationunto itself.
It's borderless because it'sdigital, but it's sovereign.
So the only constraint to itbecoming a nation unto itself is
the ability to transact andinteract between human beings
(33:39):
who are bonded, unified inintent, by that trusted black
box, and they can exchangewithout borders.
So that technology exists rightnow.
That technology exists rightnow and it's emerging through
New Zealand.
In fact, there's a profoundtechnology that is emerging
(34:02):
through New Zealand.
I won't speak about it freelyjust yet because there are
people who have entrusted me tobe discreet, who are developing
what I perceive as keycomponents of it.
But let's call it for want of abetter phrase, let's call it a
(34:27):
borderless nation in a box.
So you know, subscribe for ablueprint for borderless nation
and you've got a borderlessnation.
But ultimately it's theunderlying stack that enables
(34:48):
the borderless nation to existand proliferate.
That's profound.
In that scenario, you have allof these borderless nations, the
nations unto themselves.
They now have the power tointeract with each other.
Those interactions areverifiable and therefore the
(35:13):
verification is contained withinits own tiny black box.
We know that black box istrusted because it's immutable
and you have a trustless system.
You have a wholly trustlesssystem.
Now, over time, when youinteract with a human being, as
(35:36):
long as you've got a mechanismwhereby their risk profile so
they have a risk score attachedto them that that fluctuates
over time, so that a human beingunderstands the potential risk
of engaging with another avatarIf it's speaking on behalf of
another human being or anotherhuman being, then you can
(36:02):
determine for yourself whetherit's the risk versus the reward
of interacting with that humanbeing.
Now, in this scenario, thetechnology for this is
ubiquitous, because you can haveyour own constitution, you can
have your own economic structure, you can have your own rules,
(36:25):
you can have your own laws.
One person's laws and rulesmake sense to them.
Sorry, one nation, their lawsand rules, their interpretation
of what it means to be a nation,a borderless nation, is valid
to them and another nation isvalid to them.
They can form their owneconomic structure, they can
(36:47):
incentivise their own we call ittokenomics in W3, their own
economic system.
Now, but the beauty of theseborderless nations is that they
can interact with the formaleconomy.
They can interact with theformal economy and the reason
(37:10):
for this is because when youhave a borderless, when you have
a container, let's say, you'vedelegated the authority to
express your will, to expressyour intent to a piece of
technology, and that piece oftechnology is under the
(37:31):
stewardship of a trustrefoundation that is constituted
in civil law or common law.
Even Then, all of thoseinteractions, the expression of
your will, the expression ofyour intent, it happens outside
of statute, it happens outsideof statute, so it's all based on
(37:55):
the word.
Your word is, your bond, yourwill is stands above everything.
So you have that as the basefoundation of all of these
interactions.
And then the layer on top isempowered by the unified intent
(38:16):
of the trusted black box.
Or if you want to be a nationunto yourself, which every human
being will be as well, ofcourse, you can bond to the
formal economy through you,through the agency that you have
(38:36):
as a legal person.
You see.
So underneath, the interactionor the expression of intent
happens in common law or civillaw.
Let's say, if the foundationsare constituted in Switzerland,
and then by expressing your will, you empower the agency to
(38:58):
enact your will or to act onyour behalf.
You bond that to your legalperson, and that's the legal
entity represented by yourdriver's license, by your
passport, but that can berevoked at any time, so you can
give yourself the agency tocarry forward your will.
(39:19):
If you have the capability toenact your will, to delegate
your authority, to delegate youragency, or if you're disabled
and you can express your will,then you can empower another
agent to enact your will Atrusted third party, a trusted
(39:43):
black box, another human being,and then that person operates in
the formal economy as it is now, using fiat currency, using
web3, using crypto currency orwhatever you want.
Now this means that anycontract or bond you have in the
(40:10):
formal economy, it standsbeneath your sovereignty.
You see, it stands beneath it,not above.
Now the challenges we have isin the formal economy and in the
formal legal system.
We say things like you know, wecreate a contract and it says
(40:32):
you have to sign to say that youunderstand Well that in legal
terms, you're willingly choosingto stand under that contract.
That's the reason that itexists, because, by default, you
actually stand above it.
So it's important to understandthese things.
But ultimately, as long as yourealise and you understand the
(40:56):
power of your will and yourintent, you can revoke that
authority at will withoutquestion.
You just have to know that youactually have that power rather
than accidentally, you know,assuming that you stand under it
, but you can revoke thatauthority at any time.
(41:16):
So it's just a matter of timebefore this information
proliferates anyway, and italready is.
Hence why nation states nowexists and are proliferating
behind the scenes.
So in this scenario, it's very,very important now.
(41:37):
But because this technologyexists and this is part of the
reason I'm with a governmentagency now is because I am
really concerned about thedisruption of this technology,
and I'll give you an example.
So I'm working with a founder.
They've developed a profoundpiece of technology.
(41:58):
They've developed a nativeblockchain.
This native blockchain is basedon electricity, so they've
built a solar array, so a pieceof hardware that connects to
Starlink for redundancy.
It harvests energy from the sun, stores that energy and breaks
(42:21):
the electricity down into unitsthat can be measured, and those
units are then used to back anative cryptocurrency.
That value is it reserves is acommodity, which is electricity.
So if you bond these solararrays together, these solar
(42:46):
nodes, you obviously have awireless grid and you're
creating a cryptocurrency thatderives its value based on the
price of electricity, which is,you know, it's like creating a
reserve currency out of thin air.
When you think about it, thathas value Now because it's a
(43:09):
layer one cryptocurrency.
You can create layer two tokensthat are backed by the base
cryptocurrency and you canfractionalize that base
cryptocurrency to proliferateyour token.
But here's this is the reasonthat we really need to get more
(43:32):
sophisticated with regulationand legislation, especially in
New Zealand is because, in thecontext of this technology of a
borderless nation, theproliferation of it will be, so
it'll just be.
It's kind of beyond viral.
(43:54):
It's almost it's like a deluge,because there are no barriers.
You can't stop it, you can'tregulate against it, so you
can't keep people safe from thatproliferation.
You can't.
It's too.
It's not contained.
(44:14):
There's nothing that cancontain it.
So this is really important,because this venture they've
just they're in the process of aproof.
Well, it's actually not proofof concept.
They're going to have productmarket fit.
They've already got proof ofconcept.
They've got working versions ofthe hardware.
The software platform works.
(44:36):
They've got a marketplace whereyou can fractionalize
commodities and exchange them onthe exchange, and they're just
about to finish their deliveringproduct market fit with their
alpha tester who have graphitemines and they have graphite in
(44:59):
those mines and that graphite.
They've developed a process forde-risking this, first and
foremost, but also forfractionalizing the graphite in
the mines and then convertingthe fractionalized graphite into
(45:19):
a digital asset, putting it onthe marketplace where it can be
traded.
And they've got a businessmodel whereby retail investors
which is like normal people canpurchase the fractionalized
ownership in the graphite andthen there's a liquidity event
(45:40):
down the track with a guaranteedyield.
Once the mine has thenleveraged the investment in
those digital assets to mine thegraphite, there's a liquidity
event down the track wherethere's a guaranteed yield.
So they're going through thisright now.
(46:07):
And why is this important?
Because the reason this isimportant is because they've
stood up and delivered productmarket fit for a blueprint and a
method with their company andtechnology for fractionalizing
landlocked commodities.
So I'm working with someone inSouth Africa right now and
(46:36):
they're the spokesperson for aconsortium over there who they
collectively have 800 billionestimated tons of coal
landlocked in the earth.
Now the value of that attoday's prices is $98 trillion
(46:58):
worth of coal $98 trillion.
So just think about that for asecond.
And so in New Zealand we have afounder who's developed a
blueprint and a method forderisking that exact process
where you can fractionalize thecoal in the earth, issue it onto
the exchange.
(47:18):
All this is already done, it'salready built and make the
fractionalized ownership in thecoal available to trade on the
exchange without ever mining thecoal.
So when you consider that thisis just one consortium who has
(47:44):
commodities landlocked oneconsortium granted, it's a
ginormous consortium.
How much other landlockedcommodities are there whose
value can be leveraged?
Now, what this does?
It creates a lever for thedormant value, for the dormant
(48:07):
wealth that exists.
Another example in New Zealandwe have a lot of outstanding
treaty claims, treaty ofWaitangi claims.
They're taking forever to getwound up in court.
They go on and on for years.
Meanwhile, the iwi, the tribes,they have programs they want to
(48:30):
execute commercially viablesocial programs to empower their
people and they're just waiting, waiting, taking forever.
Now, in a scenario like this,the iwi can fractionalize
ownership in an outstandingclaim so you can constitute the
(48:54):
entitlement to the payout, youcan constitute it in law, you
can fractionalize thatentitlement and then you can
exchange.
You can fractionalize them,issue them onto the exchange and
trade them and create liquidityfor iwi, now With a guaranteed
liquidity event once the claimis finished and reconciled, but
(49:20):
the shared risk of whether theclaim is valid.
There's a process for that.
There's a process forde-risking it.
There's a process for giving ita risk profile.
So the people who invest infractional ownership of that
outstanding claim, they know therisk up front.
But here's the thing how manyNew Zealanders just want to have
(49:41):
a hundred bucks?
They'll just buy a tokenbecause they want iwi to
reconcile this.
They want to bring unitybetween Pakeha and Maori and the
Crown, this imaginary divide,it doesn't exist.
How many New Zealanders want toreconcile this?
(50:04):
We want to bring that healing,we want to mend that rift.
You know, $1,000, $5,000.
I don't care whether the claimis valid.
I want to bring healing and Iwant to close that gap.
I want to collapse the axis oftime so we can come together in
(50:26):
unity.
You see, so understand theproliferation of dormant locked
value that comes from somethinglike this.
And now imagine that on aborderless nation network that
(50:47):
is impervious to regulation.
Now, this is part of my role.
What I do at CallahanInnovation is I'm very fortunate
I have a stand up with all theregulators Every two weeks.
We talk about things and theirremit is do not harm.
But the assumption built in tothe way they regulate is that
(51:11):
it's not possible to operateoutside regulation.
But that is the challenge thatwe face now.
Either this kind of technologyis going to come through and
proliferate on a trustlesssystem that's founded in civil
law and therefore can't isimpervious to regulation.
(51:32):
So the FMA have no power,government legislation has no
power and therefore we can'tunderwrite the transactions.
We can't create a buffer or asafety net for people.
If harm is caused, like if aproper duty of care wasn't
(51:55):
disclosed and so someone youknow, a vulnerable person,
didn't realize the risk ofpurchasing a treaty, bond or the
equivalent of.
They lost all their money.
Where's the?
Where's the compensation?
So understand, we needregulation and I am of the mind
and, trust me, a lot of peoplearen't Don't agree with me on
(52:18):
this they want to disrupt.
I'm of the mind we have to cometogether willingly and
willfully, understanding thatthe potential exists for this to
proliferate, with or withoutregulators.
But then we come togetherwillfully to sandbox this thing.
Now the liquidity it's going tounlock is profound when you
(52:42):
think of $98 trillion just fromone consortium of landlocked
coal.
Now all that liquidity is goingto flow into New Zealand.
This is a New Zealand venture.
So now consider all of the restof the dormant liquidity that
can and will be unlocked.
And these tokens are, you know,they're backed by tangible
(53:06):
value, so very important tounderstand.
We have to do this togetherbecause $98 trillion of
liquidity is going to totallydebase the value of any currency
.
So, whilst we see absoluteabundance in front of us,
there's profound consequences ofdiluting a currency to that
(53:32):
degree Profound.
But if this is the thing,regulators have to understand
this.
This is why we have to cometogether now.
The sandbox has to come now hasto, because this will happen
with or without regulation.
That is, that is the reality.
(53:53):
So borderless nations, they'regoing to be a thing, but with
regulation, it's going to be achoice that's down to a human
being.
In future, they will be able tochoose to transact under the
regulatory framework or outsideit, understanding that they bear
(54:17):
the risk of facilitatingunregulated exchange.
And here's the, you know the.
The linchpin to all of this isthat there is going to be an
aspect of civilization movingforward where there are
(54:40):
transactions that are happeninganonymously and trustlessly.
And for civilization to work infuture, we have to come to
understand and accept thereality that that level of
(55:02):
privacy is an entitlement.
It is an entitlement to a humanbeing.
It is an entitlement to a bankrobber, to a thief?
It is, it is.
It is an entitlement to everysingle human being, and the
(55:23):
platform has to be agnostic tothat, has to be agnostic to that
so we can see it, we can detectthe problem, we can see that
there is, we can see thatthere's a black market, but we
use that as to detect a symptomof something that has to happen
(55:47):
out in the real world, not onthe platform, you see, because
you cannot impinge upon thatfundamental right to privacy.
It is a right and human beingsknow it and we want it.
(56:08):
This is why we need a trustedblack box.
This is why human beings willnever be wholly trusted as
intermediaries.
That's why any system that isdependent upon a human
intermediary cannot and neverwill be wholly trusted.
Understand this, so, borderlessnations.
(56:28):
The implications are profound.
In truth, the technology thatis enabling us as we speak is
it's like a.
The best way to think of it isas it's like a nervous system.
So it's the next evolution ofAI.
If you consider AI, if youconsider a neural network, you
(56:50):
consider the evolution of thatwhere, where it's evolving Into
an oracle whereby it can ingest2D images or stacks of 2D images
and videos, interpret thatinformation and act based on its
interpretation of thatinformation.
So that's the evolution ofvision, and we know this, that
(57:12):
you know.
If you cultivate a brain in adish, in a Petri dish, the first
thing that happens is it growseyes.
So the same thing is happeningwith artificial intelligence
it's evolving to create vision,and the next evolution of that
is, of course, the nervoussystem, and we're seeing this
now emerging out in New Zealandis the capability of a nervous
(57:36):
system that then distributessovereignty to an individual
cell.
You see, and that that'sliterally how this works.
There is a.
The nervous system is, you know,the, the, the people developing
this.
They talk about it like it'smycelium with the earth, which
(57:57):
is really, to my mind, that'swhat that is.
The nervous system of the earthis the mycelium, and so in that
scenario, it's thendistributing intelligence, and
that's literally what it does.
(58:17):
So you have a hive mind and youhave sovereignty.
You have both.
The mycelium or the nervoussystem carries what's required
and it enables cells to emergethat are wholly sovereign and
(58:40):
are literally a nation untothemselves and, however, they
still are part of a singularity,of a hive mind.
And so this is the evolution ofthis, and I can tell you right
now the evolution of thisnervous system.
(59:01):
Technology has the potential tointerpret chemical reactions,
and so you know, the bigquestion is is our machines
going to be able to evolve tohave emotions?
And what I would say is basedon what I'm saying.
It seems inevitable to me now,in time In time, but it's very,
(59:26):
very clear to me that we'recoming into the elbow of a curve
and yeah, it's, it's.
It's it when this, when thecompounding impact of this
technique, technology kicks in.
It's a good.
(59:48):
I don't think we will have everseen such a rapid evolution and
advancement of technology, ever, ever.
So now is the time.
How can we, how can we bringthis technology through together
?
It is emerging in New Zealand.
How can the founders of the keycomponents of this platform
(01:00:13):
come together to absorb andassimilate each other's tech
with a unified antenna purpose?
And how can we bring, how canwe work with the regulatory
system, the regulatory framework, so that we do know how?
So that is, it is all inclusive, but the solution works for
(01:00:39):
everybody involved, and that theproliferation of this
technology and of borderlessnations Happens in a way where
harm is minimized and thatanything that is rendered
obsolete because of thisinnovation, that the value still
locked within those venturesthat are in the process of
(01:01:03):
becoming obsolete is captured,absorbed and assimilated so that
there's no waste and, of course, that the legacies of the
people who have built venturesor applied thinking to solving
problems that are going to besuperseded Are valued and
(01:01:27):
incorporated and so that nothingis lost.
That's my hope for this venture.
And so, yeah, that's the natureof a borderless nation, this is
the nature of technology andhow it's evolving, this is the
reality of how the law works,and so my hope is that you can
(01:01:49):
see where your power is, whereyour sovereignty is.
If we're all mission alignedand if we're all collaborating
to help every human being toaccomplish the next stage, the
next mission, to help them towin, then that's really how we
(01:02:12):
can align ourselves, withcooperation and collaboration
and a unified and ten of purpose.
So how can we Okay, that's itfor now for the nature of a
borderless nation and or anetwork state, talk soon.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.