The Wearable QR Code

Tiered-membership access to random people.

The QR code be present overtly or covertly or in-between:

  • Big and bold on your t-shirt – along with the brand name of the app
  • Subtle on your t-shirt, like a logo in the upper corner
  • A card in your wallet/purse/bag
  • Tattooed on your thigh

The QR code will take you to a website to sign up, or to the app if it is already installed. Sign up needs to be very quick and easy. Compliance aspects can be done later.

When someone uses the app to connect with you, they get the opportunity to see your About, and to Follow you on the socials. Also previews to any paid content. If they are new to the app, these are pending until you complete registration.

They can also apply to get greater levels of access. Like your email, friend you on Socials, your OnlyFans, your phone number.

The recipient of the requests gets the time and location where you met, and optionally a selfie taken at that time of the two of you. Possibly, requests are ignored unless a photo with you in it, time and geo-stamped with where you were, is included.

The Why: this has been attempted many times before, the meet and connect app. It has never taken off because it needs the momentum of everyone having the app installed first.

The Name: It needs to emphasise how quick and easy it is to connect. Something like Quix. Or EzyMeet. Quix.io is available.

Limit the Size of Social Networks

Wearing my other hat I am a big advocate of customer-owned businesses over at Unism

Facebook has done studies asking users if they would pay for an ad free service.

Globally Facebook makes less that $10 per user annually. So I expect they would charge the same or less as streaming services like Spotify. I think a large percentage of users are so hooked they would happily pay…

…So when we say no social network can have more than 30% of the population as users, the only way they (FB) can limit the numbers is by increasing the cost of participating.

Such a rule will decrease the power the social networks have over free speech, increase competition, make people feel more proud of how they made a choice, and increase the chances of customer-owned services.

NEGATIVE: It will become unlikely that everyone you wish to socialise with online are on the same platform.

BUT: There is nothing stopping a service existing that can control all of your social networks and contacts and aggregate everything. And then we become more service agnostic.

Forced Transience

There are two very clear, recent trends;

  1. Work from home
  2. Fewer physical possessions

Combine these with a pandemic and anti-vaxxers, and we can order all of those people to move to the same city and infect each other.

Literally, WFH people can be ordered to live somewhere if they have unacceptable ideas, that aren’t quite illegal, but putting them all in the same place makes sense.

The Rights of Stupid People

Rightfully so, many formerly marginalised and discriminated against people now have laws and movements to give them equality. Most prominent in recent times has been support for the rights of gay and transgendered people.

Along with such progresses has been laws and/or public shame addresses words that can be used in hateful ways. I don’t need to mention them, you know the words you cannot and should not say.

One that was common when I was a kid, and is totally forbidden today, is retard – even though that word became a common way of not saying offensive words like “moron”, “idiot”, “cretin” and “imbecile”.

Now we are meant to say disabled, or some version of that. Which is all fine, I’m disputing this at all. I am a futurist, and so I am wondering what happens next.

Intelligence is a spectrum, and it is a luck of the draw (plus genetics) that decides where each of us are on that spectrum, from genius to mentally disabled.

I think next up will be the removal of the word stupid. And the word crazy. Both are used casually to describe not just people but also situations and activities. That was a stupid decision, based on a crazy idea. When stupid or crazy people hear such words, even when not directed at them, it is hurtful.

Instead we will say that was an unwise decision, based on a misguided idea.

Expect this before 2030, and happening this or next year wouldn’t surprise me at all.

Reducing Conspiracy Theories with Truth Panels

As we have seen with 5G and COVID, conspiracy theories are running rampant in society, and now they are directly causing vandalism, civil disobedience, a few murders and making it much harder to stem the pandemic.

  • We can’t stop social media
  • We can’t remove freedom of speech
  • Conspiracy folk don’t trust/believe what governments say

It will most likely get worse. In a nutshell, people who lack importance, usefulness or acknowledgement in their lives have found something where they can feel correct and important, no matter how crazy that thing may be.

It doesn’t help that, while decades ago research meant hours in a library, today it means I saw some random YouTube video…

We have fact checkers out there… but they don’t change the minds of those who spread rumours and lies. Those people will say you can’t trust Mainstream Media (thanks, Trump, you selfish idiot) and that Snopes is owned by [insert evil billionaire here].

Truth Panel

Find a selection of people, from all walks of life and demographics, who aren’t stupid. The more the merrier – 100 would be perfect, good for percentages.

The initial panel will be decided by 5 founding panel members who are behind the idea – these need to be highly-respected people! After the first year, nominations and online votes can be made in the future to decide who is on the panel.

They cannot be

  • politicians or have any political allegiance beyond simple membership
  • business people, unless they only operate in one clearly defined industry
  • influenced by another country
  • closely related to, or connected with, the above

Ideally they are well-respected in the community, the sorts of people who get honours from the Queen. Many should be actors, musicians or sports people. There needs to be good amounts of medical and scientific and education people. Surgeons, inventors and professors.

They are unpaid.

For the most worrisome conspiracy theories, so perhaps just 2-3 per years, the panel convenes to receive submissions. Anyone in the country is encouraged to submit, and this needs to be well publicised. However there must be barriers, so that effort is required. All claims made in a submission need references (they can refer to any source, even YouTube, but must have a reference). Submissions cannot be anonymous. The panel might have questions for those who make submissions.

After reading submissions, attending debates, and having meetings, the panel will make a conclusion. Typically it would be like this:

82% say the claim is false
8% say it is false, except for some aspect
5% say it is true except for some aspect
3% had a conflict of interest and could not participate
2% say the claim is true

Each panel member writes a paragraph or two in their own words to sum up their findings.

Funding

Funding should be from the government, mainstream media, business councils, unions – anyone who can add some cash. It doesn’t matter who it is, because the panel are unpaid. We just need a broad mix of funding from across society.

Publicity

Unions, charities, political movements can all publicise directly to their members at no cost. MSM can provide some free advertising. State broadcasters can host debates.

Why it will work

Anywhere rumours and lies are spread, they can be countered by a mention of or link to the Truth Panel decision. The panel is, by design, hard to deny. People won’t be able to find reasons for not trusting them. It will be an easy way to shut people up.

Note: countering rumours was important during World War 2

Find/Found – A Fun Dating App?

With this app, there are very few settings. You can choose the demographics of the type of person you seek. And you allow Location.

Oh, and you choose if you want to find someone, or be found.

To be found, just turn on the app whenever you wish.

To find, turn on the app, it has a map. No, it doesn’t. It gives you two numbers – the total of people in your chosen demographic who wish to be found, who are within 1,000 metres, and 50 metres.

That’s it. You won’t know who they are or precisely where they are. If it is a crowded 50 metres, it could be anyone. If it is a forest, it might be just that one person over there.

Purpose: facilitates and adds mystery and adventure
Price: zero

Cute Park Wardens

Could apply to other public spaces…

Going forward, social distancing in parks might be something we feel should be policed.

What if it could be done in a cute and friendly manner?

Maybe tell people off for smoking, drinking or not picking up dog poop…

A robot animal that is Hello Kitty level cute. If social groups are too close to each other, it trundles over and gently nudges them in the direction of away from each other.

When it sees an infraction, it comes over and just shakes its head and softly says nuh-ah!

Simply being targeted by the cure creature will be enough for most people to conform. Otherwise, of course, community cops will turn up sooner or later.

It would work in tandem with overhead cameras and AI.

Bedroom Cams for Rape Evidence

blurry

Rape is a serious issue, around the world. Rapes are under-reported because of beliefs that justice won’t be served, and having to relive the ordeal in public testimony. And that stems from the difficulty of proving a crime when it is one person’s word against the other’s.

Video footage would solve that issue. And any other forms of domestic violence.

I presume most rapes occur in private residences. We could force people to have “rape cams” in every room of their home. A black box type device that uploads data to the cloud and cannot be turned off. Data is stored for 1 week only, and is impossible to access without a court order.

Furthermore, and this is the key, the footage is not of a good resolution. It is not of a good enough resolution to make out faces or private parts clearly. It will be of no interest to voyeurs or perverts or sex sites. The sound will be of good quality, and a high res camera at all property entrances will show who arrived, and left, and when.

A basic video monitor can be provided to give reassurance to occupants that the video is indeed blurry.

I would like to think that blurry video, and good sound, are enough to reasonably determine if anything that occurs is consensual or not, and violent or not.

 

Difficulty Factor of Cooking

Idea: recipes have a difficulty score that is based on science and we all know our level

We love scoring and rating things.

All I have seen from recipes is preparation time and easy/harder.

I propose a 10-point scale set using rules set by cooking experts.

How hard is it to cook this well enough to (relatively) please 80% of eaters? People who typically like everything has their vote discounted, and vice versa…

Factors include timing, cutting skills, number of operations/ingredients, assembly, multi-tasking…

Anything microwaved is 1

Toast is 1.5, if the setting has been worked out

A roast dinner would be 2

A salad 3

A sandwich 4

A soup 5

A pasta dish 6

A pizza 7

A steak is 8

Then use AI to read a recipe and work out how long it takes. 10 point scores for difficulty, hours and minutes for time.

If I know my skill level of 1-10, and the time I have in hand, I can choose a recipe.

The difficulty score methodology is secret. First mover advantage and the “secret” keep it as the standard trusted score.

A souffle is 9

Anything not already done is a 10

A Social Platform Based on Trust

With the rise of fake news and deep fake videos, Verified Accounts are the future.

Add to this a layer where verified people/companies can acknowledge news stories as being factual.

While also allowing unverified stories to be shared. Every post will be tagged one of these:

  • fun
  • factual
  • verified
  • opinion
  • unsure

Accounts that get repeatedly reported for hate or lies will be investigated. They will be offered their own parallel channel to exist in.

But – What About The Other Thing?

It is one thing to offer up official information, but how can you disprove content that depicts you unofficially?

For example, well-known Australian gameshow host Andrew O’Keefe:

Now I’ve done the same thing in the same place… but I’m not famous.

If that was faked, there is only one way to refute it –  a drone that constantly films you when you are in public, time-stamped and verified by a trusted 3rd party.