David Ding: Regeneration
David Ding's podcast, documenting the revelations he had while awakeing to unity consciousness and holographic awareness.
For written summaries of each episode check out David's substack:
https://daviddingnz.substack.com
David Ding: Regeneration
The Nature of Deferral
What does it truly mean to be sovereign in the digital age, and how can we navigate trustless transactions without sacrificing our freedom? Join me as I explore the implications of deferring authority within the realm of digital transactions. Discover the power of self-empowerment and the balance between risk, reward, and responsibility in the digital age.
I also delve into the complexities of sovereignty, dependency, and responsibility as they pertain to the ownership and stewardship of material possessions and how true sovereignty means maintaining responsibility even when we defer our authority, toucing on the idea of revoking delegated authority as a means of retaining our freedom and the potential impact of not doing so.
Lastly, I use the example of tech giants OpenAI and their responsibility to ensure the common good. I highlight the need for OpenAI to set the standard for transitioning their assets as a singularity back to the people, while still incentivising innovation and training for their models. I then delve into the potential for collaboration and building upon existing work to ensure that everyone benefits from the collective commons with the prevalence of self-sovereignty in the realm of data and identity. Don't miss this eye-opening deep dive into authority, trust, and the future of transactions.
Contact David Ding
Thanks for listening!
Okay.
Speaker 1:So this one's about the nature of deferral and the context I want to talk about deferral in is, in particular, the deferral of authority, and we do this inevently, all day, every day, and we do it consciously. However, the deferring of authority is a major issue, especially within, in context of transacting digitally in a scenario within which you know the formal economy is heading towards developing, you know a framework within which every human being can transact in a trustless way. Trustless meaning that the mechanism is so rock solid and watertight that the de-risking of our decision making is done for us entirely. Now, at the moment, we have banks that operate as intermediaries. We defer our authority to the banks in order to imbue trust into those transactions and into that system. This is what enables us to have, for example, any e-commerce website. Someone can purchase a product and service online and we have a certain amount of trust that the person transacting with us is verified and that the system is has de-risked that transaction to a certain degree, utilizing mechanisms such as KYC or Know Your Customer and more sophisticated systems, proof of personhood. And you know, i think in the coming. Well, it's already. The technology already exists, but I think it's going to be more and more normalized for for there to be truly trustless transactions utilizing a variety of technologies that are blockchain based or similar. So we have confidence, deferring our authority, and so, in a scenario within which the system we're utilizing doesn't imbue that confidence doesn't, we don't feel as though we can trust that system wholly then we're just not going to engage with it.
Speaker 1:There may be scenarios within which we understand that there is risk associated with transacting on that system and we may, in context, say well, this transaction is only $5. So I weigh you weigh up the pros and cons of the risk versus reward, understanding that you're willing to lose the $5 in order to take the risk of transacting. And this is going on with every system. It's going on with every transaction that you have with a human being, with the digital system. At some level, you're weighing up the pros and cons of the risk versus the reward.
Speaker 1:Now, some human beings they have a tendency to believe they're entitled to be protected, that they're entitled to be protected, that they have certain rights. Unfortunately, the reality is that it's actually a privilege to have a transaction de-risked on your behalf, and so what you're actually doing when you're engaging with a third party to facilitate an exchange on your behalf is that they're providing you a mechanism for de-risking a transaction and understanding that nothing is perfect and that there is an element of risk. And so, in context of the liability, if there is an issue, then, in truth, your decision to utilize the platform is actually the issue, in that you are unable to properly diligence the mechanism for imbuing trust into that system and you decided to take the risk from a perspective of being entitled, when, in reality, the system it has not been entirely de-risked, but it has been de-risked to a recommended standard by regulators or otherwise. Now it's a very important mindset to shift into, especially in the from the perspective of the economy that is emerging, that is going to be more and more based upon self-governance and self-regulation more decentralized, less deferring of authority, but more autonomous de-risking. So you know, back to the banks, you know, with the banks, there's a lot of human beings involved in de-risking transactions, a lot of dependencies, a lot of interdependencies, and what we're seeing with blockchain and distributed ledger technology and other technologies emerging in the space are scenarios within which people are trusting the transactions because of how, how bulletproof the system is and it's getting to the point where Transactions can take place that are entirely trusted and can even be anonymous, and the technology exists right now whereby you can, rather than providing your identity or revealing your identity, you can prove beyond shadow of a doubt that you are the custodian of the original identity documents that prove that you are who you say you are, without revealing your identity. Even So, from this perspective and this is going to become more and more prevalent you can leapfrog a whole bunch of layers in the system, but in particular, the mechanism of a bank acting as an intermediary to imbue trust into a transaction. That's in a scenario within which that mechanism has been rendered obsolete. You have a much more direct connection. There's no requirement for an intermediary such as a bank. So what happens then?
Speaker 1:Well, we defer our authority to a system. In the beginning, we deferred our authority to banks. You know way back when banks were established. We go to a bank and say here's a bar of gold bullion. I trust that you're going to keep it safe in your vaults. I'll go down, i'll check the vaults. See the security that's in place. What is the mechanism that that bank is utilizing to imbue trust into the system? They've got vaults, they've got security guards, they've got cameras or whatever. It is Okay, i trust your system And I'm deferring the authority for the stewardship of this bar of gold bullion to you for its care. And in that scenario, you're saying you're the expert, you're the authority.
Speaker 1:Now in the world, you know, in a world within which everyone's on a rampage about self-empowerment and independence and sovereignty, people are so, so confused, so confused about what that means. Sovereignty in this context, when you want to defer your authority and, believe me, you do want to defer your authority It's absolutely valid. If you want to thrive as an individual, if you want to realize a vision that you have for any aspect of your life or anything you want to create in the world, you have to defer your authority. You have to. And when you defer authority, you are surrendering the fact that you, that the other person, is the authority, and so that means you entrust them with how to do it. You're saying I actually have no idea how to look after this bar of gold bullion. I have no idea how to create a system that can take care of the gold bullion. I have no inclination. I'm deferring my authority to you And I'm surrendering to the fact that you are the authority. But sovereignty in this context means that you know that you're still responsible for the bar of gold bullion. You're still responsible for the bar of gold bullion. That's what sovereignty means.
Speaker 1:Now, a person who is not acting from their sovereignty. Let's use that same scenario of the gold bullion. Let's say you go to a bank you know it's back in back in the old days, go to a bank with a bar of gold bullion. You say, please, please, take care of a bar of gold bullion. I just want to diligence your process first. Can you walk me around the premises, show me the vaults, explain to me the system of security that you have on? Cool, i'm going to defer my authority to you for the care of this bar of gold bullion. I'm entrusting you with its care And I'm deferring the authority on how to care for it to you. It means I won't question it. I won't ever question your authority If you ever have to make changes. I understand. I'm deferring my authority to you. And now, let's say a week later, that bank gets broken into and the bar of gold bullion is stolen And you lose the bar of gold bullion.
Speaker 1:Now, someone who is not acting from their sovereignty, someone who is acting disempowered or from a victimhood mentality, will blame the security company. They'll blame them. They'll say you said this and you said you've got this measure of security on board and your vaults are too weak to deal with the dynamite. It's like well, you willingly deferred your authority to us. We're doing the best we can. We've got a track record of 100 years of never having an issue. And now we have had an issue. You deferred your authority to us, you entrusted us, we did the best we can, and they may have done an imperfect job, it actually doesn't matter.
Speaker 1:Someone who's sovereign, someone acting from their sovereignty, has insurance. They have insurance And they go to the insurance company and they say the bank was broken into, my bar of gold bullion was stolen. I need to make a claim, please. And they say, yes, certainly. Can you give us the details? Now, when that person who owns the bar of gold bullion went to the insurance company, they shared with the insurance company. This is how I've de-risked the stewardship of this bar of gold bullion. I went to this bank. These are the methods that they use. This is the system that they're using. This is how their security works. And the insurance company says oh, that's impressive, you've gone to great lengths to de-risk this, so we'll give you a discount on your premiums. We're very happy with that. And the insurance company says here you go, here's your bar of gold bullion. That's what a sovereign human being does. That's what sovereignty means That you own your own risk profile.
Speaker 1:You know that nothing is not entitled to anything in this world. Every the shirt on your back, the shoes you're wearing, the life you're living, all of it is a privilege. You're not entitled to any of it. Your life can be taken in any moment. Your shirt could accidentally catch on flames and it's gone. It's not an entitlement, it's a privilege, and you are the steward of everything in your possession, everything that's outside the surface of the earth. It's come out of the earth and has formed some other object of material size. It's only above the earth temporarily. At some point it's going to go back in the earth and then come out again. So there is no entitlement. There is no entitlement, there's just a privilege, and everything in your custody is an obligation that you have for its care.
Speaker 1:And so deferring your authority to people who are more equipped to make decisions on your behalf doesn't mitigate the risk. It doesn't mitigate the responsibility And really the nature of deferral. It's all about responsibility. It's about understanding that you're wholly responsible for everything, for every aspect of your life, for every aspect of your experience. Very important to understand this, especially for people who are on a crusade of empowerment Who are you trying to claim your power of? It's yours right now. Who are you trying to preach freedom to? You're free right now.
Speaker 1:If you feel restricted, you just have to look around you and figure out how you've inadvertently given your power away and forgotten that you're still responsible for yourself. Understand this. Understand this. If you lose something in your life, you're still responsible. No one else is responsible for it, not the government, not even your parents.
Speaker 1:Having parents is a privilege. You're not entitled to parents. A child is an entitled to be cared for. It's a privilege granted that child by the parent. That parent is free to be as loving or unloving as they choose, despite any human laws that are in place, they're part of nature. You are wholly responsible for your life, for the quality of your life and for everything. You are the steward of everything in your possession. You are wholly responsible for that, and so I want to talk about so. When you defer your authority, understand you're wholly responsible.
Speaker 1:So I want to talk about this in context of dependency. And there's so much confusion around dependency, codependency, being independent versus codependent, versus interdependent, and then people get confused about well, how can I depend on someone and still be free and still be sovereign? The freedom is in the right of revocation of all delegated or deferred authority. You can claim it back at any time. That's what makes you free, but no human being is ever going to thrive by being wholly independent or refusing to depend. It's very, very simple. Interdependency means that there is an ecosystem of component parts that are choosing to defer their authority to other component parts, which means they've prepared to weight up the pros and cons of the risk versus the risk, which means they've prepared to weight up the pros and cons of the risk versus the reward of being dependent, and they've chosen to defer their authority, whether or not those components are going to blame another component in that system if they abandon them or if one of them gets hit by a bus or if they make a mistake.
Speaker 1:That's where you give your power away. That's where you give your power away. Oh, xyz happened, abc happened, covid happened. Well, you know the government's response to COVID. It's a choice. It's a choice.
Speaker 1:The government is not perfect. The government doesn't have a crystal ball. The government's doing the best they can to provide you with everything that you're you know, protect you from everything that you're afraid of, to keep you safe from harm. And when something happens that's unforeseen, that no one could have ever predicted a black swan event that's never happened before the unified voice of the people blames the government, you this and you that. And so the government listens to the pain, responds, goes into debt to imbue grace into the system so that people who would have lost their businesses are able to stay afloat and see if they can salvage themselves. And then, once that's done, people blame the government for spending too much money and being too wasteful.
Speaker 1:And the issue isn't the government. The issue is the voice. The issue is the people choosing to defer their authority and without holding the responsibility. You see, so disempowering, so disempowering. It's OK to be dependent, it's OK to choose to depend on something or someone, but never to forget that you are still responsible. You have the power to revoke. A lot of people don't realize this, but you can revoke your authority.
Speaker 1:You know under law, in law, your will. It's not the same as your agency. Your will is your command And your body's role is to be a willful servant, so it wants to follow your command. It wants to follow your will. However, if your will becomes a threat to your body, your body will reject your will And it will begin to view your choices as a threat to its own well-being. So understand this is the nature of your body is that it is a willful servant. It wants to act on your behalf. But if it doesn't trust you in the same way with the people and with the government, the people are the body. The government is the unified intent or the voice of the people. If the people don't trust the government, then they take them out of government and they appoint someone that is representative of their voice. So really important to understand this that the will, your will, is not the same as your agency, and so every government that's in place, it's held in place because you've either inadvertently or consciously deferred your authority to the governing body.
Speaker 1:Now in New Zealand, we've done this through the Crown, and this goes way, way, way, way back to when our ancestors bent the knee to the Crown. You bend the knee to the Crown. This is in common law And the Crown protects you from being invaded from other kings and queens And God knows what else. You need to be protected, so you bend the knee, agree to pay taxes and in return you're protected and a whole bunch of other things, in whatever form. So over time, the Crown obviously evolves, develops, establishes a judicial system based on statute law which is different to common law. But the Crown delegates that power, it defers its authority for justice to a judicial system, but it's still wielding the power that you gave it. The Crown is still deferring your authority, and so when you bend the knee, that can be revoked, of course, but then you're on your own, then you've got no protection, then you've got to be entirely independent.
Speaker 1:So who would want that? Who would want to lose all those benefits? Who would want to lose the peace of mind? And so under common law, you have the right to revoke any authority that you've deferred to anyone or anything. But I would not recommend it. It's not what you want. But what you do want is you want to step into the perspective of being empowered and understand that no one is responsible for you. No one is responsible for you But you. And so in your daily life, when you engage with the legal, statutory, legal system, step into a position of authority and power and understand that everyone and everything you've deferred your authority to, whether it be by online, by agreeing to terms and conditions without reading them, whether you transact using a banking platform, whether you use e-commerce, blockchain, whatever it may be, all of those transactions are asking of you to defer your authority. And you're choosing to defer your authority and entrust those systems, but you're still wholly responsible. No, within this, these systems do have a responsibility to you Under common law, under the principles of common law, and that is a duty of care.
Speaker 1:So, if you're offering to Act on behalf of another human being, to act to enact their will, to enact or fulfill their will, you have a duty of care to the individual to protect the innocence. So if they haven't, innocence, meaning their perspective. So if someone's naive and innocent to the risk, you know, like a child, they're oblivious to the risk, they're oblivious to how hot the stove is, so they might touch it. So, in In the real world, in the real world, if someone is is offering to enact you or fulfill your will, they have a duty of care to protect the innocent, and so if you are naive, if you're not aware of the risks, then they have a duty of care to make you fully aware of them And if you come up against obstacles and barriers, to do their very best To try and get put you into a space where you can Make decisions that are for in your best interest.
Speaker 1:Now, over time, statutory, the law of statute it's got away, away, gone. The pendulum swung the entire other way Whereby people believe that if you have a statutory agreement or a contract, then you can avert your response, the responsibility to a duty of care. As you know, anyone that has agency to act on behalf of a human being to enact their will Has the studio of care, and but most people believe that a statutory agreement Can negate that duty. Oh, there's a clause in the contract. Will know, because Common law, the will stands above the agency, and so, even if you signed a contract that says I understand, which means that you're choosing to stand under The law of statute Instead of above it this is the whole purpose of saying that I understand.
Speaker 1:Even if you've Acknowledge that you are choosing to stand under the law instead of above it, you can revoke it at will Because, under common law, you have the right of revocation. I am the one known as David of the ding family, commander Of David ding capitalized, who is the agent which is my best to forget, and this is my Declaration I, he by, declare And express the right of revocation And that's it. It is done. You don't need to justify it because it's without question or justification, revoked, repudiated, extinguished, whatever you want to say, it's gone. And that power that that contract has, whereby, at some point, you chose to stand under that authority willfully and willingly, it's hereby revoked. And this is the. This is how the law works, and You just have to realize how it, how you get entangled in these situations.
Speaker 1:First of all, you've got to accept, claim that if you want your power, you have to bring hold the responsibility. If you want to defer your authority and to Complete and disempower yourself, then you step into the energy of blaming Whoever you've deferred your authority to, and what I would say is that You know, in a scenario within which we have to, you know, in a scenario within which we've got Organizations such as open AI Who have built models, ai models by scraping Internet, scraping publicly available information on the internet, capturing data, information assets That is in the public domain but was put into the public domain Under the law of the Commons, because copyright is issued the moment something is produced and created. You don't have to apply for it, it just is. And so if someone's innocently put Assets into the public domain and they've been scraped And then commercialized to produce an intelligence set, and then someone cottons on to the fact that, oh, i innocently put that into public domain by accident, where was the duty of care to the person that was meant to make me aware of what could happen? Now think about the commercial gains that have come from The collective Commons Inadvertently deferring their authority To commercialize Their assets, and it's now sitting at open AI, and open AI have averted their duty of care. They've averted their duty of care to the collective Commons, and so now we're seeing them call for regulation. Now we're seeing them offering grants To Communities who have solutions to Democratising All the information. Now that's a great step. It's a great step in the right direction, for sure, and let's hope it continues to move towards that space.
Speaker 1:But the exposure that they have is, it's absolutely monumental, and so they really need to sort something out, because it could get very, very complex and messy If they really don't lean into this straightaway And look to reconcile it with something quite radical, i would say in terms of You know, open AI was meant to be open in the very beginning. It then became closed And really it's got to become open again. It's got to become open again. The collective Commons, the common good of the people, their collective assets were inadvertently, have inadvertently, fared the model. The innocence of their perspective is irrefutable. Had they known, had they known, would they have chosen to allow that to be scraped? Of course not. It's a very simple, it's kind of like very easy to come, draw that conclusion. And so they need to set the standard. Now. They, rather than deferring their authority to regulators, which is what they're doing now, trying to defer the responsibility to regulators Oh, this needs to be regulated to keep everyone safe.
Speaker 1:No, you are the innovators at the bleeding edge. You initiated it, you created it. You chose to move forward. You have a duty of care. You are responsible for the harm. Understand this, understand this To get out in front of this, like right now, and you set the standard. How do you believe this should go forward? You're the ones at the bleeding edge. You set the standard and ask for help to maintain the standard. You democratize the platform. You come up with the innovation that transitions and that transfers this ginormous asset drawn from the common good. You come up with a solution to transition that asset back to we, the people, where it belongs, and you request humbly request the privilege to be the stewards of that on our behalf, and you will be handsomely rewarded.
Speaker 1:Understand this, get there yourself. You've got to get to this position yourself. This is the only way. This is the only way, because if you can't see what's coming, other models who are setting standards are going to rise and who are seeking permission to cultivate the intelligence of the human beings, training their models. They're going to replace you and supersede you, and all of that, everything that you've done, which is astonishing, will be lost. Get in front of this, bring everyone on board. How can we? How can we do this together? How can you incentivize us to continue training the model? How can you compensate people for sharing their culture? How can we grow and build and evolve and develop and be incentivized to grow the common good? How can we grow the common intelligence? It could change the planet, it could change the world if you get in front of this And you'll continue to grow and thrive because every human being on the planet will be incentivized to continue training the model, to continue sharing their culture. They won't see their culture as being at risk of being appropriated And they'll simultaneously let go of the fear of losing their culture because it'll be captured forever within the intelligence. It'll be there for as a legacy forever.
Speaker 1:There's a massive opportunity for you to flip this round. Speaking directly to OpenAI, there's a massive opportunity for you to flip this on its head. Otherwise, you're going to draw out an army of antagonists who are going to knock you off your perch. Take the ternary perspective and move towards the conflict where it's arising and create solutions within that That work for everyone. There's no brainer that the common people are going to want you to defer their authority for the stewardship of it To Microsoft or to OpenAI To no brainer. Of course, we want the best of the best to be the stewards, but it's not yours. The asset is not yours, and you know this. You can see the potential harm. You're aware of the potential harm. You chose to go ahead anyway. It's time to set the standard. You set the standard and submit it to the public for their perspectives And figure out a way for the common people to thrive and to be incentivised to continue training the model, but the common people paying for the privilege. In the way that it's established now, it's not ideal. You need to disentangle the training of the model, of the model absorbing the intelligence of the people. That needs to be disentangled from leveraging and commercialising it Two very different things And very easy to create symbiotically.
Speaker 1:So the deferring of authority We inadvertently defer our authority all the time And then, when we slip into victimhood, it means we were wanting to defer the responsibility, when in truth it's impossible to defer responsibility because the ultimate truth is that you're the only one that's responsible for your life, for the quality of your life, for your own care. If you want help in your life, you have no way to receive that help without deferring the authority for that care to somebody else. It's not an agent to act on your behalf To fulfil your will, but you determine and have to run your own risk profile. In any risk, any loopholes, you have to mitigate those yourself Or you have to be prepared to lose everything at risk in order to receive the benefit of that agency. So it feels like the right place to finish.
Speaker 1:I'm going to talk about this topic quite a bit more in future, especially as the emerging technologies are coming on board.
Speaker 1:A lot of you know, i work for a government agency called Callahan Innovation in New Zealand And I have the privilege of seeing a lot of these emerging technologies coming through now, and what I would say is that self-sovereignty of data and identity and so many other things it's just going to be commonplace Within the next two years for sure, and I'm just very interested to see if companies like OpenAI can see this, if they're truly aware of what's coming in the emerging software space and the threat that poses, and whether they'll get ahead of that or not, or whether they're going to resist what's coming And just battle it out in court for the next god, i don't know how many years, yeah. So how can we? how can we collaborate And build upon all this work that's already been done? You know you've broken the boundaries, you pioneered the way forward, but it's not for a company to benefit from, it's for the collective commons. So how can we? Okay, that's it for now, for the nature of the Fero, talk soon.
