by Flemming Funch
MIT Technology Review has introduced an experiment and game called "Innovation Futures". It is like a stock market where one can bet on the futures of all sorts of events, and you can buy and sell contracts. The events are real, but the money is not. However, the people who're most successful in the game will win some nice prices.
This is rather intriguing. Might something like this possibly be meaningful as a democratic mechanism? You know, if the game will reveal how much faith we have in various future scenarios, and who's the best at predicting which scenarios actually come to pass - does that not translate into something we can use to organize society by? Wouldn't the best leaders by those who are most in synch with public sentiments? I'm not sure if there's a correlation. After all, the 'real' stock market will rather reward those who can predict public mis-conceptions and profit from them, without much regard to the final outcomes.
|
|