Skip to content

Podcast: Designing Open Democracy: "Trust, a concept analysis" (After: Fake News Trivia) (2019-12-11 Wednesday)

Hi All Members of Designing Open Democracy,

Before the year ends, this is a gathering about how the year in democracy has ended, as well as to discuss what the future may hold for democracies around the world.

Initially, our guest Alexar Pendashteh will present his analysis and musings on the nature of trust and how society conceptualises and acts upon it.

This will be followed by a group discussion, so don't forget to bring all your strong opinions with you!

After that you are welcome to join a Fake vs Real News trivia game!

Designing Open Democracy: "Trust, a concept analysis" (Later: Fake vs Real News trivia)

  • Gate Open: 5:30pm
  • Date: 11th of December 2019
  • Location: Melbourne Business Centre, Level 9, 440 Collins St · Melbourne

Reach Out Effort:

Political Parties that have responded to our invitation:

  • Flux Party (Ben Ballingall)
  • MiVote
  • Science Party (Victorian Coordinator, Luke James)


Designing Open Democracy Podcast Is Available In All Major Podcast App or Apple Podcast

Recording complete! A new podcast channel is now up

Let us know what you think about this episode so we can improve it next time!


  • 1s : Introduction

  • 265s : Define trust, Why exist? Where is trust from? What causes trust? What influence trust.

  • 146s : Why do we care about this topic?

  • 179s : In each field in science, bigger concepts is formed by previous fields.

  • 218s : So could the same be for trust? Are we missing out?

  • 265s : Start to talk about trust. We can approach it in different ways.

  • 290s : Personal trust is not transferable between people

  • 334s : Trust is a perception game

  • 362s : Humans have the ability to form alliance

  • 383s : Role of language in creating complex trust

  • 468s : resonance analogy

  • 524s : Dunbar's Number

  • 647s : Noam Chomsky's Dictatorship Bubble

  • 833s : Prisoner's Dilemma

  • 938s : Work agreement in companies

  • 1008s : Current social assumption about work

  • 1170s : Anthony Mc Mullen's explanation of co-ops

  • 1271s : Democratic Governance vs Democratic Ownership

  • 1550s : American Southern Strategy

  • 1771s : How labor issues was not always a left wing issue

  • 1861s : cognitive dissonance

  • 2223s : Conservative/Rightwing are more united

  • 2329s : Penny Wong

  • 2549s : Tribal Epistemology

  • 2710s : Fake Facebook Pages For Extreme Right/Left

  • 2780s : Allowing for compromise

  • 2850s : Democracy Groups Are Stuck With Infighting

  • 3035s : Why many co-ops fails (Divide&Conquer)

  • 3262s : Prisoner's Dilemma

  • 3533s : Using technology to increase trust in orgs

  • 3706s : Money

  • 3843s : Unintended consequences of rules/algos

  • 4016s : Money used to be just physical coins/notes

  • 4138s : Satoshi Nakamoto

  • 4233s : Hard to trust eVoting

  • 4369s : Trust but verify

  • 4403s : Science has base assumptions

  • 4458s : Bitcoin base assumptions is maths

  • 4622s : Crypto Ledger

  • 4725s : Facebook Crypto Currency

  • 4814s : Gig Economy

  • 4940s : Exploiting Network Effect

  • 4961s : Who is influenced is not who is influencing it

Interesting transcription bit about gig economy

I think it is a lot of resistance against it. , but definitely there are companies they just go out and buy a company they'll act illegally then the laws is changed. Look at Uber. Yeah look at taxies, they were running for a while... then in the end the government were not popualar with consumers . And so the government goes . These guys are being operated illegally. that uber ? Yeah Uber. Well , you know what it is is it's changed that so for me I think it's important these drivers themselves are owning the platform , not some external partners extracting values, then I am kind of okay with it, and I actually think the drivers will be better off . Whereas Problem of we got is that over time , a system like uber eats like now all the small businesses off restaurants . I think it's something like 30% that loses. systems put in place of dubious legality now that the government could be being getting donations and corruption . But there's also this popular opinion . If enough people reckon happy with with uber driver , a regular taxi then government will change the law because it be too unpopular for them , to take them , unless they make a case like in london that this is worse for the consumers , and then we might even think about the driver if you cannot suggest here is an error in your logic here a your because you said something about systems with system . Here is not just cars and drivers and passengers . Its roadways . Yeah . So people people a what ? Wass unlicensed taxi and to drive a flea car was a very serious offences. And what's something like doing tio people arguing that there's been so many people that are making money ? It's really driven housing crisis . It's had some impact on level homelessness . So you can go , I think , one of the broader implications of these technologies . It's difficult for governments because these technologies are also popular with people can . I just meant your conversation . I think the augment what you're looking for it's like the network effect , like how it is enough people in Facebook . It's very hard to not use Facebook because you're just essentially shut out from a big part of society . The trouble is with control and influence like who is influenced is not who is influencing it. So in terms of Uber , network allows for that . Of course , the current system is very inefficient , right , and then you leverage the technology people are happy , but at one point because the person team behind Uber and Facebook and any other platform is different from those who are influencing the platform by decisions they make . But an entire different group of people are influenced by that platform which our people on the ground ' the homelessness issue and Facebook all sort of host of all sort of issues . And this disconnect is the root cause of issues which something like cooperatives would solve . A concept of commons managing public resource as comments would also solve that when you close this loop , if if someone's influencing something , they also need to be influenced the same degree . But there has to be a connection in engineering . That's called feedback loop in the lack of a feedback loop the systems goes destablised, Yes destablised it does . And that's what we see here is the feedback loop is not cooperative . Camp is a vehicle to kind of close that loop . Yeah