Well, I think population matters insofar that the common experiences pooled or shared by the stakeholders and constituents are commeasurable in the sense that my experience has a strong possibility when expressed in a sufficiently clear way to be understood by somebody else’s participation in the same polity. If due to cultural or civilization metaphor issues or religious or other issues, such communications were not possible in the beginning. For example, in Taiwan, we have 16 national languages and the parliamentary interpolations, if they are done in an indigenous language, they require an entire supporting system of real-time interpretation, captioning, and things like that. Without such systems, of course a larger, more diverse population poses a real problem when getting those changes propagated out through the society, and only when those assistive technologies like this eyeglass are in place for most people can we then talk about scale-free propagation, but of course it has an impact, but I think it is at most logarithmic. It is not linear. So, if you can partition it into some small-world networks just like what we were saying among the law and the technology community, then within each network, you can maintain a faster iteration cycle, but you still synchronize to a longer iteration cycle – maybe a quarter of something – on a larger network.

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech