Internal Google Video Asks about Infomation Ledger as Perfect Utility per Individual

IMPORTANT! UTILITY AS A NUMBER CANNOT BE COMPARED BETWEEN TWO OR MORE INDIVIDUALS (MACRO OR MICRO.) UTILITY IS AN INTERNAL PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS BETWEEN GOODS AND SERVICES RELATED TO INCOME RATIO TO PRICE MATRIX OF THOSE GOODS. A PORTFOLIO CAN BE DEEMED AN INDIVIDUAL AND THEREFORE CAN HAVE UTILITY MEASURED PER THAT ORGANIZATION ITSELF (LIKE A FIRM OR COUNTRY.) COMPARING AN ORGANIZATION'S UTILITY TO AN INDIVIDUAL IS NOT PRODUCTIVE AND IS LIMITED TO THE FLAWS OF ITS CONTEXT IN HOW THE NUMBER IS USED. THAT IS WHY CHINA'S SESAME CREDIT SYSTEM WILL FAIL (OR BE MANAGED TO BE A CONTROLLED FAILURE) JUST LIKE AMERICA'S CREDIT SYSTEM (FICO SCORES, ETC...) OR OF ANY OTHER NATIONAL SYSTEM OR DOWN TO THE INDIVIDUAL FIRM'S RATING SYSTEM.

IT IS ALSO A HYPOTHESIS THAT UTILITY NUMBER CAN BE COMPARED WITH A CONTEXT, MY ARGUMENT IS THAT IS FALSE DUE TO CHANGES IN CONTEXT BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS' COMMUNICATION RATES.

CONTEXT MATTERS PER UTILITY

AND

MONEY AS A COMMON MEDIUM CAN BE USED A COMPARATIVE MEDIUM INA LIMITED CONTEXT OF UTILITY. THE ARTICLE BELOW TALKS ABOUT MONEY AS A UTILITY SOURCE FOR INVESTOR'S RISK TOLERANCE AND THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM A CONSUMER BUYING AN OBJECT OR SERVICE. THE ONLY SIMILARITY IS THAT THE INVESTOR AND CONSUMER CAN BE THE SAME PERSON AND HAVE THE SAME WALLET OR ACCOUNT OR INCOME SOURCE AND BE PART OF THE SAME VOTING SYSTEM FOR GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS. THAT IS IT,


CONSULT

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility

BEFORE WATCHING VIDEO AND READING ARTICLE BELOW

---

https://youtu.be/EoBAIQjWoUQ

In Economics there is a concept for utility, the usefulness of a good diminishes over the amount or plurality of its use compared to other goods and services (and life things to do.) Google compared utility finding solutions to DNA/genes and products of evolution, therefore able to predict what one needs. It is hypothesized in the UFO/Rumor-mill/alternative-news community that the information processing community (companies like google) are trying to figure out how to provide what you need before you (the human) realize it...ie, perfect utility.

My opinion is that this is a natural evolution of the human structure of the economy to take place as perfect utility prediction, this means that planned supply chains become more efficient to providing the provisions of usefulness of everyday life. It is very important to recognize the pattern of economics here, especially if there is a UFO or alternative goverment cover-up that has been happening since world war two (or one?)

For instance, the video does mention that the google training video is a summary piece for employee though experiment and it is very important to know that management uses such experiments as a way to gauge utility of the worker working on the project. (Note that in labor economics the price the employee is willing to get paid is the utility received from the employer in return for productivity. in this case it is quality of thought per production unit the employee is to produce as per reaction of such thought (or feedback to the employer.)) Depending on the worker's reaction google has a good idea how to proceed because management is at the mercy of how the employee makes the project (literally if it is a coder or code manager, it is the code itself and the context of the code that will be managed to maximize the benefit or utility of the buyer of google services (a search for product or service.))

It should be warned that the creepy part of such though experiments is that to gauge utility to predict information patterns on a personal level is a misinterpretation of the goal by management of what society wants except for monetary gain. Perfect utility gauge per person is a "holy-grail" for any business as it will sell to every point on the demand curve (whether it is for natural monopoly business or the other end of the spectrum to perfect competition. Likewise for monopsony or single buyer system.) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony)

This does not break economic models, it only justify's the idea that a new market is created per the technology as the technology is on a cost per transaction basis for the seller of good (marginal supply) and utility per predicted good sponsored by the search engine (google in this case.) However, goverment having a worry about a company (where the software is the property of the company) knowing the person more than the person itself (with latest European regulation) has many concerned about the implications of goverment intervention. This intervention (assuming the goverment is elected by majority vote) is only a different kind of economic solution by majority opinion (with legislators and executive branch) saying that "perfect" competition model is better than a perfect utility model. Whereas, in a perfect competition model, the individual person chooses to turn on or off the service of how the company (google or Facebook in this matter) would be able to predict such information about the user's (your) wants or needs.

It should be understood that in an older system of perfect competition, there is no economic profits, whereas, equilibrium is supply equals demand at economic profits equals zero and base equation is economic profits equals inflation plus surplus resources per utility of the investor (such as money.) Surplus resources of the utility of the investor is only a term stating that the investor is betting that the firm will create a return (this is where the science can get into the Markowitz bullet (modern portfolio theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_portfolio_theory) for managing portfolio risk as a part of measuring utility of the investor but this is a topic for a later discussion. It is obvious that if the investor has a utility then google could predict what kind of service the investor wants and of course this could create an entanglement of utilities between investor versus consumer; thus the complaint of voters voting against themselves by investing in a middleman's (management's) utility via firm? (assuming that the voters are people that both consume and invest..indeed it must be true.)))

Therefore, if the investor and voter are the same then should they not vote for the same interests, especially in a perfect utility system? I argue that it is a fractal complex (which deserves more study into the affected models of current economic analysis.) Assuming that one person has one vote and every person votes and that all people are investors and consumers maximizing utility, then institutional structure regulating what money goes where by middle mangers (who are also voting people) will get less than maximum utility. Why? Because of the bias of the middle managers maximizing profits because of the bias of law to maximize profits. The middle man is the politician, the manger of the corporation that does not see the every day production (for now.) The middle man (some of them) are licences for their profession (elected office, specialty profession (lawyer, doctor, civil enginer, armed security forces) and society deserves to have these kind of men (or women) as the information is job specific. It is important to understand that these men and women who serve per their licence (yes a public office is a licence per plurality of vote per this model) as they have earned it per the trust of society and the products thereof are nonetheless servants of their demand structure that placed them there. Yet, the utility of their job of being a licenced servant can have conflicts of interest of their human side. This is a translated deadweight loss built into the expense of society that many economic classes do not teach (at least the ones that I have gone to that needs to be further explored by many students.) It is of justification of the licence that in trade of trust comes responsibility that can show as an expense to society as well as an income per risk; yes I am saying that voting is a form of investing by the voters for policies that will maximize the utility of society that is built per the available resources at hand. To maximize the resources means that all information cannot be lied to all three sections of society, paper and non paper entities, people and non people entities, middle-men and non-middlemen systems. Finally, it is important to recognize the concentration of such power by a middleman (or woman) akin to that of a king, tzar, or tyrannical leader could be able to bend the power of this utility to their will and therefore the statistical variance throughout society would be more of their vision than the shared vision of one person one vote system mentioned above.

So what does this have to do with a perfect utility system of google? It is that of predicting every individual's utility (with physiological suggestion techniques) that becomes a method for great tyranny as well as great utopia. Likewise, like any technology it is very important to know that great evil or morel good can become of it and needs to be used wisely...or as the hidden power might say: "controlled."

The libertarian in me says the technology should be allowed to develop or at least be implemented as it would maximize the benefits of society that is able to give at any given (or as efficient as possible) to the user of that product or service. The economist in me says that utility basis would become more thinner and can or could pose employers to become wary about their employees' loyalty due to the possibility of employment competition per utility of per employer. Utility basis is the measurable difference between one unit of utility per one unit of employer for the employment market. As subject to compensation or prices, such technology could mean perfect employment models (unemployment at or near zero as asymptopte) and all other (macro and micro) economic models would continue as normal (Mathus, Keynes, Hayek, etc...) It is as if the engineering of technocracy is afoot.

See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek

---

As Refrenced at the bottom, a list of governments and my definitions are mentioned below. One goverment I left below is not mentioned barbecue it has perfect utility per human per social strata (or job type?)

Technocracy - the government or control of society or industry by an elite of technical experts.
(see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy )

As compared to
Meritocracy - government or the holding of power by people selected on the basis of their ability


(by the way - thanks google for the definitions)

Why do I mention both of these goverment types? Well, both utility structures are socialist and also rely on the definition of perfect competition assumption of perfect information (at the time of knowledge before any additional innovation) and therefore perfect utility at the social scale. ^^^^
The individual can also have perfect utility as well. There are caveats and negative consequences pursuing such goverment forms as there is no survey system for the population to give feedback about implementation of goverment policies. There is no perfect utility as well as such would have complete diminishing returns of utility by definition of utility. Again it is not advised to try such forms of goverment. It is advisory that present forms of governments with survey systems in place such as voting be able to keep up with technology changes to maximize the utility at a social level and that of individuals as well without harming the minority.

^^^^ Note that there is no such thing as perfect utility, only truth at the time of knowledge, therefore the utility cannot be perfect when time and innovation factors are in place. DO NOT try either Technocracy or Meritocracy because to be perfect in their utility it is possible to deform into tyranny or dictatorship when and if the survey system known as voting is taken away from a population. The deformation comes from the sin of greed or addiction of the mind to be greedy or some other evil variant and the society cannot be deems (let alone the individual) and the deformation can become true due to the never ending quest of more of something due to the diminishing returns of utility by the definition of utility. 

------

Due to the nature of seeking perfect utility by a for profit corporation, it is possible for corruption to exist where none be needed. Innovation happens and should be cherished especially with an intent of things being invested into by a global for profit and utility of investor system such as capitalism or Demo-Republic we cal lit today; or what ever we really call it today. The reliance of the truth to qualify such transactions and the quest for perfect utility can and should be though of a way to become tranquilized in submission; although, maybe in fact to the rise or prominence and true leadership can happen with perfect utility as well for the employee (as long as they do not recognize they are a slave for a higher form of management.) It is quite important to realize the limits of technology due to such diminishing returns it can present well returns as when integrated into society. The importance of a social system to vote or produce equally weighted survey for the next goverment policy or representative for politics is a way to garner the way the allocation of resources maximize utility throughout society, itself as governing. The only hindrance is truth. Without truth the system creates deadweight loss. The system creates a larger disposition from equilibrium of a market. distortions in trade from deadweight loss can overweight a portfolio of an entity rather than another portfolio, with both portfolios being equal and truthful and a third portfolio doing the lie getting the greatest benefit. However, the social benefit between all portfolios will not be as great as if they all were telling the truth to each other. Truth for innovation is important to not distort the market of souls let alone maximum utility.

Note: maximum utility variance approaches mean maximum utility in econometric (statistics of economics.)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everything stated above needs to be mentioned by the elite down to the masses, from the highest heavens to the lowest hells. How much it will help only the will of life or a force greater than my own can fully know. (disclaimer: Yes, I tonyotag is a christian.)

The problem is that the information is dense and needs a practical every-day social activities if the assumption of the county is to act like a portfolio.

A list of goverment types to the idea of providing a proper goverment form for the people as a comparison to its flaws to middle-men (or women):

Plutocracy is an old format goverment. Leader(s) are massively wealthy (not greedy, see Cleptocracy, Dictatorship, Fascism) and manage the social system. The format can easily have the risks of society be disabled from affording to innovate properly to advance society. Wealth is needed for new ideas and innovation to expand the utility gained. Deadweight loss is lost to wealth building, usually, to a few at the top of the plutocratic hierarchy. The only way it can work is to redefine wealth, or plutocrats into the innovations they want for the benefit of society, rather than themselves. It is easily

Cleptocracy (new spelling is kleptocracy) is an old format goverment. Leaders are bribed to maximize their own profits before the rest of the social system. This goverment format is obsolete because it is obvious of stealing from the people. Any economist can find large dead weight losses due to profits as taxes in this system (taxes are not paid back to the social system at large, it is paid back to a small group of people by definition of cleptocracy.)

Communism's (or socialism's) answer is that the property becomes the state but the middle man issue becomes blocked by goverment officials.

Democracy says by majority vote or mob (ancient Greek definition) can reinforce the stereotypes of society upon the mob rule; therefore, innovation can stagnate if lies persist. (The only way a perfect competitive model can be implemented in society is if everyone knows the truth, thus eliminating information bias in the transaction for utility. The flaw is lying to the mob, thus creating and enlarging already existing deadweight loss at multiple levels and markets. A good or service which can minimize lying will always be valued relative to the culture of the social system. (This is why democracy can be "naked" compared to more tyrannical or middlemen forms of government**.))

Dictatorship, especially tyranny, can force a country to assume the flaws of its leader due to the nature of Modern Portfolio Theory and how the risk invested (equivalent to the wealth of GDP or GNP asymptote to 100%) in a large  portfolio can reinforce defeat by a studious adversary (easy goverment downfall by taking the weakness of the individual rather than the group.)

Fascism is different due to the positive* qualities of tyranny on a group basis held by a management group, its flaws are still spread upon the nature of those individuals and the risk varies hence dynamic like a republic but not elected (assuming appointment by whom?) Fascism does have the tendency to become too invested in executive branch like functions without legislative of the masses it represents and therefore can have incest issues (society's focus on efficiency can outweigh a diverse of labor force therefore becoming too risky to manage.) Fascism is a higher level goverment form like Demo-Republic (US government system and most western governments) and therefore cannot propagate normally like other social systems. Fascism's issue is conformity can choke off any innovation or benefits before realized by management or the firm's gains, other tyrannical governments have the same issue with innovation.

Many hybrid forms of goverment have the benefit of trying to accurately measure the needed utility by society's wants and desires. One such system is the Demo-Republic; middlemen try to gauge the wants and desires by survey system and try to garner majority. The United States Government is a Demo-Republic. Guaranteed representation by voters in a legislative body and rule of law over individuals decreases the effects of deadweight losses made by licenced individuals and therefore can maximize the effect of perfect utility. Note that Demo-Republic is not perfect either, can be slow in nature of changing laws as the nature of representation of a mass of people can delay or decay the statistical nature of laws versus innovation. An example wold be transportation or basis costs of labor over a period of time and therefore moving votes to new regions of the country (think horse drawn carriage to supersonic jet changes)



*Fascism's social benefits can outweigh costs if and only if truth is not propagandized AND equilibrium of social welfare of innovation is not hindered upon the differences of cultural norms. Corporations can become their own nations and therefore Fascist by definition. Due to this fact, I, tonyotag disclaim Fascism as I am a pro hybrid demo-republic pro United States Constitutionalism and do not want to advocate for Fascism. I, tonyotag, am not a Fascist nor support such goverment.

** For democracy definition: when Truth value is high or low? Dependency on truth value comparative utility rates unknown for higher or lower forms of goverment.