Dive deeper

Problem statement

Our democracy is eroding as a result of this new disruptive information technology. Trust in existing political, financial, economic, legal and even social institutions has been damaged, partly because of the Snowden revelations and WikiLeaks publications, which have corroded social capital. Society is becoming increasingly polarised. In this connection, the ‘openness of the debate’ and ‘fear of media or public condemnation’ threaten to take the edge off our political discussions and drive us towards ‘politically correct’ answers and positions  that fuel a crisis of authority.  Many interest groups, industries and politicians are aware of this situation and realise that, to achieve their objectives, it is best to focus their activities on the trust and existing polarisation of target groups. Sometimes they wish to protect trust in existing views, but sometimes they wish to change those views. Contradicting openly is often not the best method. Sowing doubt about existing views tends to be more effective. An example in this regard are publications about the potentially harmful effects of smoking, sugar, alcohol and firearms.  Doubt can likewise be sown about the human aspects of refugee care, poverty, the approach to COVID-19 and the nitrogen policy, as it  can about the government and the death penalty – doubt about everything.

Information technology is eminently suitable for furthering polarisation and sowing doubt. While the convenience and reach of the internet and social media could unite people across the world, people are increasingly being divided into online data groups, as a result of which people are driven apart and viewpoints harden. There is a digital divide.  State-of-the-art technologies make it possible for influencers to generate data that are tailored to personal needs. This is also referred to as personalised targeting or precision targeting of influence.  By using AI for automatic data collection, evaluation and manipulation, and by using algorithms for automated decision making, we can be fed by information that only confirms our beliefs. In other words, we can end up in echo chambers and silos of belief. The situation is being made worse because information platforms are buying each other up and concentrating.  The infosphere is not universal, but is becoming fragmented. This is a threatening development.

This polarisation and growing doubt are affecting humanity at its core. The ability to think in large groups made it possible for people to devise solutions to the most complex problems (hunger, poverty, disease). While the internet should be improving cooperation, the growing lack of trust may disrupt cooperative ties. Moreover, polarisation is occurring while humankind is facing major problems, such as overpopulation, environmental changes, immigration and raw materials management. This trend is visible in the international arena. International cooperation is decreasing and international organisations (World Bank, International Monetary Fund, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, United Nations, European Union, NATO) are all losing ground. Many countries are turning inwards and building walls instead of bridges. The recent COVID-19 crisis, the subsequent economic crisis and the lack of European solidarity seem to confirm this assessment. Increasingly alarming terms, such as global anti-libertarianism, progressive localism, national protectionism and national developmentalism, are therefore being used in the subject literature. There is a crisis of confidence.

It is therefore vital that humankind develop mechanisms to counter this destabilising threat. First we have to eliminate ‘sensationalism’ in our profit-making selling mechanisms and strive for more balanced news production. Secondly we have to educate people on their role and responsibility in countering and debunking desinformation. Also we must provide tools to identify and debunking destabilizing newsfeeds and articles.One of the most successful mechanisms of the new information world is to use blockchain methodology in order to make ‘trusted’ and ‘reliable’ transactions in multiple variations. In contradiction with former times, no ledger is needed anymore to make such a transaction, enormously increasing the possibilities to make transactions across the globe.

Challenge

How can we help Royal Netherlands Army to safeguard trust within its own ranks and within the broader defense system (= Remarkable Trinity of Von Clausewitz (government – army – people) and our Allies by using block chain methodology by the populace (producers) when identifying and debunking desinformation (with regards to security policies, grand strategy and military information) instead of spreading more desinformation?

Sub-questions

• How can we define what is considered 'good' information?
• Since it is impossible to count and check each and every message, how can we select messages (relying on the audience's will and comments)?
• Focus on labeling criminal content - but how do you avoid unjust naming, shaming and cancellation?
• How to work with input that is not valid? Blockchain technology makes things difficult to correct.
• How to support contributors for validating without twisting peer to peer review?

This challenge connects society, low ranking government officials, middle ranking government officials, high ranking (elected) government officials, police forces, armed forces, and institutional organisations.

Design an easy-to-use personnel software package for use on smartphones, tablets and personnel computers, based on block chain methodology, in order to be able to identify and debunk disinformation and in this way ensure the trustworthiness of information itself and maintain trust within our societies.

Read the article here

Criteria

• User friendly to institutional personnel
• Designed for multiple devices: smartphones, tablets, computers
• Scalable solution
• Secure and Ethical by design: it should not be available to other governments or misused for peer attacks
• Incorporate a selection principle for the information messages
• Taking potential malicious intent (click farms, etc. ) into account

The goal of the solution is to protect mankind from the dark side of information technology: maintain law and order, implement governmental policies, promote welfare and wellbeing, safeguard and stimulate economic activity, maintain cultural diversity and cultural creativity, maintain credibility of (represented and delegated) government, maintain trust within society, safeguard privacy, promote knowledge production and scientific research, etc.

Instead of having governments, institutions or AI deciding on trustworthiness of information sharing without validation,we should be working together to  fight disinformation with disinformation, discredit and silence desinformaters.