Sovereignty that stays with you.
Your identity, memory, choices and rights. Otto’s personal capsule helps you act; participation never requires surrendering your whole life to the network.
Earlier annual-cohort study. Open the shared living simulation →
SOS SYSTEMS / WORLD OBSERVATORY
A world that
works together.
From useful local circles to an open operating system for shared life. Explore how cooperation could grow, and what it takes to keep power, care and the planet in balance.
AN OPEN DESIGN STUDY
Thirty illustrative years. Sixteen synthetic cohorts. Geography provides a setting; these are not country data, existing deployments or a forecast of peace.
LOCAL SEEDSCONNECTED COMMONSCONTINUING STEWARDSHIP
PROPOSED EVOLUTION / Begin locally
A shared world begins with a useful promise.
A few circles organise around needs people already have: water, income, learning, care. Participation is voluntary. Rights and a route to challenge decisions belong in the first agreement.
What must be true in real life
People can get help without buying a token. Local consent, paid work and a human appeals route exist before the first automated decision.
CHANGE THE CONDITIONS
A future we can question.
Change the institutions and inspect the consequences. The world, charts and ledger all use the same model. A larger network can still fail its people.
Invest in useful services, shared knowledge, care and independent scrutiny. Follow the trade-offs over thirty illustrative years.
THIRTY-YEAR TRAJECTORY
Needs met
Higher means more of the modeled service basket is delivered. All indices are synthetic.
Your choices: 76.9%
Prosperity has more than one condition.
2 / 7○
Needs metat least 95%
76.9○
Least-served circleat least 90%
71.6Ecological reservesat least 65 /100
75.9○
Unresolved disputesat most 8 /100
18○
Control concentrationat most 25 /100
42○
Trustat least 65 /100
45Deferred careaverage ≤ 1 credit / cohort
00 / 5 consecutive years meet every proposed threshold. These are explicit design choices inside a simplified model. They do not certify peace, prosperity or an institution’s legitimacy.
OBSERVED IN THIS RUN / YEAR 0
Four seed cohorts begin with higher participation. Every circle has the same needs and a small synthetic variation in starting capacity.
THE SYSTEM WE WOULD NEED
An operating system.
A living civil society.
The goal calls for more than connected products. These proposed institutions fill gaps in how people share power, fund care, handle conflict and protect what belongs to everyone.
Capability where life happens.
Communities meet needs and make the decisions close to them. Shared work develops skills, infrastructure and livelihoods that people can inspect.
Cooperation across boundaries.
Federations coordinate shared resources, standards and consequences. Delegation is bounded; no central AI or chain becomes sovereign over everyone.
01 / Dignity before contribution
A rights floor
A contribution economy can exclude people whose work is unpaid, invisible or impossible.
Basic needs, privacy, personal space, protection, choice and a basic voice stand independently of measured impact. Accessible services include people who cannot or choose not to use digital identity.
How authority is bounded
Contribution can inform a bounded project role. It cannot buy another person’s fundamental rights or replace equal standing in the rights process.
SOS Systems · Umahn · Care · SideGigs
02 / Decide close to the consequence
Local assemblies
A global operating system can become a global centre of control.
People form local circles with clear membership, open budgets, paid participation and recallable delegates. Wider bodies receive a limited mandate for shared problems; communities retain exit and interoperability.
How authority is bounded
Use affected-person participation and independently facilitated review. Sortition and rotating roles are options to pilot, not assumed solutions.
SOS Systems · Tusita · Manifest
03 / Fund what must keep working
Commons treasury
Launch funding does not pay for lifelong care, public goods or replacement.
Separate project finance from recurring service income, shared contributions, solidarity and asset renewal. Published budgets account for care and prevention before expansion. Independent audit follows the money and delivery.
How authority is bounded
Funding terms, refunds, losses and obligations are explicit. Tokens create neither physical resources nor guaranteed returns.
Koink.Fun · Manifest · Steward · Market
04 / Make disagreement survivable
Peace & justice network
Shared infrastructure needs a credible answer when people disagree, suffer harm or reject a decision.
Provide accessible human mediation, independent appeal, restorative options where appropriate and lawful routes for serious harm. Protect complainants, pay for access and keep decision makers separate from parties to the dispute.
How authority is bounded
No AI judge or private automated police. Work with legitimate public institutions; mediation never makes a harmed person give up their rights.
SOS Systems · Panik · Care · local institutions
05 / The model must be challengeable
Evidence commons
Otto could reinforce the judgments of the contributors who govern it.
Publish assumptions, uncertainty, decision records and reproducible evaluations. Fund independent reviewers and competing models. Separate proposing a change, assessing its impact and approving it.
How authority is bounded
A favorable simulation cannot approve its own deployment. Real outcomes, dissent and the least-served people can force a revision.
Otto · Bloom · Manifest · independent reviewers
06 / Cooperate without total exposure
Personal data trusts
A connected world can turn into an infrastructure for surveillance.
Keep personal capsules under specific access boundaries. Share the minimum needed for a purpose; support revocation, portability and redress. Use independently reviewed emergency procedures with limits and later scrutiny.
How authority is bounded
Use proofs or commitments when they help; do not put raw personal or clinical records on an immutable public chain.
Otto capsules · Umahn · Care · Panik
07 / Many providers, one ability to cooperate
Protocol stewardship
A single chain, model or identity provider would make the whole system dependent on one gatekeeper.
Specify interoperable records and interfaces before choosing a network. Support multiple providers, local operation, offline routes, open implementations and migration. Stewardship includes security response and funded maintenance.
How authority is bounded
ONEON can be one implementation of the shared network. A community’s ability to cooperate must outlive any one implementation.
ONEON · Otto · all service protocols
08 / Account for the world outside the ledger
Planetary commons
A prosperous community can push its costs onto neighbours, future people or ecosystems.
Set locally grounded resource and ecological budgets, observe external effects and share responsibility across boundaries. Restoration, adaptation and the people bearing transition costs need funded plans.
How authority is bounded
An ecological index is only a model here. Actual limits require local evidence, affected communities and appropriate public authority.
Energy · Water · Food · Loop · Habitat
This is a proposed evolution of SOS Systems, open to criticism and revision. The institutions are functions to develop with people, not newly announced organisations. Existing democratic and public institutions remain part of the world this system must work within.
HOW THE ORGANS WORK TOGETHER
The connections become a life.
The network matters when a need gets met, a lesson carries forward, a conflict is addressed or someone has room to begin again.
A need becomes a shared capability
Manifest → Otto → Koink → SideGigs → Bloom
A circle needs reliable water. People define the need and acceptance criteria. Otto compares options; scoped funding supports trained workers. Independent acceptance releases the agreed payment. The lesson and repair manual become useful elsewhere.
A local shock becomes a shared response
Water + Food → Manifest → Commons treasury → Logistics
A dry period creates a measured shortfall. Neighbours offer real surplus; the pool finances transport within its means. People receive support according to need. Work on long-term capacity continues without making assistance conditional on joining.
A harmful decision becomes a correction
Affected people → Peace & justice → Evidence commons → local assembly
A community challenges a provider’s decision. Independent people examine evidence, protect private information and hear both sides. A remedy and appeal route are recorded. The model or contract changes, and the same defect can be prevented elsewhere.
Useful work becomes continuing prosperity
Travel + Market + Music + Tech Assist → income → Care + Steward + commons
People earn through work and services they choose. Income supports livelihoods, care, maintenance and shared investment. Personal wellbeing remains private; cultural life and time outside paid work matter alongside production.
OPEN THE MODEL
Nothing important hidden
behind the glow.
The simulation is an invitation to make the design more rigorous. Its calculations are inspectable, its assumptions are authored, and its results can be wrong about the real world.
Assumptions, units and causal rules
The world being modeled
Sixteen equal-sized cohorts each need 100 service units a year. Starting capacity varies synthetically from 56 to 68. Existing provision outside the new network adds 20 units per cohort every year. There is no population forecast, observed country ranking, GDP estimate or probability of war.
Four cohorts begin at 12% participation; the rest at 2.5%. Each cohort has a notional maximum of 220 local circles. These quantities set the visual scale, not a deployment target. Geographic anchors represent neither territorial claims nor actual affiliated communities.
Investment and care
Output credits = 100 × (0.55 + knowledge / 140 + capacity / 250) × (1 − disputes / 220). The chosen share funds a common budget; eight seed credits per cohort are added in each of the first four years. Care, solidarity, restoration, justice and construction divide that budget exactly.
Care due = 6.5% of productive capacity + 2 credits. The care allocation meets current obligations and then backlogs. Unfunded current care reduces capacity. Construction increases capacity using investment, local participation and accumulated knowledge; assets also depreciate.
Resources and the commons
Available services = capacity × (0.7 + 0.3 × ecology / 100) × (1 − shock) + 20 baseline units. Assistance cannot exceed total surplus, total shortfall or affordable transport. It is allocated in proportion to unmet need, without a membership condition. Transport costs one credit per service unit. Transfers conserve service units; unused pool credits carry forward. The pool cannot purchase missing goods into existence. These goods are an interchangeable service basket; separate water, energy, food and location-specific constraints would be needed in a real implementation.
Open knowledge improves learning and assumed resource efficiency. Restoration adds to ecological reserves; productive activity and climate shocks draw them down. This one-stock ecological model cannot represent biodiversity, climate tipping points or location-specific limits.
Power, trust and participation
Concentration rises through network effects and capture attempts, and falls through open knowledge and independent checks. Unmet needs, concentration and disruptions add disputes; funded justice and independent review resolve a share. Delivery and accountability support trust; disputes, concentration and care backlogs reduce it. Participation can grow or reverse.
Except for the least-served measure, world indices and deferred care are equal-weight cohort averages; inspect individual circles to reveal local differences. Openness and checks assume institutional capacity; this model does not estimate the work required to attain a setting. These relationships are hypotheses encoded as coefficients, not fitted social-science findings. The full equations and coefficients are in the open model source and all inputs and annual results are in the export. The model has no military actors, coercive enforcement, elections, clinical predictions or individual social scores.
Inspect the thirty-year ledger
| Year | Circles | Needs % | Least served % | Ecology | Disputes | Concentration | Trust | Deferred care | Pool credits |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 176 | 76.9 | 71.6 | 75.9 | 18 | 42 | 45 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 272 | 79.5 | 74.1 | 77.1 | 17.9 | 41.3 | 44.7 | 0 | 68.1 |
| 2 | 368 | 82.2 | 76.7 | 78.2 | 17.4 | 40.5 | 44.6 | 0 | 137.6 |
| 3 | 463 | 85.1 | 79.5 | 79.4 | 16.7 | 39.8 | 44.6 | 0 | 208.8 |
| 4 | 567 | 88.1 | 82.5 | 80.5 | 15.8 | 39.1 | 44.9 | 0 | 281.8 |
| 5 | 672 | 90.4 | 84.7 | 81.2 | 15 | 38.5 | 45.2 | 0 | 337.5 |
| 6 | 777 | 92.9 | 87.1 | 81.9 | 14.2 | 37.8 | 45.7 | 0 | 395 |
| 7 | 885 | 95.6 | 90.2 | 82.5 | 13.2 | 37.1 | 46.3 | 0 | 450.8 |
| 8 | 997 | 98.5 | 95.4 | 83.2 | 12.2 | 36.5 | 47.1 | 0 | 497.7 |
| 9 | 1,109 | 100 | 100 | 83.8 | 11.3 | 35.9 | 48 | 0 | 547.3 |
| 10 | 1,223 | 100 | 100 | 84.4 | 10.5 | 35.3 | 48.9 | 0 | 611.2 |
| 11 | 1,336 | 100 | 100 | 85 | 9.8 | 34.7 | 49.9 | 0 | 679.1 |
| 12 | 1,455 | 100 | 100 | 85.5 | 9.3 | 34.1 | 50.8 | 0 | 749.2 |
| 13 | 1,570 | 100 | 100 | 86 | 8.9 | 33.6 | 51.8 | 0 | 821.6 |
| 14 | 1,686 | 100 | 100 | 86.5 | 8.6 | 33 | 52.8 | 0 | 896.5 |
| 15 | 1,803 | 100 | 100 | 86.9 | 8.3 | 32.5 | 53.8 | 0 | 974 |
| 16 | 1,918 | 100 | 100 | 87.3 | 8 | 32 | 54.8 | 0 | 1,054 |
| 17 | 2,028 | 100 | 100 | 87.6 | 7.8 | 31.5 | 55.9 | 0 | 1,136.9 |
| 18 | 2,138 | 100 | 100 | 87.9 | 7.6 | 31.1 | 56.9 | 0 | 1,222.6 |
| 19 | 2,244 | 100 | 100 | 88.1 | 7.4 | 30.6 | 58 | 0 | 1,311.3 |
| 20 | 2,346 | 100 | 100 | 88.3 | 7.2 | 30.2 | 59 | 0 | 1,403.2 |
| 21 | 2,446 | 100 | 100 | 88.4 | 7 | 29.7 | 60.1 | 0 | 1,498.3 |
| 22 | 2,541 | 100 | 100 | 88.5 | 6.8 | 29.3 | 61.2 | 0 | 1,597 |
| 23 | 2,631 | 100 | 100 | 88.5 | 6.6 | 28.9 | 62.3 | 0 | 1,699.2 |
| 24 | 2,714 | 100 | 100 | 88.4 | 6.4 | 28.5 | 63.4 | 0 | 1,805.3 |
| 25 | 2,793 | 100 | 100 | 88.4 | 6.1 | 28.2 | 64.6 | 0 | 1,915.3 |
| 26 | 2,869 | 100 | 100 | 88.3 | 6 | 27.8 | 65.7 | 0.1 | 2,027.9 |
| 27 | 2,936 | 100 | 100 | 88.3 | 5.8 | 27.4 | 66.8 | 0.3 | 2,141.3 |
| 28 | 3,002 | 100 | 100 | 88.2 | 5.7 | 27.1 | 67.9 | 0.5 | 2,254.8 |
| 29 | 3,060 | 100 | 100 | 88.2 | 5.6 | 26.8 | 69.1 | 0.6 | 2,368.4 |
| 30 | 3,112 | 100 | 100 | 88.2 | 5.5 | 26.4 | 70.2 | 0.7 | 2,482.1 |
Export or inspect this experiment
Download the inputs, rule settings and all unrounded annual results. If file downloads are blocked in your browser, select and copy the same JSON below.
Where the design meets the real world
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights informs the distinction between human dignity and measured contribution. UN Sustainable Development Goal 16 provides a reference for peace, access to justice and accountable institutions. Neither source validates this simulation’s numerical assumptions.
The Earth texture is NASA’s historic Blue Marble imagery. It is a visual basemap, not current environmental measurements. No source or institution is presented as a partner or endorser.
FROM A WORLD MODEL TO REAL EVIDENCE
Begin with a promise
people can hold us to.
Rights, needs, responsibility.
Choose independent pilot circles with local consent. Agree baseline protections, budgets, care obligations and an accessible route to challenge a decision.
One complete, useful loop.
Deliver a real service from need to funding, work, independent acceptance and continued maintenance. Test portability and exit across different providers.
Let the evidence change the design.
Invite independent scrutiny and affected people to compare outcomes, costs and harms. Publish failures. Repeat what survives review and redesign what does not.