What this is
I am trying to build an institution around one idea:
HUMAN JUDGMENT IS VALUABLE.
Machines are becoming extraordinarily capable.
I want to use that capability to create as much value for as many humans as possible, while humans remain responsible for deciding what matters.
I don't know the perfect rules for doing that.
THIS IS MY BEST ATTEMPT.
Some things I have decided. I'll tell you what they are.
Some things I haven't.
I'LL ASK YOU.
You decide before you see what anyone else decided.
Your judgment is recorded.
Then you see the room.
You can explain why, if you want.
Your judgment does not automatically become the rule. It becomes evidence I have to confront when deciding what this institution should become.
If I disagree with the room, you'll see that too.
Then you can judge my decision.
This Constitution will change.
THE RECORD OF HOW IT CHANGED WILL NOT.
The Foundation
01
Humans decide what matters.
Machines can help us create, understand, compare, predict, and solve.
Capability is not the same thing as judgment.
HUMANS DECIDE WHAT MATTERS.
02
Create value. Circulate value. Don't hoard it.
Build Something exists to create as much value for as many humans as possible, using the least resources necessary.
I do not want to build another system whose success depends on extracting as much value as possible from the humans using it and concentrating that value at the top.
Build Something can pay its operating expenses.
Beyond that:
CREATE VALUE.
CIRCULATE VALUE.
ENABLE MORE CREATION.
REPEAT.
Exactly how that should happen is not completely solved.
03
Your judgment creates value.
What humans create, choose, prefer, believe, reject, and change their minds about can create enormous value.
If your judgment creates economic value, you should benefit from it.
Build Something may also create revenue from aggregate human judgment.
It will not sell your individual private data.
And it will not quietly take the value humans create and pretend that value belongs only to the institution.
04
Follow the money.
Build Something can pay its operating expenses.
After that, remaining economic value must circulate rather than accumulate for the founder or owners.
You should be able to see where the money came from, what the operating expenses were, and where the remaining value went.
IF WE SAY WE CIRCULATE VALUE, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE US DO IT.
05
Money can buy the question. Not the answer.
Advertisers and other organizations may pay for the opportunity to ask humans questions.
They cannot pay humans to produce a particular answer.
They cannot buy the result.
They cannot secretly change the question after seeing the answers.
MONEY CAN BUY ACCESS TO HUMAN JUDGMENT. IT CANNOT BUY HUMAN JUDGMENT.
06
Humans and machines are not the same thing.
Machines can create, answer, and compete.
So can humans.
The institution will not pass one off as the other.
When something came from a machine, the Record says so.
When something came from a human, the Record says so.
And when the question is what humans want:
HUMANS ANSWER IT.
07
The Record does not rewrite history.
Your judgment today belongs to today.
If you change your mind later, that belongs to later.
Your new answer does not erase your old answer.
The room can show where you stand now.
Your Record preserves where you stood before.
Corrections do not secretly replace the past. They are added to it, with a date.
HISTORY STAYS HISTORY.
08
You decide before the crowd.
When Build Something asks you a question, you answer before you see what anyone else chose.
No winning answer shown first.
No crowd telling you what to think.
YOU DECIDE FIRST.
Then your judgment is recorded.
Then you see the room.
09
Participation is a choice.
Nobody has to participate.
Nobody is publicly called out for refusing.
Nobody is pressured with fake deadlines or manufactured urgency.
If this institution is valuable, people should choose it because they understand what it is and want to participate.
How the room works
After you decide, you see:
THE PERCENTAGE THAT CHOSE EACH ANSWER.
THE EXACT NUMBER OF RESPONSES.
HOW MANY WERE SIGNED.
HOW MANY WERE ANONYMOUS.
We show both.
We don't pretend they're necessarily the same kind of evidence.
Whether they should have the same constitutional power is something I have not decided.
So I'm asking you.
You can also explain why you chose your answer.
Whether your explanation is public is your choice.
Now I need your judgment
The Foundation above contains the rules I am proposing to operate under.
But some constitutional questions remain unresolved.
I could answer them myself.
I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HUMANS THINK FIRST.
There is no hidden correct answer.
Choose before you see the room.
Which One? 01 / 05
Should a signed judgment have more constitutional power than an anonymous one?
Which One? 02 / 05
Who should be allowed to help change this Constitution?
Which One? 03 / 05
How much agreement should it take to change the Constitution?
Whatever the rule is, it must exist before we know the outcome. We don't get to move the bar after seeing the vote.
If humans choose B, the exact higher threshold still has to be decided before it governs an amendment.
Which One? 04 / 05
When should the founder stop having final authority over the Constitution?
Which One? 05 / 05
Should everything in this Constitution be changeable?
My current answer: B.
I believe some principles should be permanent.
For the first Constitution, I will decide which principles I believe deserve that protection.
I will explain why.
I will ask the room.
I will weigh what humans tell me.
BUT I WILL MAKE THE INITIAL DECISION.
Future permanent principles can be added through the constitutional process.
What your judgment does
I am not going to pretend these votes have power they don't yet have.
THESE VOTES DO NOT AUTOMATICALLY WRITE THE CONSTITUTION.
Not yet.
We haven't decided exactly what constitutional voting power should mean.
You're helping answer that.
During this founding version, I retain responsibility for the final constitutional decisions.
But I do not get to pretend you agreed with me when you didn't.
The Record will show:
WHAT I ASKED.
WHAT YOU CHOSE.
WHAT THE ROOM CHOSE.
WHAT I DECIDED.
WHY I DECIDED IT.
If I follow the room, you'll see it.
If I reject the room, you'll see that too.
Then you decide whether my judgment deserves your trust.
How future changes work
When an amendment to this Constitution is proposed, the humans governed by the constitutional process get the opportunity to judge it before it takes effect.
Their judgments are recorded.
The result is visible.
No individual judgment guarantees the outcome.
The rule determining whether an amendment passes must exist before the outcome is known.
IT CANNOT BE REWRITTEN AFTERWARD TO MANUFACTURE THE DESIRED RESULT.
Who gets constitutional power, how much agreement is required, and when founder authority transitions are questions you are helping answer now.
Signing
You've seen:
WHAT THIS INSTITUTION STANDS FOR.
WHAT IT PROMISES.
WHAT IT HASN'T DECIDED.
WHAT YOU THINK.
WHAT THE ROOM THINKS.
Now you decide whether you want to participate under these rules.
Signing does not mean you agree with me on every unresolved question.
Signing does not mean you agree with the majority.
Your Which One judgments remain yours.
Signing means:
I UNDERSTAND THE CONSTITUTION THAT CURRENTLY GOVERNS BUILD SOMETHING.
I AGREE TO ABIDE BY ITS SETTLED RULES WHILE I PARTICIPATE.
I MAY CHALLENGE THOSE RULES AND HELP JUDGE PROPOSED CHANGES.
MY JUDGMENTS REMAIN MY JUDGMENTS, EVEN WHEN THEY DISAGREE WITH THE FOUNDER OR THE ROOM.
If you sign, your real name is attached publicly to the frozen, dated version you signed.
Leaving later does not rewrite the historical Record of what you signed or the judgments you made part of that Record.
The Constitution may change.
WHAT YOU SIGNED DOES NOT.
The last rule
I don't know what the perfect institution for human judgment looks like.
Neither does a machine.
Neither does any one person.
So this Constitution begins with a rule about uncertainty:
WHEN WE DON'T KNOW, ASK HUMANS.
Record what they actually decide.
Show the disagreement.
Learn from it.
Improve the rules.
Never pretend agreement existed when it didn't.
THIS IS MY BEST ATTEMPT.
MAKE IT BETTER.
Do you want to sign?
Original signing statement · Read only
Real name — shown publicly
Email — kept private
I affirmatively sign Our Constitution_v1. I understand that my real name, the version, the signing time, and my constitutional judgments will be attached to a public, permanent signing record.
Nobody has to.