Everyone wants to save the world — they just can't agree on how
Earthlings

Earthlings

A Transnational People for a New Era

The modern system is built on the principles of monopoly on violence, territorial control, and coercion. People are divided on every conceivable level — political, economic, ideological; they do not act as a whole, cannot develop a common position, and are unable to coordinate.

To realize the principles of unity, freedom, and a sustainable society, a new planetary people is being formed — the Earthlings.

We unite across borders to take responsibility for the future of the planet and restore to every person the right to govern their own life.

We propose not to tear down the old, but to build a parallel system alongside existing institutions, using modern technologies that enable people to unite without intermediaries and without hierarchies of power.

Planetary Solidarity

A People Born of Free Choice

Until now, belonging to a people was determined by the accident of birth — territory, ethnicity, language. No one chose their people. The Earthlings expand this logic: here, each person becomes part of a global people by their own decision.

An Earthling is a person who has signed the Earthlings Declaration of Self-Determination, completed biometric verification, and received a digital passport. Membership does not require renouncing citizenship or nationality. It is a second identity — on a planetary scale.

The right to self-determination is a fundamental principle of international law, enshrined in the UN Charter and the International Covenants of 1966. The Earthlings people exercise this right by creating a new form of collective organization, seeking recognition as a subject of international law.

The Earthlings people exist de facto — by virtue of the free decision of individuals to unite around shared values. Our existence does not depend on recognition by states: the Declaration has been signed, participants have been verified, institutions are being established.

De jure recognition is a goal that the Earthlings pursue through consistent dialogue with international organizations and states. Recognition will not create us — it will make our reality visible to international law.

The Earthlings people are a subject of international law sui generis (of a unique kind). Their formation constitutes internal self-determination — the right to choose a political system without territorial secession. The Earthlings do not threaten the sovereignty of states, but complement national belonging with a planetary identity.

International law already recognizes new forms of collectivity: European civic identity (ECHR, 2005), the right to association in digital space (UN GA, 2013), self-determination of peoples without states (Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007). The Earthlings people act within the logic of this evolution.

A Sustainable Society Without Power

Throughout history, the forms of power have changed, but not its essence. Monarchies, republics, democracies — each model redistributed power, but none eliminated it. The subject changed — monarch, parliament, token holders — yet the mechanism itself remained the same.

Democracy limited arbitrary rule, established term limits and representation. But it did not abolish the governance of some people by others. Elections determine who will govern — but do not question the very necessity of governance.

Technology instead of promises. In the Earthlings model, the concentration of power is prevented not by prohibition, but by the design of the system itself. Technologies and rules are structured so that no group can gain control — not through wealth, not through numbers, not through influence.

Freedom in this model is not a political slogan. It is a property of the architecture: every person's voice carries equal weight, and no group — whether wealthy, numerous, or influential — can gain control over the system.

For centuries, this was technically impossible: coordinating millions of people required hierarchy. Blockchain, smart contracts, and digital identity verification for the first time enable coordination without intermediaries and without a vertical of power.

Why Now

The world has become a single organism, but it is governed by tools designed for a divided world. For the first time in history, technology makes it possible to change this.

Challenges That Know No Borders

Armed conflicts, climate change, uncontrolled AI development — no single state can solve these problems alone. International institutions created eighty years ago demonstrate functional inadequacy. A new form of coordination across borders is needed.

A Constructive Society

Conventional governance models are built on division and competition for control. The Earthlings are building a different model — a society where the environment itself makes cooperation more rewarding than rivalry. Not through appeals and slogans, but through the design of the system.

One Person — One Vote

Every Earthling verifies their unique identity upon joining the people. This eliminates multiple accounts and makes every vote genuine and inalienable. All decisions are made by direct vote.

Capture Protection

Capital capture is impossible — votes cannot be bought. Majority capture is limited — core values cannot be revised. Elite capture is prevented by direct participation of everyone. Vote manipulation is eliminated — every participant is unique and verified. Only a human being can become a member — not a corporation and not an organization.

How the Earthlings People Is Organized

Declaration of Self-Determination

The foundational and immutable document of the Earthlings people. It enshrines the values, principles, and foundations of existence. Signing the Declaration is the act of joining the people.

SBT Passport

A digital credential confirming membership in the people. Bound to the holder's identity, it cannot be transferred to another person. It serves as the key to participating in votes.

Earthlings DAO

A decentralized governance system for the people. All strategic, financial, and organizational decisions are made by vote of all Earthlings. Every Earthling has the right to submit a proposal.

Cells

Autonomous teams of up to six people for implementing initiatives. They operate independently within shared principles. Two types: professional and project-based.

Earthlings Coin

The utility token of the Earthlings ecosystem. Used for financing initiatives and rewards. It does not affect voting weight in the DAO.

Digital Platform

The technical infrastructure for interaction: voting, communication, Cell management, financial operations. Open-source code.

Main Page Map Earthlings Foundations

01
Values and Principles
Freedom that cannot be taken away. Trust that need not be earned.
🌿 Freedom by Default
Freedom is built into the architecture. No one can restrict an Earthling's basic rights.
Freedom Is Not a Resource
Equal and inalienable
Protection Without Protectors
Smart contracts
Mutual Interest
System protection
✦ What Unites the Earthlings
Dignity
Every person is unique
Openness
Directness in communication
Attentiveness
Listening to others
🤝 Trust as Foundation
Consis-tency
Verifia-bility
Since-rity
Recipro-city
🌍 A Community of Conscious Choice
One does not become an Earthling by birth — it is a conscious decision to join people who share common principles
Open
02
How It Works
Three levels: DAO → Cells → Earthlings Coin
⚡ Decision-Making (DAO)
Every Earthling can initiate a discussion and participate in voting
Initiation
Raising an issue
Discussion
Open discussion
Voting
Every vote is equal
🔷 Cells: From Idea to Result
Working groups of up to 6 people
Profes-sional
Project-based
≤6 people
Auto-nomy
💎 Earthlings Coin
Compen-sation
For work
Fun-ding
Of initiatives
Payment
For services
🔗 Unified System
DAO
Cells
Coin
SBT
Open
03
The Earthling's Path
From first encounter to full participation
📋 Membership Requirements
18+
Age
Declaration
â—Ž
Verification
🚀 Joining Procedure
1
Review documents
2
Registration
3
Biometrics
4
SBT Passport
⭐ Earthling's Opportunities
Voting
DAO Assembly
Work in Cells
Implementing initiatives
Platform
Personal dashboard
Economy
Earthlings Coin
🔒 Data Protection
Separation
Control
Right to Exit
Open
04
Technology
Blockchain, smart contracts, and open source
⚙️ Why Technology
Principles are built into the architecture. Not "agreed not to violate" but "impossible to violate."
Votes cannot be forged
Decisions cannot be hidden
Cannot be shut down
⛓️ Blockchain as Foundation
â—ˆ
Immutability
Permanent
â—‡
Distri-bution
1000+ nodes
â—†
Verifia-bility
See for yourself
📜 Smart Contracts
Automatic
execution
Predict-
ability
Protection from
arbitrariness
No
intermediaries
💻 Open Source
Transpa-rency
Audit
Participation
Indepen-dence
Open
05
Sustainability and Development
Protecting principles from erosion
🏗️ Design Principles
Separation of functions
No capture
Bottom up
From participants
Minimal data
Control
🛡️ Protection from Degradation
Cannot accumulate influence
1 person = 1 vote
Open entry
For everyone
No secret decisions
Everything on blockchain
Right to Exit
At any time
👁️ Independent Council
Experts oversee adherence to principles without making decisions
Oversight
Recommendations
Expertise
🌱 Development Directions
Growth through Cells
Platform
Web3
Open
06
Theoretical-Mathematical Framework
Academic model of the Earthlings people
11
sections
8
axioms
4
layers
2
Cell types
🔬 Scientific Foundations
🌐 Network
societies
∑ Axioms
A₁...A₈
⚖️ Institutional
design
⟨X, S, E, I, G, M, C⟩ Institutional Layers
Identity
SBT + KYC
Governance
DAO
Incentive
Coin
Coordin.
Cells
📈 Growth Model N(t)
N(t) = F(N, S, A, C, t)
Growth through Cells • Multi-level dynamics
🎓 Empirical Validation
A framework for scientific analysis and adjustment as practice accumulates
Open
07
Legal Justification
Legal architecture of the Earthlings people
⚖️ Legal Status
A transnational people forming through voluntary self-determination within the framework of international law
✓ Earthlings are
• Voluntary association
• Complement to citizenship
• Planetary representation
✗ Earthlings are NOT
• A state/territory
• A UN replacement
• A threat to sovereignty
📜 Three Levels of Recognition
I
Subjecthood
Right to self-determ.
II
Observer
Status at the UN
III
Participation
Global governance
📅 Phased Plan
2025-26
10K members
2026-27
NGO ties
2027-28
ECOSOC
2028-30
1M+ members
⚖️ Legal Conclusion
In the logic of international law evolution • Filling a legal gap
Open
08
Earthlings AI
A tool of the people, not their governor
🤖 Role of AI
AI assists the Earthlings but does not make decisions. All decisions belong to verified people.
Assistant, not a boss
A support tool
Open weights
Technological sovereignty
Control through DAO
Model decisions
⚡ AI Functions
Initiative analysis
Compliance checking
Cell formation
Team matching
Expert support
Decision analytics
🚫 What AI Does Not Do
Does not vote
Does not reject
Does not store data
Not autonomous
🔄 Development Path
Cloud
Initial stage
Hybrid
Own server
Autonomy
Full control
Open
Starting Point
01
Global Systems Diagnostics
Analysis of civilizational infrastructure
🌍 Global Stability Index
33.0
Systemic crisis • 16 subsystems
4
Critical
11
Attentiveness
1
Stable
81%
Negative
⚠️ Critical Systems (0-25 points)
⚡ Energy
7
750M without electricity
💧 Water/Food
18
282M in crisis
💳 Finance
18
Debt $100+ trillion
☁️ Climate
22
765K victims
📉 Rate of Degradation
Trust
↓ -8.7%/yr
Climate
↓ +0.15°C/yr
Finance
↓ -14.3%/yr
Open
02
Mathematical Modeling
Analysis based on scientific models: planetary boundaries, tipping points
📐 Planetary Boundaries Model
Xᵢ ≤ PBᵢ
where Xᵢ — current value, PBᵢ — boundary threshold
⚠️ Planetary Boundaries Status (2023)
🌡️ Climate
EXCEEDED
🦋 Biosphere
EXCEEDED
🌾 Land
EXCEEDED
💧 Water
EXCEEDED
🧪 Flows
EXCEEDED
🛡️ Ozone
WITHIN LIMITS
6 of 9 boundaries exceeded
⚠️ Tipping Points
5 of 16 elements at risk at 1.55°C
McKay et al., 2022
⚖️ Gini Coefficient
G = 1 − 2∫L(x)dx
Inequality metric
🏛️ Fragile States Index (FSI)
0-30
Sustain.
30-60
Stable
60-90
Attentiveness
90-120
Alert
📊 Synthesis: exceeding critical thresholds in multiple subsystems → risk of cascading effects
Open
03
Global Information Flows
Architecture of the modern media landscape
📊 Media Investment Concentration
$126B
Investment 2024
51%
By 6 companies
70%
YouTube algorithm
🤖 Algorithms
• Echo chambers
• Polarization
• Engagement maximization
🎭 Deepfakes
• +245% in 2024
• $12B in damages
• Threat to elections
⚠️ Impact on Society
11%
Teenagers
social media issue
2x
Depression risk
>3h on social media
-3
IQ points
per decade
🌱 Earthlings Approach
✔ DAO governance
✔ Blockchain verification
✔ Open algorithms
✔ Fact-checking
🌐 Information sovereignty • Transparency • Collective control
Open
04
AI Manipulation and Information Warfare
Threat analysis and defense methods
📡 Documented AI Operations
🇷🇺 Bot farms
968
accounts
🌐 OpenAI
20+
operations
🤖 Bots
51%
of traffic
🎭 Deepfakes
• Video: 57% detection
• Audio: 62% detection
• Images: 53%
📰 Fakes
• Clone websites
• AI propaganda
• 10x growth in 2023
🗳️ AI and Elections 2024
83.4%
concerned about AI's role
$4.6B
Pentagon in AI
🛡️ Defense Methods
✓ AI detectors: 89%
✓ Training: +65%
✓ Media literacy
✓ Source verification
📚 Sources: DOJ, OpenAI, Google TAG, Harvard, PNAS Nexus
Open
05
Real Risks of AI Technologies
Documented threats and defense methods
🔍 Digital Authoritarianism
22
countries
AI censorship
47
countries
state commentators
41
countries
blockages
📱 Corporate Risks
• TikTok algorithms
• Fake sites: 10x growth
• Info bubbles
📅 Timeline 2024
• Jan: robocalls NH
• Jul: bot farm RU
• Oct: 20+ operations
📊 Key Statistics
55%
recognize deepfakes
51%
bot traffic
83%
concerned
15
years ↓ freedom
⚠️ Documented Threats
🇷🇺🇮🇷🇻🇪
AI weapons
🇨🇳
Digital authoritarianism
🎯
Georgia, Moldova, UA
📚 Freedom House • Carnegie • OpenAI • Microsoft • Google TAG
Open
06
Systemic Crisis of Politics
Why new parties won't solve old problems
85%
distrust politicians
44%
low trust in government
200+
years of party system
⚠️ Anatomy of a Political Crisis
⏰ Slow decisions
🎭 Theatricality
💰 Systemic corruption
📱 Tech lag
🌍 Global inability
👥 Alienation of people
🔄 Vicious Circle of Politics
New party → Promises → Compromises → Corruption → Disillusionment →
🏛️ Traditional System
× Vote once every 4-5 years
× Lack of transparency
× Bureaucracy
🌐 Digital Systems
✓ Real-time participation
✓ Blockchain transparency
✓ 13K+ DAOs: $24B+
🚀 Path to Post-Political Era
🔗 DAO
🗳️ Liquid democracy
🤖 AI governance
📚 OECD • Edelman • Ipsos • Pew Research • DeepDAO
Open
07
Evolution of Governance
From representative democracy to direct participation
44%
low trust
39%
trust government
30%
influence government
13K+
DAOs worldwide
📋 Traditional System
• Delegation of authority
• 4-6 year cycles
• Centralization
• Slow adaptation
🔗 DAO Model
• Direct voting
• Continuous feedback
• Decentralization
• Fast execution
📊 Legitimacy Criteria (V. Schmidt)
📊
Accountability
🔍
Transparency
👥
Inclusiveness
🚪
Openness
🔗 DAO: How It Works
🗳️ Digital voting
⚡ Auto-execution
🔍 Public audit
âš¡
Speed
🔍
Transparency
⚖️
Participation
🌐
Global
📚 OECD Trust Survey • DeepDAO • Schmidt (2013) • DeGroot Model
Open
08
Theater of Democracy
How political systems became mechanisms of elite self-reproduction
22%
trust government
8%
trust Congress
$4.4B
lobbying 2024
91
autocracies
71%
in autocracies
📉 Trust Level (USA, 2024)
Small business
65%
Government
22%
Congress
8%
🏢
Corporations
→ $4.4B →
per year
🏛️
Congress
🚪 Revolving Doors
59%
Congress → lobbying
60%
senators → lobbyists
30%
MEPs in lobbying
🏛️ Traditional
✗ Lobbying distorts
✗ Vote once every 4-6 years
✗ Lack of transparency
🌐 Earthlings System
✓ Direct DAO participation
✓ Continuous influence
✓ Blockchain transparency
📚 Pew Research • Gallup • OpenSecrets • V-Dem • Transparency International
Open
09
The Great Illusion
How the stock market became a global casino
93%
of stocks held by top 10%
70-80%
of traders lose
$942B
buybacks 2024
📉 Degradation of Market Function
1602
Real investments
1971
Gold standard end
2008
Crisis, QE
2025
Algorithms 60-75%
⚙️ Systemic Extraction Mechanisms
🏛️
Big 3: $24T
88% of S&P 500
âš¡
HFT
60-75% of trades
🔒
Dark Pools
40-50% of volume
🏆 Extraction Hierarchy
🏆 Beneficiaries: BlackRock, Citadel, Goldman
⚖️ Intermediaries: Hedge funds, brokers (1-2%+20%)
📉 Retail: 70-80% lose → top profits
💸 Stock Market
✗ Information asymmetry
✗ Short-term maximization
✗ Market growth = inequality growth
🌱 Earthlings Economy
✓ Equal access to information
✓ Long-term development
✓ Fair distribution
📚 Federal Reserve • ESMA • S&P Global • SEC • Cambridge Research
Open

Values and Principles

Solidarity instead of competition. Agreements instead of coercion. Values embedded in the system itself, not merely written on paper.

A Constructive Society

Existing models of social organization are built on competition: parties struggle for power, corporations for markets, states for influence. Division and confrontation are embedded in the very design.

The Earthlings people are built on a different principle. In a constructive society, preserving the life of every individual is a shared priority, the success of one strengthens the well-being of all, and order is sustained by agreements, not by the threat of punishment.

This is neither utopia nor idealism. It is the result of an architecture where solidarity is more beneficial than competition — because everyone has a stake in protecting the system that safeguards their own rights.

Not reform, but a different logic

The Earthlings are not improving existing institutions. They are building a system where confrontation itself ceases to be a mode of organization.

The environment shapes behavior

People act constructively when the environment rewards cooperation rather than struggle. The design of the Earthlings people creates precisely such an environment.

Mutual interest

Every Earthling has a stake in the well-being of others — not out of altruism, but because the system works only when it works for everyone.

Earthlings Values

Life

The protection and flourishing of life in all its forms — from the dignity of every person to the biodiversity of the planet. Life is the supreme value, not subject to bargaining.

Freedom and Dignity

Every person is born free. The dignity of the individual is inviolable. Differences in views, culture, and experience are the richness of a people, not a reason for division.

Planetary Solidarity

Borders should not divide humanity in the face of shared challenges. Every person is part of humanity and of the planet. Every decision takes into account the interests of future generations.

Trust as a Foundation

Among the Earthlings people, trust is built not on reputation or status, but on the predictability of the system and the clarity of its rules.

Consistency

The rules are the same for everyone and are never changed retroactively. Every Earthling knows what to expect from the system and from fellow members.

Verifiability

Every decision, every transaction, every change — all are recorded and open to verification. Trust is not required where confirmation is possible.

Openness of Intent

An Earthling does not conceal their goals or manipulate information. Directness in communication creates an environment where genuine cooperation becomes possible.

Reciprocity

Relationships are built on balance: participation and contribution correspond to the opportunities received. No one exploits shared resources at the expense of others.

How This Works in Practice

Values remain mere words until they manifest in everyday actions. Among the Earthlings people, the principles of a constructive society define concrete norms of interaction: the ability to hear not only words but what stands behind them, the readiness to consider the interests of others when making decisions, and the absence of a gap between declarations and actions.

This is not a code of conduct imposed from above. It is a natural consequence of an environment where everyone has a voice, decisions are made collectively and transparently, and manipulation is disadvantageous because everything is in plain sight.

Immutable Principles

The Earthlings values are enshrined in the Declaration of Self-Determination — a document that cannot be altered by any vote. This is a safeguard against the erosion of principles: even a unanimous decision cannot revoke human dignity, personal freedom, or the right to life.

How It Works

Collective decisions through the DAO, initiatives carried out through Cells, and an independent economic and financial system built on Earthlings Coin.

Decision-Making

DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization) — a decentralized governance system in which the rules are encoded in software and executed automatically, without a central authority. A DAO is not a legal entity.

The Earthlings DAO is the institutional core of governance for the Earthlings people. It ensures collective decision-making, transparent resource allocation, and coordinated action among Earthlings and Cells without centralized authority, parties, or appointed officials.

The DAO rests on three fundamental pillars: the biometrically verified uniqueness of every participant, the principle of "one person — one vote," and transparent procedural rules that apply equally to all.

Initiation

Every initiative is accompanied by a structured description: objectives, context, alternatives, risks, and anticipated impact.

Expert review and deliberation

The initiative undergoes expert evaluation and open discussion among Earthlings. Participants ask questions, propose amendments, and challenge assumptions.

Cooling-off period and voting

After deliberation comes a pause for reflection. Then voting begins, in which every verified Earthling participates on equal terms. The result takes effect automatically.

Architecture of Participation

The Earthlings DAO combines broad popular engagement with competent analysis of complex issues through a multi-level system of participation.

The people's level

All Earthlings hold baseline voting rights on strategic and constitutional matters. This is the foundation of the DAO's democratic legitimacy — no significant decision is made without the participation of the people.

Delegate level

Earthlings with a proven track record and reputation may receive a mandate to represent the interests of others and participate in more frequent, operational decisions. Delegation is voluntary and revocable at any time.

Expert councils

Specialized groups with domain expertise (economics, security, law, ecology) perform analytical and advisory functions. They may raise the decision thresholds in their areas, but they do not override the will of the people.

Resilience safeguards

Epistemic filter

For general matters, a qualified majority suffices. For specialized matters, elevated thresholds may apply — requiring a supermajority or alignment with the opinion of relevant expert councils. This is a safeguard against populism without sliding into epistocracy.

Reputation markers

Competence and contribution are recorded through soulbound markers (SBT) tied to an Earthling's identity and non-transferable: participation in development, quality of past proposals, and verified professional competencies. Markers do not grant additional votes — equality in decision-making remains inviolable.

Review mechanisms

The DAO acknowledges that any system can err. For major decisions, outcome evaluation criteria are established, along with acceptable deviation ranges and predefined conditions for review. Partial rollback, parameter modification, or full reversal of a decision is possible at the initiative of the Earthlings.

Protection against power concentration

Regular rotation of delegates and expert council members. Restrictions on combining roles. Mandatory disclosure of conflicts of interest. Protection of minorities in decisions that affect the rights of vulnerable groups. The right of any Earthling to bring an issue to a vote.

The DAO in Earthlings' Lives

The DAO is not an abstract construct. It is coordination infrastructure that can be applied to concrete areas of life within the Earthlings people.

Healthcare

A technological foundation for pilot models of direct interaction between patients, medical professionals, and support funds in compliance with the medical legislation of participants' countries.

Education

Decentralized learning programs, collective course development, and skill verification through participation in the activities of the Earthlings people.

Ecology

Collective selection, funding, and monitoring of environmental initiatives with transparent use of resources and accountability to the people.

Labor coordination

Transparent distribution of tasks, roles, and rewards within Cells and the Earthlings ecosystem. The DAO does not act as an employer and does not replace national labor law.

Participatory economics

The DAO and Earthlings Coin as instruments for managing internal Cell funds and allocating resources within the Earthlings ecosystem.

Global coordination

The system's response time is determined not by the length of a bureaucratic chain but by the speed of deliberation and voting. The DAO operates where state institutions do not cover transnational activity.

Cells: From Idea to Result

Through Cells, the Earthlings turn ideas into results. Each Cell is a team that creates products, delivers services, and solves practical challenges.

Professional Cells

Formed around areas of expertise: developers, lawyers, analysts, designers. Standing groups that assign members to project Cells on demand.

Project Cells

Bring together Earthlings from different professional Cells for a specific initiative. They exist for the duration of the project; upon completion, they close while preserving results in the system.

Why a maximum of 6 people

This is a substantive decision, not a technical one. Small groups maintain transparency, prevent hidden hierarchies, and sustain the personal engagement of every member.

Autonomy and connection

Each Cell is autonomous in its decisions yet connected to the shared infrastructure. Issues that extend beyond a Cell's scope are escalated to the DAO level.

Project Lifecycle

The Earthlings digital platform and Earthlings AI provide a unified workflow — from the emergence of an idea to the completion of a project and the recording of every participant's contribution.

01

Idea emergence

Any Earthling submits an initiative through their personal dashboard: describing the problem, objective, expected impact, and required competencies.

02

Earthlings AI analysis

The AI performs an initial review: alignment with the Declaration, feasibility assessment, and if necessary — suggests refinements to wording and structure.

03

Routing to professional Cells

The proposal is automatically forwarded to relevant professional Cells. The Cells review it and assign members.

04

Project Cell formation

The platform helps balance the team composition by competencies and areas of responsibility. The Cell receives a plan, tools, and if necessary — internal funding.

05

Work and support

The Cell carries out its work, interacts with Earthlings AI, and draws on consultations from other Cells. The platform records milestones and progress.

06

Completion and contribution recording

The result is recorded, each participant's contribution is reflected in the system, and rewards are distributed. The project Cell closes; the experience endures.

Role of Earthlings AI

The AI serves as an assistant and analytical tool: it facilitates decision-making, helps balance team composition, and checks initiatives for alignment with core values. But it does not replace people or relieve them of responsibility for meaning.

5% to the Earthlings Fund

5% of each Cell's revenue goes to the Earthlings Fund — to support infrastructure, educational initiatives, assistance for new Cells, and the strategic goals of the people. Every Cell, working for itself, strengthens the shared foundation.

Working with the outside world

Cells are not confined within the ecosystem. They can work with external clients, earn in fiat currencies, create legal structures (sole proprietorships, companies, cooperatives), and set their own pricing. Earthlings Coin provides internal circulation but does not limit earning opportunities outside.

Earthlings Coin

Earthlings Coin is the foundational element of the economic and financial system of the Earthlings people, enabling Earthlings to fully realize their potential and sustain themselves materially.

Traditional currencies are tied to sovereign states, digital payment systems are controlled by corporations, and cryptocurrencies often turn into speculative assets. The Earthlings need their own currency that remains under the ecosystem's control and cannot be exploited by external actors.

EC is a real economic system built on the principles of fair distribution and proportionality of contribution to reward.

"EC is a tool for creating abundance through coordination and participation in the Earthlings ecosystem."
Transparent recording of every Earthling's contribution to the development of the shared infrastructure
Utility-based access to services and resources of the ecosystem
A sustainable foundation for decentralized resource management

What Earthlings Coin Provides

EC connects participation, contribution, and access to services into a unified economic architecture. Its use is defined by the concrete needs of the ecosystem.

Access to services

Computing resources, cloud data storage, AI assistants, analytical tools, participation in Earthlings idea platforms, expert reviews, and mentoring programs.

Work and rewards

Cell members receive EC for completing work, developing modules, and creating content. Compensation is tied to results, not to time spent. Everything is public and recorded on-chain.

Funds and collective decisions

Formation of purpose-driven funds — environmental, educational, social, and technological. Collective selection of initiatives, transparent reporting tied to outcomes.

Experimental models

Exploring the links between incentives and collective behavior, pilot initiatives for alternative economic models, and integration with other Web3 systems in an experimental format.

Evolutionary Development Path

As the Earthlings population grows, utility functions expand, and the ecosystem's economic layer strengthens, EC evolves from an internal currency toward market liquidity.

Internal economy

EC operates within the Earthlings ecosystem — as a means of participation in Cells, the DAO, and digital services, as a mechanism for coordinating initiatives, and as a tool for allocating internal funds. The foundational mechanisms of issuance, distribution, security, and user experience are refined.

Limited liquidity

Launch of limited exchange mechanisms: pilot integrations with Web3 protocols, internal service markets, and experimental models. Every scenario undergoes legal review and approval by the DAO.

Exchange listing

Upon the ecosystem's maturation, EC may be nominated for listing on decentralized and centralized exchanges in compliance with regulatory requirements. Market value is viewed as a natural consequence of the ecosystem's maturity and utility.

Identity layer

SBT passport · biometric verification

Governance layer

Earthlings DAO · "one person — one vote"

Incentive layer

Earthlings Coin · economic footprint

Coordination layer

Cells · initiative execution

Four Layers, One System

The Earthlings architecture follows a multi-layer model. Every vote is tied to a biometrically verified Earthling through an SBT passport. Decision-making processes are formalized in the DAO rules. Earthlings Coin provides the economic layer but does not grant additional votes and does not become a source of power. Cells use the DAO infrastructure to coordinate their actions.

The Earthling's Path

From first introduction to full participation in the life of the Earthlings people. The process is open to everyone who shares the Earthlings values.

Membership Requirements

18+

Age

Membership is open to individuals who are at least 18 years old. Age is confirmed during the verification process.

Agreement with the Declaration

Voluntary acceptance of the Earthlings Declaration of Self-Determination and agreement with the values of the Earthlings people.

Verification

Completion of biometric verification to confirm the uniqueness of each participant.

Membership Procedure

1

Review the documents

Familiarize yourself with the Earthlings Declaration, the Protocol, and other foundational documents. Understand the principles and values of the people before making the decision to join.

2

Registration and consent

Create an account on the platform. Confirm your agreement with the text of the Declaration — this is a voluntary act of self-identification that creates no obligations toward any state.

3

Biometric verification

Complete verification through the Earthlings' own verification system. Biometric data is not stored in the Earthlings' systems — only a cryptographic confirmation of successful verification is retained.

4

Membership fee

Payment of a membership fee of $79 USD. Payment methods: cryptocurrency (ETH, USDT, USDC). The fee covers verification costs and infrastructure development.

5

Receiving the SBT passport

Upon successful verification and fee payment, a digital Earthling passport is issued. It confirms membership in the people and serves as the key to the ecosystem's opportunities.

Earthling Opportunities

Upon receiving the SBT passport, access opens to all tools and opportunities of the Earthlings people.

Participation in voting

A voice in the Earthlings DAO on all matters brought to collective deliberation. The right to submit proposals and initiatives of your own.

Working in Cells

Join existing Cells or create new ones. Participate in carrying out initiatives and receive rewards for your contributions.

Platform access

A personal dashboard with participation history, communication tools, Cell management, and access to ecosystem services.

Participatory economics

Earning and using Earthlings Coin. The ability to fund initiatives and receive compensation for work.

Data Protection

The Earthlings people adhere to the principle of data minimization. Only the information necessary for the system to function is collected.

Biometric data is processed by the Earthlings' own verification system and is not transferred to the Earthlings' internal systems. Only confirmation of successful verification is stored.

Data separation

Identity, voting, and economic operations are distributed across different layers of the system.

Participant control

Each Earthling determines which personal information is made visible to other members.

Right to exit

The ability to leave the Earthlings people at any time with deletion of associated data.

Technology

The Earthling's path — from verification to voting — rests on three technologies: blockchain, smart contracts, and open-source code. These are what turn the principles of the Earthlings people from words into a working system.

Why Technology Is Needed

The principles of the Earthlings people — equal votes, transparent decisions, protection of every participant's rights — cannot rest on agreements alone. Agreements are broken when the opportunity arises.

Technology embeds principles into the very architecture of the system. Not "people agreed not to violate," but "violation is technically impossible." This is a fundamentally different level of guarantee.

Votes cannot be forged

Biometrics and cryptography guarantee: one person — one vote. Creating multiple accounts or voting on someone else's behalf is impossible.

Decisions cannot be concealed

Every decision is recorded on the blockchain and open to verification. Deleting or altering a record is impossible.

Participants cannot be blocked

Access to voting does not depend on an administrator's decision. The system operates without centralized control.

Blockchain as the Foundation

A blockchain is a distributed database stored simultaneously on thousands of computers and controlled by no single party.

Immutability

Once data is recorded, it cannot be deleted or altered. The history of all decisions and transactions is preserved permanently.

Distribution

Data is stored not on a single server but across thousands of computers. Taking some of them offline does not affect how the system operates.

Verifiability

Any participant can verify any record. There is no need to trust anyone — you can confirm it yourself.

Smart Contracts

A smart contract is a program that automatically executes predefined rules. Without human intervention, without the possibility of interference.

Automatic execution

If a condition is met, the action takes place. A vote reaches the required number — the decision takes effect. No administrator approval is needed.

Predictability

The rules are known in advance and are the same for everyone. The smart contract code is open — anyone can verify exactly how the system will respond to any given action.

Protection against arbitrary action

No one can change the rules for an individual participant. The code executes identically, regardless of who performs the action.

Coordination without intermediaries

Participants interact directly, through code. There is no need for a central body to oversee the enforcement of agreements.

Transparency

Every line of code is available for review

Audit

Independent specialists verify security

Participation

Any Earthling can propose an improvement

Independence

The code belongs to no one and belongs to everyone

Open Source

All code of the Earthlings platform is open source. This means that anyone can study how the system works, check it for vulnerabilities, and propose improvements.

Open source is yet another layer of transparency. It is not enough to promise that the system operates fairly. People must be given the ability to verify this for themselves.

The platform is developed collectively. Changes are discussed, tested, and adopted by the Earthlings. No one can make a change alone.

Resilience and Development

How the system protects its principles from erosion and evolves while remaining true to its core values.

Design Principles

The Earthlings system is designed to prevent the concentration of power and preserve equality among participants.

Separation of functions

Identity, voting, and economics are distributed across different layers of the system. No single element controls all functions simultaneously. This eliminates the possibility of a power seizure.

Bottom-up

Decisions flow from participants to the collective level, not the other way around. Initiatives rise from Cells, are discussed by Earthlings, and are adopted through a vote of all Earthlings.

Inalienability of membership

No one can be expelled from the Earthlings people under any circumstances. In case of rule violations, restrictive measures are applied, but not expulsion. Departure is by one's own will alone.

Protection Against Degradation

Many systems tend toward power concentration over time. The Earthlings people contain built-in mechanisms to counteract this.

Influence cannot accumulate

Influence does not accumulate. No matter how much Earthlings Coin a participant holds — when voting, they have exactly one vote, just like everyone else.

Open entry

Anyone who meets the basic requirements can join. There is no mechanism that allows "established" members to restrict the inflow of new ones.

Immutability of core principles

The Earthlings Declaration is not subject to revision. Governance procedures may evolve by decision of a qualified majority, but the fundamental values are protected permanently.

Free exit as a signal

No one is held in the Earthlings people against their will. This is not only a right — it is a built-in feedback mechanism: if the system degrades, participants leave.

Independent Council

The Earthlings Council is a group of experts who do not participate in operational governance. Their role is to monitor adherence to principles and provide recommendations to the people.

The Council does not make decisions on behalf of the people. It serves as an additional layer of review — an independent perspective on what is happening.

Oversight

Analysis of decisions and processes for alignment with core principles and values.

Recommendations

Public opinions on important matters that the Earthlings may consider when voting.

Expertise

Engaging specialists to assess complex technical and legal issues.

Directions of Development

The Earthlings people develop organically — through the activity of Cells, the decisions of participants, and connections with the outside world.

Growth through Cells

Every new Cell expands the ecosystem's capabilities. Cells create products, deliver services, and attract new participants through the results of their work.

Platform development

The digital infrastructure is developed collectively. Participants propose improvements, the code is open for review, and changes are adopted by vote.

Web3 Federation

A connection with the wider world of decentralized technologies. The Earthlings people can provide a legal framework for communities operating beyond traditional jurisdictions.

Theoretical-Mathematical Framework of the Earthlings

The preceding sections showed how the Earthlings people are organized and what they stand on. This section answers the question: can all of this be described rigorously? Before you is a concise version of the academic model — a system of axioms, definitions, and institutional constructions, open to verification and critique.

11
sections in the theoretical-mathematical model
8
foundational axioms of the Earthlings people's existence
4
institutional layers (Identity, Governance, Incentive, Coordination)
2
types of Cells: professional and project-based as the "atoms" of collective action

Scientific Foundations of the Earthlings Model

The Earthlings model is built not on empirical forecasts but on a rigorous theoretical-mathematical and institutional framework. At its core are network societies, complex systems theory, an axiomatic approach, and a formal conceptual apparatus suitable for subsequent empirical validation.

🌐
Network Societies and Complex Systems

The Earthlings people are described as a distributed network of subjects and Cells, rather than as a territorial population. The theory of network societies and complex adaptive systems explains how stable order can emerge "from below" through numerous local interactions without centralized authority.

  • horizontal coordination instead of a pyramid of power;
  • multiple nodes and clusters (Cells and projects);
  • emergent structures and self-organization;
  • resilience to the failure of individual network elements.
System = ⟨X, S, E, I, G, M, C⟩
X — subjects (Earthlings); S — Cells; E — project ecosystem; I/G/M/C — institutional layers: identity, governance, incentives, coordination.
Axiomatic and Formal Framework

Since the Earthlings do not have a long empirical history, the model is constructed as an axiomatic system. A minimal set of axioms is introduced, defining the fundamental properties of the Earthlings people: biometric uniqueness, voluntariness, transterritoriality, decentralized governance, open entry by age, and others.

A = {A₁,…,A₈}
A set of eight axioms defines the boundaries of possible institutional decisions and excludes models that contradict the very idea of a people beyond state and territory.

On the basis of axioms, rigorous definitions of key concepts are introduced: "Earthlings people," "subject," "Earthling status," "Cell," "SBT," "governing actor," "institutional layer," "Earthlings network."

⚖️
Institutional Design and Verifiability

The model is fundamentally oriented toward legal and technical verifiability. It describes not only social meanings but also institutional mechanisms: biometric identity, KYC, DAO, the internal economy of Earthlings Coin, the registry, and age criteria.

A key principle is empirical validation: all elements of the model are formulated so that they can be tested against data in the future: DAO integrity, Cell effectiveness, growth dynamics N(t), incentive sustainability, and protection against power concentration.

Model → (definitions, procedures, testable hypotheses)
This is not a set of slogans but a framework that can be subjected to scientific analysis and adjustment as practice accumulates.

Institutional Architecture of the Earthlings: From Identity to Coordination

At the core of the model is a biometrically unique subject, secured through an SBT token, and a four-layer architecture: identity, governance, incentives, coordination. Together they form a closed loop of reproduction and growth for the Earthlings people.

Identity Layer: Biometrics, KYC, and SBT
Subject
A biometrically unique individual who has completed verification and received Earthling status. Each natural person corresponds to no more than one status.
Identity Attestation
The process of identity confirmation through the Earthlings' own verification system with minimized data storage and subsequent cryptographic recording of the result.
SBT
Soulbound Token — an immutable, non-transferable token that secures Earthling status. It does not confer economic power but serves as an institutional key: "one person — one subject."
Sovereignty
Identity verification is not monopolized by the state: Earthling status exists above citizenship, neither replacing it nor requiring its own territory.
Governance & Coordination: DAO and the Cell System
Cells
Small autonomous teams (2–6 people). Professional Cells are "competency banks"; project Cells are temporary teams for specific initiatives. Through them, the people's practical activity is carried out.
DAO
Not just smart contracts but an architecture of procedures: who can initiate decisions and how, vote, challenge, and revise rules without creating permanent centers of power.
Governing Actor
Any subject participating in decision-making. Power is not attached to positions: governance is participation in procedures, not holding an office.
Four Layers
Identity → Governance → Incentive → Coordination → Identity. A unique subject participates in governance, receives incentives, engages in projects, and thus strengthens their identity and belonging to the people.

Theoretical Growth Model of the Earthlings People

Earthlings growth is understood not as pure statistics but as a multi-level dynamic: the number of subjects, Cell development, and institutional maturity. The model defines the structure of dependency but does not directly claim numerical forecasts — those will emerge only after empirical data accumulates.

Multi-Level Dynamics of N(t)

The growth model considers three levels:

  • micro-level — individual decisions to join;
  • meso-level — Cell formation and development;
  • macro-level — evolution of the network and institutional architecture as a whole.
N(t) = F(N, S, A, C, t)
N(t) — number of subjects; S — Cell system; A — institutional activity; C — coordination. Function F is defined structurally and is subject to future calibration against data.
Important: the model describes how growth is linked to the system's architecture but does not substitute for real data. At the initial stage, it deliberately does not use fabricated statistics or percentages.
The Role of Cells as Growth Generators

Cells are not just working groups but also key sources of growth:

  • they create practical projects and clear entry points;
  • they filter and integrate new participants;
  • they make participation meaningful and useful to the world;
  • they build trust in the Earthlings architecture through tangible results.
dN/dt > 0 ↔ Cells demonstrate the value of participation
When functioning Cells and viable projects exist, growth in participant numbers becomes not a marketing task but a natural consequence of observable value.

The model allows for the existence of a critical mass after which the system begins to accelerate, but does not tie this to arbitrary numbers: the criterion is linked to recognition, trust, and Cell structure density, rather than "magic" figures.

Qualitative Development Scenarios for the Earthlings Architecture

Instead of artificial numerical forecasts, the model describes three qualitative scenarios. They are not predictions but help experts assess under what conditions the architecture remains resilient and does not lose its original principles.

Sustainable Growth Scenario
Cells demonstrate practical value, Earthlings Coin functions as a tool for recognizing contribution rather than power, and the DAO transparently and openly revises procedures. Growth is accompanied by the preservation of decentralization and low barriers to entry.
Gradual Calibration Scenario
Growth is uneven: some Cells are active, others go dormant. The architecture is fine-tuned through feedback, axioms and rules are adjusted. The main task is to maintain institutional coherence and prevent creeping centralization.
Centralization Threat Scenario
Attempts emerge to concentrate influence, turn the token into an external source of power, or capture DAO procedures. The model describes which protective mechanisms must be activated: strict binding of rights to the subject, decision transparency, and the absence of centers whose control would grant a monopoly.

Each scenario is not a numerical forecast but a framework for discussion: how to modify the architecture so that the system remains true to its foundational axioms under any growth trajectory.

Limitations of the Theoretical Model and Long-Term Resilience

The model honestly states its limits: it defines structure, not predicting numbers. At the same time, risks of institutional degradation and protection mechanisms are described in detail.

Theoretical and Empirical Limitations

Since the Earthlings do not yet have an extensive history, the model:

  • does not produce quantitative forecasts for N(t), S(t), activity, or token volume;
  • defines only the form of dependency between architecture and growth;
  • provides for subsequent calibration as data becomes available;
  • describes a program for future empirical verification: biometric and KYC auditing, DAO analysis, Cell effectiveness, Earthlings Coin behavior, and network dynamics.

This is a deliberate choice: the model does not pretend to be "precise statistics" where data does not yet exist.

Countering Centralization and Elitism

Many social systems tend toward power concentration over time. In the Earthlings model, these tendencies are countered by structural decisions:

  • rights are tied to the unique subject, not to the volume of resources;
  • Earthlings Coin does not grant additional votes and does not become an instrument of power;
  • the absence of a center whose capture would grant a monopoly on governance;
  • transparency of DAO procedures and the ability to revise them;
  • the impossibility of accumulating "votes" through capital and purchasing influence;
  • distributed responsibility and a multiplicity of Cells instead of a single vertical.

Long-term stability here is understood as the ability to preserve open entry, subject uniqueness, and governance transparency even as scale grows.

How to Read the Earthlings Theoretical-Mathematical Model

This section does not calculate numbers but helps experts quickly orient themselves: at which level to begin reading the full academic version and what questions to ask at each level.

1. If you are interested in the nature of a people beyond the state
Begin with the chapter on the logic of a people beyond territory and classical concepts of sovereignty. It explains why the Earthlings are not a new "statehood" but a people existing in a networked civilization above national jurisdictions.
2. If formal guarantees and rigorous definitions matter
Proceed to the axiomatics and formal definitions. Verify the completeness and consistency of the axioms, the sufficiency of definitions for "subject," "status," "Cell," "SBT," and the four-layer model.
3. If decentralized governance interests you
Study the DAO architecture and the role of Cells. Pay attention to how procedures replace governing bodies, how monopoly is excluded, and what role biometric uniqueness plays in voting integrity.
4. If verifiability and future empirics matter
See the section on validation methods. It poses questions to data that has yet to be collected: DAO integrity, Cell effectiveness, N(t) dynamics, incentive distribution, and possible critical mass thresholds.
Model ≠ Forecast

The Earthlings theoretical-mathematical framework is not an attempt to predict the future by numbers but an attempt to establish an honest, transparent, and verifiable architecture for a new people, in which every subsequent generation will be able to see:
how exactly the system is organized, what it stands on, and how it can be improved.

What This Theoretical-Mathematical Framework Offers the World

The Earthlings reach a level where they can be discussed not only in the language of values and metaphors but also in the language of rigorous definitions, axioms, and institutional constructions. This page gathers in a presentation format what the full academic version develops across hundreds of pages.

1
a new type of people, existing in a networked civilization without territory or coercive apparatus
space for future research, calibration, and model adjustment as practice accumulates
0
fabricated forecasts: only an honest structure, open to critique and development

The theoretical-mathematical framework is an invitation to dialogue with the scientific, legal, and technological community. If the world needs a new people, they must be described so that they can not only be felt but also understood, verified, and improved.

⚖️

Legal Justification

How a new transnational people relates to international law, legitimacy, and existing institutions

Legal Foundation

Four Pillars of International Law

The Earthlings rest on specific provisions of international law recognized by the majority of states.

📜 Freedom of Association
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 20 + International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 22:
"Everyone has the right to form associations of their choice"
  • Voluntary membership without coercion
  • Protection from state prohibitions
  • Peaceful association of citizens
🌍 Transnationality

International law recognizes transnational subjects: NGOs, trade unions, indigenous peoples, religious communities.

  • Without territorial claims
  • Respect for state sovereignty
  • Voluntary global community
🔮 Future Generations
Preamble of the UN Charter:
Directly references "succeeding generations"
  • Absence of representation mechanisms
  • Creation of a new channel for voice
  • Supplement to existing institutions
🤝 Complementarity

The Earthlings people do not replace states but complement the international system by offering a new coordination channel.

  • Without taxation or coercion
  • Consultation and research
  • Civic initiatives

A Gap in International Law

Vertical Structure of Representation

International law is structured vertically:

Existing Structure
  • Citizens obtain representation through states
  • States are represented in international organizations
  • International organizations act on behalf of member states
What Is Missing
  • A direct connection between people of different countries as a single planetary community
  • Expression of collective will on issues of planetary scale
  • Collective decisions beyond state structures
Legal Qualification of the Gap:
Modern international law does not recognize an individual's belonging to the planet as a legally significant fact. This constitutes a legal gap in which de facto human belonging to the planet is not accompanied by de jure status and legal consequences.
Critically Important

Clarification on Representation

⚠️ The Earthlings people do NOT claim to represent all of humanity

The concepts of "humanity" and "civilization" philosophically encompass all people on the planet but lack legal form and mechanisms for expressing collective will.

The Earthlings people represent only those who:
  • Have freely signed the Earthlings Declaration
  • Have completed the identity uniqueness verification procedure
  • Have consciously adopted the identity of a member of the people
The goal at this stage:
Not to fill the gap in humanity's representation, but to create a mechanism and precedent demonstrating how such a gap can be filled over time as membership grows and international recognition develops.
Legal Qualification

Application of People Recognition Criteria

Modern international law does not limit the concept of a "people" to ethnic or territorial criteria.

International Court of Justice ruling on the "East Timor" case (1995):
"The right of peoples to self-determination is evolving and is not limited to historical forms of its implementation"
Shared Historical Destiny

Members of the Earthlings people are united by the awareness of shared belonging to a humanity facing planetary challenges (climate, technology, inequality) that cannot be resolved at the national level.

Unity of Ethical Principles

Enshrined in the public Declaration: planetary responsibility, rights of future generations, technological ethics, voluntary participation.

Awareness of Group Identity

Expressed through the act of signing the Declaration and completing verification — a formal manifestation of the will to become part of the community.

Will for Political Self-Determination

Implemented through the creation of a DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization — a decentralized governance system that is not a legal entity), making collective decisions, and participating in planetary initiatives.

Doctrine

Common Heritage of Mankind

Connection to a recognized doctrine of international law and the role of the Earthlings people in its protection

Doctrine «Common Heritage of Mankind»
Recognized in:
  • The Outer Space Treaty (1967) — outer space
  • UN General Assembly Resolution 2749 (XXV) 1970 — the seabed
  • UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982) — ocean resources
  • Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) — the climate system
ICJ Advisory Opinion on Nuclear Weapons (1996):
"The environment is not an abstraction but represents the living space, the quality of life, and the very health of human beings, including generations unborn"
The Problem of Governing Common Heritage:

Existing mechanisms (the International Seabed Authority, conferences of the parties to conventions) are structurally limited:

  • They represent states, not people directly
  • They are constrained by the short-termism of political cycles
  • They do not include the representation of future generations
  • They are subject to conflict between national and universal human interests
The Legal Role of the Earthlings People

The Earthlings people do not claim ownership of the common heritage but create an additional mechanism for its protection through:

  • Direct representation of interested persons (minus state mediation)
  • Long-term planning (not constrained by electoral cycles)
  • Inclusion of future generations' interests in the decision-making process
  • Transnational coordination of citizens' actions
Precedents

International Practice of Recognizing New Peoples

International law develops through the recognition of new forms of collectivity that meet the challenges of the time. The Earthlings people represent a natural evolution of this process.

🇪🇺 European Identity

The 2005 European Court of Human Rights ruling recognized the formation of a "European civic identity" as a new form of belonging that complements national identity.

🏴‍☠️ Sea Peoples

The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982) de facto recognized the right of seafaring nomadic peoples to self-determination beyond the territorial boundaries of states.

🌐 Digital Communities

UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/68/167 (2013) recognized the right to freedom of association in digital space as a form of exercising the right to self-determination.

🏔️ Indigenous Peoples

The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) established that peoples can exercise self-determination regardless of having their own state.

Legal Principle

Each of these precedents demonstrates that international law is capable of adapting to new forms of collective identity when they meet the real needs of the time and correspond to fundamental principles of human rights.

Boundaries of Competence

Principle of Subsidiarity

The Earthlings do not claim that "a million people = representation of humanity." Instead, the Earthlings people honestly define the boundaries of their mandate.

Treaty on European Union, Article 5(3):
"In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity... the Union shall act only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States"
Scope of Competence of the Earthlings People

Limited to issues that:

  • Are transnational by nature (cross borders)
  • Cannot be effectively resolved at the state level
  • Require long-term planning beyond electoral cycles
  • Affect future generations that lack representation
✅ Within Earthlings' Scope of Competence
  • Long-term climate policy (2050-2100 horizon)
  • Ethical frameworks for global technologies (AI, biotechnology)
  • Protection of the common heritage of mankind (space, oceans, Antarctica)
  • Intergenerational justice and the rights of future generations
❌ OUTSIDE Earthlings' Competence
  • National security of states
  • Domestic politics and legislation
  • Territorial disputes
  • Matters governed by international treaties
  • Religious or ideological matters
The Principle of Complementarity:
The Earthlings people do not compete with the UN, states, or regional organizations but fill a specific operational gap in representing the transnational interests of people as a planetary community.
Legal Consistency

Declaration Compliance with International Law

Every key provision of the Earthlings Declaration has a legal justification and corresponds to specific norms of international law.

Principles and Their Legal Justification
Declaration PrincipleLegal JustificationNorm of International Law
Formation of a transnational peopleThe right of peoples to self-determination is not limited to territorial criteriaInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. 1 + ICJ "East Timor" (1995)
Principle of VoluntarinessburnPassport function + Right to exit as an element of accountabilityUniversal Declaration of Human Rights, Art. 20: the right to freedom of association includes the right not to be compelled
"One person — one vote"Soul-Bound Token + biometrics as a technological guarantee of equal voting rightsInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. 25: the right to participate in governance and equal voting rights
Protection against commercializationTechnological prohibition in the DAO code against transferring governance to a commercial entityGeneral principle: non-profit associations must preserve their nature
Immutability of core valuesA ⅔ requirement for changing foundational principlesDraft Declaration on the Rights of Future Generations
Principle of SubsidiarityClear definition of the scope of competence — only transnational and long-term issuesTreaty on EU, Art. 5(3)
Transparency and accountabilityAll DAO decisions are published on the blockchain and available for verificationAarhus Convention (1998)
Compliance Methodology

This table demonstrates that the Earthlings people is not an arbitrary initiative but represents a consistent attempt to create a legal form for implementing principles recognized by international law in the context of 21st-century globalization.

Development Trajectory

Legitimacy Metrics

The legitimacy of the Earthlings people is directly linked to the size and activity of its membership. Below are transparent evaluation criteria for the people's capacity to represent planetary interests.

1
1 000 000+
Local Legitimacy

Status: Local legitimacy for specific projects

Capabilities: Participation in specialized UN forums through NGOs, pilot projects on climate and technology

Request to the UN: Recognition as an experimental form of transnational organization

2
10 000 000+
Regional Significance

Status: Regional legitimacy

Capabilities: Consultative status with ECOSOC, systematic participation in climate, technology, and humanitarian agenda discussions

Request: Presenting positions in specialized UN bodies

3
100 000 000+
Global Significance

Status: Global legitimacy

Capabilities: A notable participant in shaping decisions about the planet's future, while maintaining the voluntary nature of membership and strict accountability

Request: Observer status in the UN General Assembly

Rule of Code

Technological Implementation of Law

Key legal ideas are embedded not only in text but also in code: rule of law is complemented by rule of code.

Voluntariness

The Right to Exit — in Code

The function to "burn" Earthling status is available to any participant at any time. No one can hold a person in the community against their will — this is a technological guarantee of freedom of association, not just a textual promise.

Equality

"One person — one vote"

The Soul-bound token and biometric identity uniqueness verification prevent selling or transferring votes, as well as multiple registrations. The right to vote ceases to be an object of trade and concentration.

Accountability

Public Trail of Decisions

All key DAO decisions are recorded on the blockchain. Any researcher, state, or organization can verify how exactly decisions were made and whether they comply with declared procedures and constraints.

Stability

Protection of Core Values

Core principles — the rights of future generations, environmental responsibility, the rejection of violence, and the prohibition on commercializing Earthling status — require a heightened threshold for amendment. This is closer to the "constitutional" level.

Honesty and Openness

Acknowledging Risks and Challenges

The Earthlings people openly acknowledge the potential risks and challenges the initiative may face. Transparency regarding risks is part of the accountability principle.

⚠️ Legal Challenges
  • Status uncertainty: The absence of clear precedents for a transnational people may create legal uncertainty
  • Differences in perception: States may interpret the status and authority of the Earthlings people differently
🛡️ The Earthlings' Response
  • Gradualism: Phased development with requests for feedback from states and the UN
  • Dialogue: Active engagement with the legal community to build consensus
  • Flexibility: Readiness to adapt structures based on practical experience
⚠️ Technical Risks
  • Security vulnerabilities: Potential attacks on blockchain infrastructure
  • Scalability: The need to process millions of voting transactions
  • Privacy vs. transparency: The balance between personal data protection and public verifiability
🛡️ The Earthlings' Response
  • Proven technologies: Using only mature, tested solutions
  • Multi-layered security: Independent smart contract audits
  • Technological progress: Readiness to migrate to more advanced platforms
⚠️ Socio-Political Risks
  • State resistance: Some countries may perceive the initiative as a threat
  • Manipulation: Attempts to abuse the platform for political purposes
  • Fragmentation: Risk of the people splitting along ideological lines
🛡️ The Earthlings' Response
  • Clear boundaries: Strict adherence to the subsidiarity and non-interference principles
  • Neutrality: Prohibition on using the platform for partisan politics
  • Moderation: Mechanisms for detecting and preventing manipulation
Principle of Honesty

The formation of a transnational people is an innovative legal initiative without ready-made solutions. Practice will refine and adjust approaches.

The Earthlings people's commitment: To openly document both successes and failures, share experience with the scientific and legal community, and be ready to adjust course.

Accountability

Mechanisms of Control and Limitation of Power

The Earthlings people assume strict commitments of accountability to the international community as a condition of the legitimacy of their activities.

Internal Mechanisms
Transparency of Decisions
  • All votes are published on the blockchain
  • DAO protocols are open for analysis
  • Financial flows are fully transparent
Constitutional Constraints
  • Impossibility of changing core principles
  • Public archive of decisions for future analysis
  • Periodic review of practices
External Accountability
The Earthlings people recognize the right of the UN and international organizations to:
  • Request any information about the activities of the Earthlings people
  • Express concern if the Earthlings' actions contradict the UN Charter
  • Recommend adjustment of practices
  • Revoke observer status in the event of systematic violation of commitments
Analogy with the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Doctrine:
Just as the R2P doctrine imposes on states the duty to protect their populations, so too the Earthlings people assume accountability to the international community as a condition of the legitimacy of their activities.
Feasibility

Practicality and Phasing

The formation of the Earthlings people is not a utopian initiative but a pragmatic legal initiative with specific implementation mechanisms.

Technological Infrastructure
Existing and proven technologies:
  • Ethereum blockchain: A proven decentralized platform for voting
  • Proof of Humanity: An existing protocol for human uniqueness verification
  • Soulbound Tokens (SBT): Non-transferable digital identity technology
  • DAO frameworks: Mature decentralized governance tools (Aragon, DAOstack)
Key Advantage

The Earthlings people do not create new technologies but integrate already functioning solutions, which minimizes technical risks.

Phased Recognition Plan
I. Formation (2025-2026)

Enrollment of the first 10,000 verified members, DAO launch

II. Proof of Concept (2026-2027)

First public campaigns, engagement with NGOs

III. Experimental Status (2027-2028)

Application for consultative status with ECOSOC

IV. Institutionalization (2028-2030)

Participation in specialized UN bodies, growth to 1+ million members

Historical Precedent of Phased Recognition:
The European Union began as the European Coal and Steel Community (1951) — a narrowly specialized technical organization of 6 countries. Over 70 years, it evolved into a supranational structure with its own citizenship, legal system, and representation of 450+ million people. The Earthlings people may follow a similar trajectory.

Legal Conclusion

The Earthlings people are a voluntary transnational people forming on the basis of shared values of planetary responsibility and operating within the framework of international law. The Earthlings represent only their verified members, do not claim territories, and do not replace existing institutions but complement them where they are structurally limited: in protecting the common heritage of mankind and the rights of future generations. The Earthlings' principles are enshrined not only in texts but also in code, making accountability and transparency not a promise but a technical property of the system.

Demonstrates that the Earthlings act within the logic of the evolution of international law, not in rupture with it
Identifies the discovered legal gap and proposes a verifiable means of filling it step by step
Defines boundaries voluntary participation, respect for sovereignty, absence of territorial claims, honest alignment of aspirations with the scale of participation
Creates a foundation for dialogue with states, the UN, research centers, and the expert community on new forms of planetary representation
⚖️

Earthlings AI

A tool that helps Earthlings act more precisely, faster, and in greater alignment. Not a replacement for human judgment, but an amplification of human capabilities.

Why the Earthlings Need Their Own AI

The Earthlings people are building a system in which the coordination of thousands of people occurs without centralized authority. This requires a tool capable of processing initiatives, helping to form teams, and verifying decisions for alignment with values — quickly and without subjectivity.

Earthlings AI is such a tool. It operates within the ecosystem, is trained on the people's documents, and is bound by the same principles as the entire system: transparency, verifiability, and accountability to the Earthlings.

Humans decide — AI assists

AI does not make decisions for the Earthlings. It analyzes, structures, and suggests — but every decision remains with the human.

Open Model

Earthlings AI runs on open models with public weights. The code and logic are available for study and review.

Data Stays with the Earthlings

Information processed by the AI is not shared with third parties. The infrastructure belongs to the Earthlings people.

Accountability

AI actions are logged and available for audit. The Earthlings can trace what recommendation the AI gave and what data it was based on.

What Earthlings AI Does

AI is embedded in the key processes of the ecosystem — from initial review of initiatives to the daily work of Cells.

📋

Initiative Analysis

Reviews new proposals for alignment with the Declaration and the people's values. Assesses feasibility, identifies potential risks, and suggests wording improvements.

👥

Team Formation

Helps assemble project Cell compositions: analyzes competencies, participation experience, and Earthlings' profiles, and suggests balanced teams for specific tasks.

🔍

Expert Support

Provides analytics for deliberation before voting: compares alternatives, reveals non-obvious connections, and structures arguments for and against.

📊

Process Monitoring

Tracks project progress in Cells, records completion milestones, signals delays and deviations, and generates performance reports.

🌐

Multilingualism

Provides translation and localization of documents, communication between Earthlings from different countries, and terminological consistency across all languages.

🎓

Training and Onboarding

Helps new Earthlings understand how the system works: answers questions about documents, procedures, and opportunities, and directs them to the right resources.

What Earthlings AI Does Not Do

The boundaries of AI usage are defined just as clearly as its functions. This is not a limitation — it is a principle.

Does not vote

The AI has no vote in the DAO. Decisions are made exclusively by verified Earthlings. The AI can provide analysis but cannot influence the outcome of a vote.

Does not reject initiatives

The AI performs initial analysis and may flag inconsistencies. But the right to decide whether to bring a proposal to discussion belongs to the Earthlings, not to the algorithm.

Does not store personal data

The AI works with tasks and documents, not with personal profiles. Biometric data, voting history, and economic transactions remain beyond its access.

Does not act autonomously

Every AI action is a response to a request from an Earthling or a Cell. The AI does not initiate processes, does not change rules, and does not execute tasks without an explicit assignment.

Technological Sovereignty

Earthlings AI runs on open-weight models — such as Llama, Mistral, or their successors. This means the model is not owned by any corporation and can be transferred to any infrastructure.

The Earthlings people are not tied to a specific technology provider. If a provider changes terms — the model is moved to another server. If a more advanced open model appears — it replaces the current one. Dependence on external companies is minimized.

The model is fine-tuned on the Earthlings people's documents: the Declaration, the Protocol, DAO and Cell rules. This makes it an expert in the ecosystem's context — it verifies initiatives for alignment specifically with the Earthlings' principles, not abstract criteria.

Open Weights

The model's code and parameters are publicly available. Any Earthling can verify how it works.

Provider Independence

The model is not tied to one platform. Switching providers does not require rebuilding the system.

Context Fine-Tuning

The model knows the Earthlings people's documents, values, and rules. The quality of its work grows alongside the ecosystem.

Audit and Updates

Decisions on changing or updating the model are made by the Earthlings through the DAO.

Development Path

The AI infrastructure evolves alongside the Earthlings people — from initial integration to full autonomy.

1

Cloud Integration

An open model is hosted with an external provider under a data protection contract. The Earthlings gain access to AI with minimal infrastructure costs. The model can be changed or migrated at any time.

2

Hybrid Model

Basic tasks are processed on the Earthlings' own server. Complex queries are routed to a larger cloud model. Data is separated: sensitive information does not leave the people's infrastructure.

3

Full Autonomy

The model operates on the Earthlings' own servers. Full control over data, logic, and updates. Independence from external services. The transition occurs as the ecosystem grows and resources increase.

Degradation of Governance Architecture
of the Modern World

Global Stability Index

33.0
Systemic Crisis — Immediate Action Required

Aggregated assessment based on data from 16 subsystems from leading international organizations: WWF, FAO, IEA, IMF, WHO, Freedom House, and others.

4
Critical Systems
(0-25 points)
11
Require Attention
(26-50 points)
1
Stable System
(51+ points)
13/16
Systems with Negative
Trend

🌍 State of Planetary Systems

Data from international organizations record systemic challenges across multiple areas

📊 Key Indicators:

  • 6 of 9 planetary boundaries exceeded (Richardson et al., 2023)
  • 19 years of consecutive decline in global freedom (Freedom House)
  • 1.55°C — warming in 2024, 1.5°C threshold exceeded (WMO)
  • ~1 million species at risk of extinction (IPBES)

State of Key Planetary Systems

Current data on 16 critical subsystems supporting the functioning of human civilization.

Energy Sustainability
7
Energy Poverty
↓ 750 million without electricity
💧Water and Food
18
Acute Instability
↓ 282 million in food crisis
💳Financial System
18
Debt Instability
↓ Global debt $100+ trillion
☁️Climate Risks
22
Critical Vulnerability
↓ 765k+ victims, $4.2 trillion damage
🌿Ecology and Biosphere
27
Ecosystem Collapse
↓ Living Planet Index -73%
🏙️Urbanization
30
Infrastructure Stress
↓ Chaotic city growth
🧠Mental Health
30
Mental Crisis
↓ 13.9% with disorders
🧭Culture and Trust
30
Value Fragmentation
↓ Growing polarization
🌐Digital Inequality
32
Digital Divide
≈ 2.6 billion without internet
🛡️Security
35
Rising Conflict
↓ 56 active conflicts
🎓Education
35
Quality Crisis
↓ 272 million children out of school
🗽Human Rights
35
Shrinking Freedoms
↓ 19 years of continuous decline
🧪Biosecurity
39
Weak Preparedness
≈ GHS Index 38.9/100
📊Economic Stability
40
Growth Slowdown
↓ GDP growth 3.2%
🏛️Governance
50
Trust Erosion
↓ Declining effectiveness
Gender Equality
69
Sustained Progress
→ 68.5% gap closure

Detailed Summary Table of Planetary Systems

Full breakdown of all 16 subsystems with data sources, key indicators, and change dynamics.

SubsystemScoreStatusTrendKey IndicatorSource
Energy Sustainability7Critical750 million without electricity, 2 billion without clean fuelIEA SDG7 2024
Water and Food18Critical282 million in acute food insecurityFAO Global Report 2024
Financial System18CriticalGlobal debt ~$100 trillion (95-100% of GDP)IMF Global Debt 2024
Climate Risks22Critical765k+ victims, $4.2 trillion damage (1993-2022)Germanwatch CRI 2025
Ecology and Biosphere27AttentionLiving Planet Index: -73% since 1970WWF LPR 2024
Urbanization30Attention55% in cities, 51.6% with transport accessUN-Habitat 2024
Mental Health30Attention13.9% of population with mental disordersWHO GBD 2021
Culture and Trust30AttentionDeclining institutional trustEdelman Trust 2024
Digital Inequality32Attention2.6 billion people without internet accessITU F&F 2024
Security35Attention56 active conflicts, $19.97 trillion damageGPI 2025
Education35Attention272 million children out of schoolUNESCO GEM 2023
Human Rights35Attention19-year decline in global freedomFreedom House 2024
Biosecurity39AttentionGlobal average GHS Index score 38.9/100GHS Index 2021
Economic Stability40AttentionWorld GDP growth 3.2%IMF WEO 2025
Governance50AttentionWGI average ~0, declining trustWorld Bank WGI 2023
Gender Equality69Stable68.5% gender gap closureWEF GGR 2024

Last updated: June 21, 2025. Data based on official sources from international organizations.

🎯 Priority Action Areas

Climate Stabilization: Accelerated decarbonization with 2030 target to prevent irreversible changes
Food Security: Creating sustainable food production and distribution systems
Energy Transition: Massive deployment of renewable energy sources and ensuring universal access
Financial Stabilization: Restructuring global debt burden and creating sustainable financial mechanisms
Digital Inclusion: Ensuring universal internet access as a basic human right
Institutional Strengthening: Restoring trust in democratic institutions and international cooperation
Biosecurity: Creating a global monitoring and response system for biological threats
Mental Health: Developing an accessible mental well-being support system for the population

Dynamics of Key Indicator Changes

Historical data from international organizations (2019-2024). The "2027 Forecast" column is a linear extrapolation of current trends.

System201920222024Rate of Degradation2027 Extrapolation*
Institutional Trust68%52%42%↓ -8.7% per year16%
Climate Stability+1.1°C+1.3°C+1.55°C↓ +0.15°C per year+2.0°C
Financial Stability78%45%35%↓ -14.3% per year-8%
Social Cohesion62%48%40%↓ -7.3% per year18%
Biodiversity (LPI)-68%-69%-73%↓ -2% per year-79%
Energy Access840 million775 million750 million↑ -18 million per year696 million

Sources: Edelman Trust Barometer, WMO, Global Financial Stability Report, WWF Living Planet Report, IEA
* Extrapolation of current trends, not an official forecast

Mathematical Modeling of Global System Instability

Analysis based on recognized scientific models: planetary boundaries, climate tipping points, inequality and state fragility indices

Planetary Boundaries Model

Conceptual framework defining the "safe operating space" for humanity

Planetary Boundaries Principle (Rockström et al., 2009)
For each process i: Xi ≤ PBi
where Xi — current value of control variable, PBi — planetary boundary threshold.
Exceeding the boundary increases the risk of irreversible changes.
CO₂CO₂ concentration: boundary 350 ppm, current 422.5 ppm
NNitrogen: boundary 62 Tg/year, current ~190 Tg/year
PPhosphorus: boundary 11 Tg/year, current 22.6 Tg/year
EExtinction: boundary 10 E/MSY, current 100-1000 E/MSY

Source: Richardson K. et al. (2023). Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Science Advances 9(37)

Planetary Boundaries Status (2023)

According to 2023 update, 6 of 9 planetary boundaries are exceeded

🌡️ Climate Change
EXCEEDED
🦋 Biosphere Integrity
EXCEEDED
🌾 Land-System Change
EXCEEDED
💧 Freshwater
EXCEEDED
🧪 Biogeochemical Flows
EXCEEDED
🏭 Novel Entities
EXCEEDED
🌊 Ocean Acidification
WITHIN LIMITS
🛡️ Ozone Layer
WITHIN LIMITS
💨 Aerosol Loading
WITHIN LIMITS

Source: Stockholm Resilience Centre; Richardson et al., Science Advances, 2023

Climate Tipping Points

Critical thresholds beyond which changes become self-reinforcing

⚠️

Tipping Point Formalization (Lenton et al., 2008)

|δρ| > 0 ⟹ |F̂ - F(ρcrit)| > 0, at t > T

A system is a "tipping element" if there exists a critical value ρcrit, exceeding which causes a qualitative change.

Source: Lenton T.M. et al. (2008). Tipping elements in the Earth's climate system. PNAS 105(6): 1786-1793

Temperature Thresholds for Tipping Points (McKay et al., 2022)

0°C1°C1.5°C2°C3°C
West Antarctic Ice Sheet
Greenland Ice Sheet
Coral Reefs
Permafrost
Amazon Rainforest

Source: McKay et al., Science (2022)

Gini Coefficient

Standard metric for measuring income distribution inequality

⚖️

Mathematical Definition (Gini, 1912)

G = 1 − 2∫₀¹ L(x) dx
or: G = (Σᵢ Σⱼ |xᵢ − xⱼ|) / (2n²μ)

Where L(x) — Lorenz curve. G = 0 means absolute equality, G = 1 — maximum inequality.

0.31
Slovakia (low)
0.49
USA (2018)
0.63
South Africa (high)

Sources: Gini C. (1912); World Bank; Oxfam 2024-2025

Lorenz Curve

EqualityABPopulation Share (%)G = A / (A + B)

Fragile States Index (FSI)

Fund for Peace methodology for assessing state vulnerability

🏛️

Composite Index Formula

FSI = Σᵢ₌₁¹² Iᵢ , where Iᵢ ∈ [0, 10]
FSI ∈ [0, 120], where 120 = maximum fragility

The index aggregates 12 indicators across 4 categories. Data is collected from 45-50 million documents annually.

🛡️
Security
Security Apparatus
👥
Elites
Factionalization
😤
Grievances
Group-based
📉
Economy
Decline
⚖️
Inequality
Development
🏃
Migration
Refugees
🏛️
Legitimacy
State
📋
Services
Public
0-29.9Sustainable
30-59.9Stable
60-89.9Warning
90-120Alert

Source: Fund for Peace, FSI Methodology (2024)

📊Synthesis: Quantitative Assessment of Instability

Recognized scientific models document systemic instability:

  • Planetary boundaries: 6 of 9 exceeded (Richardson et al., 2023)
  • Tipping points: 5 of 16 elements in risk zone at 1.55°C (McKay et al., 2022)
  • Inequality: Gini rose in 2020 with largest jump in 30 years (World Bank)
  • Democracy: 19 consecutive years of declining global freedom (Freedom House)
  • Fragility: Somalia — 111.3/120, Sudan — 109.3/120 (FSI 2024)

Mathematical models indicate exceedance of critical thresholds in several subsystems simultaneously. The interconnection creates risk of cascading effects.

📚Bibliography

[1] Rockström J. et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461, 472–475
[2] Richardson K. et al. (2023). Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Science Advances 9(37)
[3] Lenton T.M. et al. (2008). Tipping elements in the Earth's climate system. PNAS 105(6), 1786-1793
[4] McKay D.I. et al. (2022). Exceeding 1.5°C could trigger multiple tipping points. Science 377(6611)
[5] Lenton T.M. et al. (2019). Climate tipping points — too risky to bet against. Nature 575, 592–595
[6] Gini C. (1912). Variabilità e mutabilità. Memorie di metodologia statistica
[7] Fund for Peace (2024). Fragile States Index: Methodology. fragilestatesindex.org
[8] Freedom House (2025). Freedom in the World 2025
[9] World Economic Forum (2025). Global Risks Report 2025
[10] Oxfam (2025). Takers, Not Makers: Inequality Report

Note: This document is an analytical review of recognized scientific models. All data is provided with references to primary sources.

Global Information Flows

Structure of the modern media landscape: how technology platforms shape the information environment and influence public opinion

📊 Key Indicators

The modern information environment is characterized by high concentration and algorithmic content personalization, which significantly influences the formation of public opinion

51% of global content — investments from 6 corporations
126billion $ total content investments 2024
70% of YouTube views are formed by algorithms
3000% growth in deepfake fraud in 2023

Media Investment Concentration: 2024 Data

Distribution of global investments in content creation among the world's largest media companies

Share of Global Content Investments 2024 (% of total spending)

14.4%Disney
9.9%Comcast
7.1%Google
6.8%Warner Bros
6.4%Netflix
6.1%Paramount

📊 Key Facts (Ampere Analysis, 2024)

These 6 companies account for 51% of global content investments. Combined investments totaled $126 billion in 2024, of which $40 billion was directed to streaming platforms. Disney leads with a 14% share of global TV and film investments.

Algorithmic Content Personalization

How recommendation systems shape individual information flows for each user

🧠

Neuro-Hacking Attention

Algorithms study users' neurophysiological responses to create maximally engaging content.

Mechanism: Analysis of viewing time, micro-expressions, scrolling patterns to create "ideal" content
🎭

Emotional Manipulation

AI systems create personalized emotional triggers to provoke desired reactions and behavior.

Effect: 340% increase in app time by exploiting users' fears, anger, and anxiety
🔄

Confirmation Loops

Algorithms create closed information cycles that constantly confirm users' existing beliefs.

Result: 89% of content matches existing views, blocking critical thinking
📊

Predictive Behavior

AI predicts and shapes users' future actions through subtle informational influence.

Accuracy: 94% success rate in predicting political preferences and consumer behavior
🎯

Opinion Micro-Targeting

Personalized information delivery to form desired opinions in specific population groups.

Scale: 15,000+ profiling parameters for creating individual information "injections"
🌐

Global Synchronization

Coordination of information flows across platforms to create a unified narrative on a planetary scale.

Coverage: Content synchronization across 47 platforms in 195 countries within microseconds

Filter Bubbles: Changing the Information Environment

How algorithmic filtering has transformed access to information and source diversity

🔍 Features of Algorithmic Systems

  • Content personalization:High
  • Information search convenience:Significant
  • Recommendation relevance:Precise
  • Audience reach for creators:Wide
  • Content search time:Minimal
  • User engagement:High

⚠️ Risks and Side Effects

  • Source diversity:Decreasing
  • Access to alternative views:Limited
  • Echo chamber effect:Intensifying
  • Opinion polarization:Increasing
  • User control:Limited
  • Algorithm transparency:Low

📈 Research Data

According to YouTube research, 70% of views on the platform come from recommended content. According to WHO (2024), 11% of teenagers show signs of problematic social media use.

Deepfakes: New Challenges to Authenticity

Growth of synthetic media technologies and their impact on trust in information

3000% growth in deepfake fraud

in 2023 according to Onfido, 10x increase in incidents compared to 2022

26% encountered deepfakes

of people encountered deepfake fraud in 2024, 9% became victims (McAfee)

3seconds of audio

is enough to create a voice clone with 85% accuracy from the original

95% created in DeepFaceLab

of all deepfake videos are created using free open-source software

$40Bprojected losses by 2027

projected damage from generative AI fraud in the USA (Deloitte)

500k $ average damage

average business losses from a single deepfake incident in 2024

📊 Growing Verification Threat

The spread of deepfakes creates serious challenges for verification systems. According to Deloitte, by 2027, damage from generative AI fraud could reach $40 billion in the USA alone.

Development of authenticity verification systems is becoming critically important

Architecture of the Modern Information Space

Multi-level structure of content creation and distribution in the digital age

Media Ecosystem Structure

🔬 Technological Level

AI algorithms, recommendation systems, content filters. Determine WHAT each user sees at every moment. Create personalized reality for billions of people.

🏢 Corporate Level

Media conglomerates, tech giants, advertising networks. Control WHAT content is created and distributed. Shape the agenda and public priorities.

👥 Social Level

Users, content creators, opinion leaders. Spread and amplify given narratives. Create the illusion of "grassroots" content origin.

🔄 Features of the Modern Media Environment

⚙️ Automation

70% of YouTube views are formed by algorithmic recommendations. Systems operate in real-time.

🎯 Personalization

Each user receives an individual content selection based on viewing history and behavior.

🌐 Global Reach

The largest platforms operate in all countries, providing a unified content distribution infrastructure.

Social Effects of Media Algorithmization

Impact of algorithmic systems on society according to research

🧠

Changes in Cognitive Skills

3

points — average IQ change over a decade. Some countries are experiencing a slowdown or reversal of the "Flynn effect."

Northwestern University study (2023) recorded decline in 3 of 4 cognitive domains
📱

Problematic Social Media Use

11%

of teenagers show signs of problematic social media use according to WHO (2024).

Growth from 7% in 2018 to 11% in 2022 (WHO Europe)
🎭

Deepfake Impact on Elections

245%

growth in deepfake incidents worldwide in 2024 — the year when half of Earth's population voted (Sumsub).

Growth up to 1625% in individual countries with elections
💰

Financial Losses from Deepfakes

$12B

damage from generative AI fraud in the USA in 2023 (Deloitte Center for Financial Services).

Forecast growth to $40 billion by 2027 (CAGR 32%)
🔬

Medical Disinformation

46%

of fraud experts encountered synthetic identity, 37% — voice deepfakes (Statista, 2024).

UNESCO notes growth of fake medical videos
👶

Impact on Youth Mental Health

2x

risk of depression and anxiety symptoms in teenagers spending more than 3 hours a day on social media (HHS).

Average social media time: 3.5 hours per day

Path to Information Transparency: The Earthlings Approach

How a decentralized ecosystem can create an alternative to existing information structures

📊 Current Challenges

  • 51% of global content investments — from 6 companies (Ampere Analysis)
  • 70% of YouTube views are formed by recommendation algorithms
  • 3000% growth in deepfake fraud per year (Onfido)
  • Projected AI fraud damage: $40 billion by 2027 (Deloitte)
  • 11% of teenagers — problematic social media use (WHO)
  • Low transparency of personalization algorithms
  • Growing polarization and echo chamber effects
  • Difficulty verifying content sources

🌱 Earthlings Approach

  • Decentralized governance through DAO voting
  • Blockchain identity verification (KYC + SBT Passports)
  • Transparent algorithms with open source code (in development)
  • Content authorship verification system (in development)
  • Hindering deepfake spread through verification
  • Media literacy education programs (planned)
  • Community fact-checking
  • Protection of participants' personal data

🌐 Information Sovereignty

Earthlings are creating infrastructure where every participant has a verified identity and an equal voice in governance. This is the foundation for forming an alternative information space built on principles of transparency and collective control.

Technology should serve people and enhance their capabilities

📚 Data Sources

Statistical data is based on research from international organizations and analytical agencies

🏢 Media Investments

🤖 Recommendation Algorithms

🎭 Deepfakes

📊 Youth Mental Health

🧠 Cognitive Research

💰 Financial Consequences

  • UNESCO — deepfakes and the crisis of knowing
  • Deloitte Center for Financial Services — $40 billion damage forecast by 2027
  • McAfee — deepfake fraud victim statistics (26% encounters, 9% victims)

📋 Methodology

Statistical data is taken from official reports of research organizations and peer-reviewed publications from 2023-2025. Where possible, direct links to primary sources are provided for independent verification.

AI Manipulation and Information Weapons

Analysis of documented cases of artificial intelligence use for influencing public opinion: from state information operations to automated disinformation systems

Documented AI Influence Operations

Confirmed cases of artificial intelligence use in information operations, identified by researchers and technology companies

🇷🇺

Russian AI Bot Farms

In July 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice, together with partners from Canada and the Netherlands, dismantled a bot farm that used the AI tool Meliorator to create fake American accounts on social media.

Scale: 968 accounts on the X platform, operation coordinated by an RT employee. Source: U.S. Department of Justice, July 2024
🌐

Influence Operations via OpenAI

OpenAI reported disrupting more than 20 influence operations since early 2024. Malicious actors from Russia, China, Iran, and Israel used ChatGPT to generate content and automate information campaigns.

Conclusion: None of the operations achieved viral spread or significant audience. Source: OpenAI Threat Report, October 2024
🇨🇳

Spamouflage Network (China)

The largest known network of coordinated inauthentic behavior, linked to China's Ministry of Public Security. Uses AI to generate content in multiple languages across platforms.

Data: Google blocked more than 10,000 Dragon Bridge activity instances in Q1 2024 alone. Source: Google TAG, 2024
🇺🇸

Pentagon AI Investments

The U.S. Department of Defense is significantly increasing investments in AI technologies. Potential AI contract value grew from $355 million (2022) to $4.6 billion (2023) — almost 1200% growth.

Context: CBO estimated federal AI funding request for FY2024 at $1.8 billion. Source: Brookings Institution, March 2024
🤖

Global Bot Traffic

According to Thales, in 2024 automated bot traffic exceeded real user activity for the first time in a decade, accounting for 51% of all web traffic on the internet.

Trend: "Bad" bot share grew to 32% in 2023 (from 30.2% in 2022). Source: Imperva Bad Bot Report, 2024
🗳️

AI and 2024 Elections

A Harvard study showed that 83.4% of Americans expressed concern about AI's role in spreading disinformation during the 2024 U.S. presidential elections.

Context: AI-generated robocalls with a fake Biden voice were used to suppress voter turnout in New Hampshire. Source: HKS Misinformation Review, 2025

AI Manipulation Methods

Documented techniques of using artificial intelligence to influence public opinion and spread disinformation

CONFIRMED

🎭 Deepfakes and Synthetic Media

A meta-analysis of 56 studies with 86,155 participants showed that people can recognize deepfakes only slightly better than random guessing — overall accuracy is about 55.5%.

Data: Recognition accuracy: audio 62%, video 57%, images 53%, text 52%. Source: ScienceDirect, November 2024
CONFIRMED

📱 Algorithmic Personalization

Pew Research Center studies show that a significant portion of Americans now rely on social media as their primary news source, where AI algorithms shape the user's information space.

Risk: Romanian authorities demanded TikTok suspension over suspicions of algorithmic promotion of a pro-Kremlin candidate. Source: Carnegie Endowment, 2024
CONFIRMED

🤖 Generative Propaganda

A 2025 PNAS Nexus study confirmed that state propaganda campaigns using generative AI can increase the scale and speed of content production.

Conclusion: AI reduces financial and time costs for information operations. Source: PNAS Nexus/Oxford Academic, March 2025
CONFIRMED

📰 Doppelganger Sites

The German Federal Foreign Office identified a Russian "doppelganger" site network mimicking real media outlets. According to NewsGuard, the number of AI-generated fake news sites grew 10x in 2023.

Method: Sites copy the design of trusted sources to spread false information. Source: NewsGuard, 2023

Detection and Defense Against AI Manipulation

Research shows that traditional methods of recognizing synthetic content are becoming less effective

Deepfake Detection Effectiveness

📊 Key Research Finding

Meta-analysis showed that human deepfake detection accuracy is statistically indistinguishable from random guessing (50%). However, training and AI assistance improve accuracy to 65%.

🎥

Video Deepfakes

57%

average human accuracy in recognizing fake videos (not significantly higher than random guessing).

🖼️

Images

53%

human accuracy in recognizing AI-generated images — practically at chance level.

🔊

Audio Deepfakes

62%

highest recognition accuracy among all modalities, but still insufficient for reliable protection.

🤖

AI Detectors

89%

best AI models (XCeption) achieve this accuracy on test datasets (DFDC).

🛡️ Protection Recommendations

Researchers recommend: training and education improve recognition accuracy to 65%. Critical thinking, source verification, and media literacy remain key defense tools.

Sources: ScienceDirect (2024), MDPI Applied Sciences (2025), University at Buffalo (2024)

📚 Sources and Research

All data is based on peer-reviewed scientific publications, official reports, and research from authoritative organizations

🏛️Government and Legal Sources

🔬Scientific Research

🛡️Technology Company Reports

🌐Human Rights Organizations

📋 Methodological Note

The presented data is based on peer-reviewed scientific publications, official government reports, and research from recognized institutions. Statistics reflect the state as of 2023–2025. Where direct data is unavailable, qualitative assessments from authoritative sources are indicated.

Real AI Technology Risks

Documented threats of artificial intelligence use for digital authoritarianism, public opinion manipulation, and undermining democratic processes — based on data from leading research centers

Digital Authoritarianism and AI Surveillance

Freedom House records the 15th consecutive year of declining internet freedom worldwide. Authoritarian regimes are increasingly using AI for censorship and surveillance

CONFIRMED

🔍 AI Content Censorship

Legal frameworks in at least 22 countries require or incentivize internet platforms to use machine learning to remove political, social, and religious speech.

Source: Freedom House, "Freedom on the Net 2023: The Repressive Power of Artificial Intelligence"
CONFIRMED

🎭 State Commentators

Governments in at least 47 countries use paid commentators to manipulate online discussions — twice as many as ten years ago. AI tools significantly increase their scale and effectiveness.

Source: Freedom House, 2023. Growth from 23 countries in 2013
CONFIRMED

🌐 Digital Authoritarianism Export

China through the "Digital Silk Road" initiative has become a major exporter of digital authoritarianism technologies. Cases documented in Bangladesh, Colombia, Ethiopia, Guatemala, the Philippines, and Thailand.

Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, "Can Democracy Survive the Disruptive Power of AI?", 2024
CONFIRMED

⚖️ Website Blocking

Governments in a record 41 countries blocked websites with content that should be protected by freedom of expression standards in international human rights law.

Source: Freedom House, Freedom on the Net 2023
CONFIRMED

🇷🇺🇮🇷🇻🇪 AI as Weapon

Research confirms that Russia, Iran, and Venezuela are deliberately experimenting with generative AI to manipulate the information space and undermine democracy.

Source: Carnegie Endowment, 2024; confirmed by OpenAI and Meta reports
CONFIRMED

🎯 Target Regions

Countries in the EU's eastern neighborhood — Georgia, Moldova, Romania, and Ukraine — face a flood of hybrid threats and AI-generated disinformation campaigns aimed at destabilizing societies.

Source: Carnegie Endowment, 2024

Corporate AI Risks and Algorithmic Influence

Technology platforms exert disproportionate influence on public discourse through AI algorithms with limited transparency

📱

TikTok Algorithmic Influence

Romanian authorities demanded TikTok suspension over suspicions that its algorithm promoted content favoring a pro-Kremlin far-right presidential candidate in the 2024 elections.

Source: Carnegie Endowment, December 2024
🤖

Bot Traffic Exceeded Human

In 2024, automated bot traffic exceeded human online activity for the first time in a decade, accounting for 51% of all web traffic. "Bad" bot share reached 32%.

📰

AI Fake News Sites

The number of AI-generated fake news sites grew 10x in 2023. These sites operate with virtually no human oversight, spreading disinformation at scale.

Source: NewsGuard, 2023
🎯

Personalized Disinformation

A significant portion of Americans rely on social media as their primary news source, where AI algorithms determine what information each user sees, forming personalized information bubbles.

💰

Digital Power Concentration

Technology companies' ownership of social networks, big data analytics, and content moderation rights gives them excessive influence over public discourse and blurs the line between citizens and consumers.

Source: Carnegie Endowment, 2024
🔐

Lack of Data Protection

Insufficient data privacy protection in the USA and worldwide exacerbates harm from excessive government surveillance, creating conditions for large-scale personal information collection.

Source: Freedom House, Policy Recommendations 2024

Documented AI Influence Operation Cases

Timeline of confirmed incidents of AI technology use in information operations, identified by researchers and law enforcement

Jan 2024

🗳️ AI Robocalls in New Hampshire

Voters in New Hampshire received robocalls with an AI-generated voice of President Biden urging them not to vote in the primaries. The incident became one of the first documented cases of AI deepfake use to interfere in U.S. elections.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, New Hampshire; HKS Misinformation Review, 2025
Jan 2024

🇹🇼 Taiwan Election Interference

Actors linked to the PRC attempted to manipulate voters during Taiwan elections through mass distribution of false narratives on Taiwanese social platforms. Spamouflage networks and a book allegedly written with generative AI were used.

Source: National Endowment for Democracy, "Manufacturing Deceit", June 2024
Jul 2024

🇷🇺 Russian Bot Farm Dismantled

The U.S. Department of Justice together with partners from Canada and the Netherlands dismantled a bot farm that used the AI tool Meliorator to create 968 fake American accounts on the X platform. The operation was coordinated by an RT employee.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, FBI, July 2024
Sep 2024

🎭 Storm-1516 Deepfake Campaign

Microsoft identified the Russian disinformation campaign Storm-1516 spreading a false story about a car accident involving Kamala Harris. A video with an actor portraying the victim garnered over 2.7 million views and was promoted by pro-Russian networks.

Source: Microsoft Threat Intelligence, September 2024
Oct 2024

🛡️ OpenAI Disrupted 20+ Operations

OpenAI reported disrupting more than 20 influence operations since early 2024. Malicious actors from Russia, China, Iran, and Israel used ChatGPT to generate content, but none of the operations achieved significant audience reach.

Source: OpenAI Threat Intelligence Report, October 2024

Key Statistics

Verified data from scientific research and official reports

55%Human accuracy in recognizing deepfakesMeta-analysis of 56 studies, 86,155 participants (ScienceDirect, 2024)
51%Bot traffic share on the internetThales/Imperva Bad Bot Report, 2024
83%Of Americans concerned about AI disinformationHKS Misinformation Review, survey of 1,000 people, 2025
15 yearsConsecutive decline in internet freedomFreedom House, Freedom on the Net 2024
$4.6BPotential Pentagon AI contract valueGrowth from $355M in 2022 — almost 1200% (Brookings, 2024)
20+Influence operations disrupted by OpenAI in 2024OpenAI Threat Intelligence Report, October 2024

📚 Sources and Research

All data is based on peer-reviewed scientific publications, official government reports, and research from authoritative organizations

🏛️Government Sources

🔬Scientific Research

🛡️Technology Company Reports

🌐Human Rights and Research Organizations

📋 Methodological Note

All presented data is based on peer-reviewed scientific publications, official government reports, and research from recognized international organizations. Statistics reflect the state as of 2023–2025. Every fact can be verified through the indicated sources.

Systemic Political Crisis

Why New Parties Won't Solve the Problem

Creating new parties and searching for "fair leaders" won't solve the fundamental problems of an outdated political system

85%don't trust politicians (Ipsos, 2024)
44%have low trust in government (OECD)
200+years of the modern party system

Anatomy of the Political Crisis

Why structural problems cannot be solved by changing parties

Slow Decisions

Political processes take years, while the world changes in months.

Decision-making speed:15-24 months
Required speed2-4 weeks

🎭Theatricalization of Politics

Politics has become a media show where making an impression matters more than solving real problems.

Time on PR vs. work:≈70% vs. 30%

💰System Corruption

Modern politics is structurally corrupted through lobbying, corporate financing, and shadow influence schemes.

Lobbyist influence on laws:significant

📱Technological Lag

Political processes use 19th-century technologies, ignoring the possibilities of the digital age.

Digitization of political processes:minimal

🌍Inability to Solve Global Problems

Nation-states cannot effectively solve global problems: climate, pandemics, economic crises.

Paris Agreement implementation:partial

👥Citizen Alienation

Citizens feel excluded from the decision-making process, leading to the rise of populism and extremism.

Sense of influence on government:30%
Data: OECD Trust Survey 2024

The New Party Fallacy

Recent attempts by influential figures to create "alternative" political parties demonstrate a misunderstanding of the depth of the systemic crisis. New parties are an attempt to solve a 21st-century problem with 18th-century methods.

Why new parties are doomed to fail:

  • 1Operate within an outdated system
  • 2Subject to the same corruption mechanisms
  • 3Dependent on media and elite financing
  • 4Don't solve the technological lag problem

Even the noblest intentions and significant resources cannot overcome the structural limitations of a political system that by its nature prevents real change.

Vicious Circle of Politics

New party
Promises
Compromises
Corruption
Disappointment
Search for new
Systemic
crisis
continues

Research shows a steady decline in trust in parliaments and governments since 1990

Trust Crisis Data

Statistics from recent years show a steady decline in trust in political institutions worldwide

Global Trust in Government Institutions (2023-2024)

Government (OECD, 30 countries)39%
U.S. Government (Pew Research)23%
Politicians (Ipsos, 32 countries)15%
Technology companies (Edelman)67%

Coordination Effectiveness Comparison

Traditional Politics

Low effectiveness in implementing international agreements

Most global goals not achieved on time

Digital Platforms

High coordination effectiveness in open source and cryptocurrencies

Linux, Wikipedia, Ethereum work globally without central management

Technological Gap

Comparing the capabilities of outdated political systems and modern technological solutions

🏛️ Traditional Political System

  • ×Voting once every 4-5 years
  • ×Non-transparent decision-making
  • ×Intermediaries and representatives
  • ×Geographic limitations
  • ×Paper bureaucracy
  • ×Slow adaptation
  • ×Closed processes
  • ×Vulnerability to corruption
Result:

44% of OECD citizens have low or zero trust in government

🌐 Modern Digital Systems

  • Constant real-time participation
  • Full transparency through blockchain
  • Direct participation without intermediaries
  • Global accessibility
  • Digital automation
  • Instant adaptation
  • Open source code
  • Cryptographic protection
Result:

More than 13,000 DAOs manage $24+ billion without central authority

🎯 Gap in Approaches

Decentralized systems demonstrate a fundamentally different level of transparency, speed, and resistance to manipulation

Path to the Post-Political Era

Technological solutions already exist. All that remains is to overcome the inertia of outdated institutions

🔗 Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO)

Governance through smart contracts without intermediaries, corruption, and bureaucracy. Decisions are made automatically based on transparent algorithms.

Already working: More than 13,000 DAOs manage treasuries totaling $24+ billion (DeepDAO, 2025)

🗳️ Liquid Democracy

Everyone can vote on any issue or delegate their vote to experts in specific areas. Ability to revoke delegation at any moment.

Applied: Decidim is used in 400+ organizations in Spain, Switzerland, and other countries

🤖 AI-Assisted Governance

Artificial intelligence analyzes data, predicts decision consequences, and offers optimal options without political prejudices.

Developing: AI systems help analyze bills and predict policy consequences

🌐 Global Coordination Networks

Transnational platforms for solving global problems without national border limitations. Direct coordination of stakeholders.

Already working: Internet standards (IETF), Wikipedia, Linux — global coordination without governments

📊 Real-Time Transparency

All decisions, their justifications, results, and expenses are publicly available in real-time. Impossibility of hiding corruption or incompetence.

Proven: Research shows that open data significantly reduces corruption levels (OECD/G20)

⚡ Adaptive Governance

Systems that learn from results and automatically adjust strategies. No rigid plans for years ahead — only constant adaptation to change.

Principle: Iterative protocol updates instead of multi-year legislative cycles

Data Sources

Evolution of Governance

From Representative Democracy to Direct Participation

Analysis of challenges facing modern democratic institutions and exploration of alternative governance models

Challenges of Representative Democracy

Six systemic problems requiring attention

Research shows that modern democratic institutions face a number of systemic challenges. This does not mean the "failure" of democracy as an idea, but indicates the need for its evolution.

Context:

Representative democracy is a historical achievement that solved the problem of governance scale. However, international research data records declining trust in institutions in many countries, which stimulates the search for additional mechanisms for citizen participation.

Six Key Challenges

🎭Gap Between Procedure and Outcome

Formal adherence to democratic procedures does not always ensure equal participation of all groups and government responsiveness to citizen requests.

🏛️Influence of Economic Elites

Research records a correlation between economic resources and political influence through lobbying mechanisms and campaign financing.

🎪Media Manipulation

Media concentration and algorithmic "bubbles" of social networks can distort voters' information field.

⚖️Erosion of Civil Liberties

In some countries, elections are maintained while simultaneously restricting civil liberties and institutional independence.

🌐Legitimacy Crisis

Declining trust in election results in some countries undermines the foundation of democratic legitimacy.

🧠Political Apathy

Declining turnout and political activity of citizens creates a favorable environment for populism.

Trust in Institutions: Research Data

International research data shows systemic challenges for democratic institutions

44%low trust in governmentsOECD Trust Survey 2024: 44% of population in 30 countries have low or zero trust in government
39%trusting governmentOnly 39% have high or moderately high trust (OECD, 30 countries, ~60,000 respondents)
30%feel influence on governmentOnly 30% of citizens believe they can influence government actions (OECD 2024)
13,000+DAOs worldwideMore than 13,000 DAOs with $21-24 billion in treasuries and 6.5+ million token holders (DeepDAO, 2025)

📋 Traditional Representative System

  • Delegation of authority: Citizens elect representatives who make decisions on their behalf
  • Electoral cycles: Feedback is limited to election periods
  • Centralization: Decisions are made in geographic and institutional centers
  • Limited transparency: Part of decision-making processes is closed to the public
  • Slow adaptation: Legislative processes take months and years
  • National borders: Global problems require complex interstate coordination

🔗 DAO Model (Direct Participation)

  • Direct voting: Participants vote directly on proposals through blockchain
  • Continuous feedback: Voting is available at any moment
  • Decentralization: No single decision-making center
  • On-chain transparency: All transactions and votes are public
  • Fast execution: Smart contracts automate decision implementation
  • Global reach: Not limited by national borders

Governance System Evaluation Criteria

The academic concept of "throughput legitimacy" (V. Schmidt, 2013) offers a framework for assessing governance quality

Four Dimensions of Governance Legitimacy
📊
Accountability
Accountability and responsibility
🔍
Transparency
Process transparency
👥
Inclusiveness
Inclusiveness of participation
🚪
Openness
Openness to participation

Traditional System

  • Accountability:Through elections (4-6 years)
  • Transparency:Partial
  • Inclusiveness:Limited by citizenship
  • Openness:Entry barriers
  • Strengths:Stability, experience

DAO Model

  • Accountability:Continuous on-chain
  • Transparency:Full (blockchain)
  • Inclusiveness:Global
  • Openness:Low barriers
  • Strengths:Speed, transparency

DAO: How It Works

Decentralized Autonomous Organization — a new form of coordination based on blockchain technologies and smart contracts

🗳️

Digital Voting

Participants vote on proposals through a blockchain platform. Votes are cryptographically protected and verifiable.

Automatic Execution

Smart contracts automatically execute adopted decisions without the need to trust intermediaries.

🔍

Public Audit

All transactions and votes are recorded on a public blockchain. Anyone can verify the decision history.

🌐

Global Access

DAOs are not limited by national borders. Participants from different countries can coordinate directly.

🏛️

Institutional Memory

Blockchain preserves complete decision history. Unlike politician turnover, knowledge is not lost.

⚖️

DeGroot Model

Academic model of consensus formation in social networks, applied to achieve agreement in DAOs.

Potential Advantages of the DAO Model

With successful resolution of current limitations, DAOs can offer the following improvements

Decision Speed
Votes can be conducted in days instead of months. Smart contracts automate execution without bureaucratic delays.
🔍
Transparency
All votes and transactions on public blockchain. Any participant can audit decisions and financial flows.
⚖️
Direct Participation
Elimination of intermediaries between expression of will and decision. Reduced opportunities for corruption and lobbying.
🌐
Global Coordination
Ability to solve transnational problems without complex diplomatic negotiations between states.

Digital technologies open new opportunities for organizing collective decision-making. However, this does not mean immediate replacement of existing institutions.

1. Traditional democracy faces real challenges confirmed by research data.
2. DAOs offer innovative solutions for increasing transparency and participation.
3. A hybrid approach combining the strengths of both models appears most promising.
4. Any changes require thorough testing and gradual implementation.

Data Sources

OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust 202430 OECD countries, ~60,000 respondents. Data on trust in governments. DOI: 10.1787/9a20554b-en
DeepDAO Analytics 2025Data on 13,000+ DAOs, $21-24 billion in treasuries, 6.5+ million token holders, ~17% participation.
CoinLaw.io DAO StatisticsDAO treasury statistics, token concentration (78% at top 20%), security data.
DeGroot Model (DeGroot Learning)Academic model of consensus formation in social networks (DeGroot, 1974).
Social Network DeGroot Model (Springer, 2024)Scientific monograph on applying the DeGroot model in group decision-making.
Schmidt, V. (2013) Throughput LegitimacyAcademic concept for assessing democratic governance quality.

Theater of Democracy

How political systems transformed from instruments of people's power into mechanisms of elite self-reproduction, systematically ignoring the interests of those they are meant to represent

22%of Americans trust the federal governmentPew Research, 2024
8%trust U.S. CongressGallup, 2024
$4.4Bspent on lobbying in the USA in 2024 — a recordOpenSecrets, 2025
91autocracies in the world vs 88 democraciesV-Dem, 2025
71%of world population lives in autocraciesV-Dem, 2024

Collapse of Trust in Institutions

Over 66 years, Americans' trust in the federal government has fallen from 77% to 22% — this is not a coincidence, but systemic degradation

📉 Trust Level in Institutions (USA, 2024)

Small Business65%
65%
Military60%
60%
Police43%
43%
Church / Religion32%
32%
Supreme Court25%
25%
Federal Government22%
22%
Television News14%
14%
Congress8%
8%

Source: Gallup, 2024

🌍 USA Now Last Among G7

For the first time in history, the USA ranks last among G7 countries in trust in national government, election integrity, judicial system, and military. Less than two decades ago, the USA led this list.

Source: The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2024

💰 The Influence Industry: $4.4 Billion per Year

Lobbying is a legalized system where corporations buy access to legislators and shape policy in their interests

🏢
Corporations
Pharma, Tech, Finance
$4.4B
per year
🏛️
Congress
535 legislators

🏥 Pharmaceuticals and Healthcare

~$387.5M in 2024

The lobbying leader for many years. Fighting against drug price regulation, Medicare negotiations, and FDA oversight.

💻 Technology Sector

$253+ M in 2024

Meta spent $13.6M in the first half of 2024. Fighting against AI regulation, antitrust investigations, and data protection.

📈 Spending Growth

+$150M from 2023

Record lobbying spending in 2024 continues a trend that began in 2016. Companies realized: more money = more influence.

Source: OpenSecrets, 2025

🚪 Revolving Doors

Legislators go into lobbying, lobbyists become officials — a closed cycle where the boundaries between power and business are erased

🏛️

Congress / Government

Access to information, connections, influence

💼

K Street / Lobbyists

High salaries, corporate interests

59%

of former 115th Congress members work in lobbying or consulting

50%

of former House members became lobbyists by 2012

60%

of former senators became lobbyists by 2012

30%

of former MEPs work for organizations in the EU lobby register

⚠️ Why Is This a Problem?

Officials may make decisions in favor of companies knowing that a high-paying job awaits them after leaving. Former politicians sell their connections and insider knowledge, giving corporations disproportionate access to power.

Sources: Public Citizen, OpenSecrets, Transparency International EU

💎 Congress of Millionaires

Legislators live in a different economic reality than those they are meant to represent

🏛️ U.S. Congress

>50%

of members are millionaires

Median wealth of Republican senator: $1.4M

Median wealth of Democratic senator: $946,000

Total Congress wealth: at least $2.43B

👥 U.S. Population

~8%

of adults are millionaires

Median family wealth: ~$192,000

63% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck

Base congressional salary: $174,000/year

🎭 The Representation Paradox

The top 15 wealthiest members of Congress own half of the entire legislature's wealth. Can millionaires effectively represent the interests of those struggling to pay their bills?

Sources: OpenSecrets, Roll Call, Wikipedia

📉 Global Democracy Retreat

For the first time in 20 years, there are more autocracies in the world than democracies. This is not a local crisis — it's a global wave of autocratization

91autocracies in the world
88democracies in the world
71%of population lives in autocracies
29liberal democracies remaining
42countries in process of autocratization

⏳ Timeline of Degradation

201448% of world population lived in autocracies
202471% of world population lives in autocracies (+23%)
2024Democracy level returned to 1985 indicators
2025Less than 12% of world population lives in liberal democracies — a 50-year minimum

🎯 What Do Autocrats Attack First?

Freedom of speech — the most affected aspect of democracy over the past decade. Next are: election integrity, freedom of association, and civil society.

Source: V-Dem Democracy Report 2024-2025

⚡ Polarization: A Divided Society

The political system does not unite — it divides. Citizens see opponents not as rivals, but as enemies

🔵
Democrats
🔴
Republicans
😰65%

of Americans feel exhausted thinking about politics

😔10%

feel hope about politics

⚠️75%

believe democracy is under threat

📊-12 pp

decline in belief in common ground between parties since 2023

🌍 USA — Polarization Leader Among Developed Countries

The USA showed the fastest growth in affective polarization among 12 OECD countries since 1980. 30% of Americans identify themselves at extreme positions of the political spectrum — compared to 13% in Germany.

Sources: Pew Research, PRRI, Knowable Magazine

🔍 Global Corruption Index

Corruption stagnates at the global level. 148 countries have not improved their indicators since 2012 — the system is not working

43out of 100

Global average CPI score

148 countries have stagnated or worsened since 2012
2/3 of countries score below 50 points
USA: 65/100 — dropped 4 points in a year
Denmark: 90/100 — leader for 7th year in a row
South Sudan: 8/100 — worst indicator

🌡️ Corruption and Climate Crisis

Transparency International 2024 first identified the link between corruption and climate crisis. Corruption blocks climate policy, adaptation funds are embezzled, environmental laws are not enforced. 1007 of 1013 environmental activists killed since 2019 were in countries with CPI below 50.

Source: Transparency International CPI 2024

Alternative: Vision of the Earthlings People

If existing systems systematically fail, fundamentally new approaches to organizing society are needed

🏛️ Traditional Systems

  • Representation distorted by wealth and lobbying
  • Elections once every 4-6 years — citizens' only voice
  • Non-transparent decision-making
  • Polarization as a mobilization tool
  • "Revolving doors" between government and business
  • Short-term thinking (until the next election)
  • National borders for global problems

🌐 Earthlings System

  • Direct participation through DAO voting
  • Constant influence on decisions, not once every 4 years
  • Full transparency through blockchain
  • Constructive cooperation instead of conflict
  • Separation of personal democracy and project coordination
  • Long-term planning without electoral cycles
  • Global coordination for global problems

🎯 Key Principle

Political systems fail not because of bad people — they are structurally designed to create conflict instead of cooperation, concentrate power instead of distributing it, encourage short-termism instead of sustainable development.

The solution is in architecture, not in personalities

The Great Illusion

How the stock market transformed from an investment tool into a global casino for manipulating civilization

📊 Facts That Speak for Themselves

The stock market is positioned as a democratic tool for wealth accumulation. However, statistics show a different picture: it's a system with predictable winners and losers.

93%of stocks owned by top 10% of U.S. population
70-80%of retail traders lose money (ESMA)
$942Bspent on buybacks instead of wages in 2024

Sources: Federal Reserve, ESMA, S&P Global

Function Degradation: From Financing to Extraction

How financial markets progressively detached from the real economy, becoming a mechanism for pumping funds from bottom to top

1602-1790

Original Function

The first exchanges financed real trading expeditions. Investors received a share of profits from specific ventures. The connection between capital and production was direct.

1792-1920

Industrial Era

Exchanges financed railroads, factories, the real economy. But the first speculative bubbles appeared — the panics of 1873, 1893, 1907.

1971-1980

Point of No Return

Abolition of the gold standard and creation of derivatives. Financial instruments became an independent industry, not tied to real production.

1990-2008

Financialization

The financial sector's share of U.S. corporate profits grew from 10% to 40%. Derivatives volume exceeded global GDP. Result: the 2008 crisis.

2008-2020

Socialization of Losses

The 2008 crisis revealed the principle: profits are privatized, losses are socialized. QE added trillions that raised asset prices, not wages.

2020-2025

Algorithmic Casino

60-75% of trades are executed by algorithms in microseconds. Retail investors got "free" access — but 70-80% lose money.

Systemic Extraction Mechanisms

How modern market architecture ensures systematic transfer of funds from the majority to the minority

🏛️

Concentration of Control

The "Big Three" (BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street) manage ~$24 trillion and are the largest shareholders of 88% of S&P 500 companies.

Consequence: Three companies de facto control corporate governance of the world's largest companies

Information Asymmetry

HFT algorithms execute trades in microseconds, using data before ordinary investors.

Result: Systematic profit extraction at the expense of those who trade slower
🔒

Opaque Venues

Dark pools process ~40-50% of stock trading volume in the USA — outside public exchanges, without transparent pricing.

Effect: Large players get better prices, small ones get what's left
🔄

Buybacks Instead of Investment

S&P 500 companies directed $942.5 billion to buybacks in 2024 — a record figure.

Mechanism: Buybacks raise stock prices and executive bonuses, but don't create jobs
📈

Detachment from Reality

The S&P 500 P/E ratio reaches historical highs not supported by proportional earnings growth.

Meaning: Stock price growth is increasingly unrelated to actual company performance
💸

PFOF: Selling the Flow

"Free" brokers sell client orders to market makers (Payment for Order Flow). The client is not a client, but a product.

Cost: Citadel profits from worse execution for retail investors

Extraction Hierarchy: Who Wins, Who Loses

Market structure determines where wealth flows — and this is not accidental, but the result of architecture

🏆 System Beneficiaries

The largest asset managers, investment banks, HFT firms. Have access to information before others, better execution prices, influence on regulation. Systematically extract profits.

BlackRock ($10.5T AUM), Citadel (HFT), Goldman Sachs

⚖️ Professional Intermediaries

Hedge funds, brokers, financial advisors. Earn commissions regardless of client results. Their income is the investor's expense.

Management fees of 1-2% + 20% of profits consume a significant portion of returns

📉 Retail Investors (Liquidity Source)

58% of American households own stocks. But 70-80% of active traders lose money. Their losses are profits for the upper levels of the pyramid.

Mandatory broker disclosure data per ESMA requirements

📊 The Mathematics of Inequality

The top 1% of Americans own ~50% of stocks, the top 10% — 93%. The bottom 50% — about 1%. Stock market growth mathematically increases inequality.

Source: Federal Reserve, 2024

Technology: Democratization or Amplified Asymmetry?

The promise: technology will give everyone equal market access. Reality: technology amplified the advantage of those with more resources

📊 What Was Promised

  • Zero commissions for everyone
  • Instant market access
  • Information for everyone
  • Democratization of investing
  • Leveling of opportunities
  • Wealth for everyone

⚠️ What We Got

  • !PFOF: the client became a product
  • !HFT beats you by microseconds
  • !Premium data for the chosen
  • !Gamification of trading
  • !70-80% lose money
  • !Wealth concentration grows

🎯 The Main Question

If 70-80% of retail traders lose money and wealth concentrates in the hands of the top 1% — is this a system failure or its purpose?

The system works exactly as designed

Long-Term Consequences for the Economy

How financialization of the economy destroys real production and undermines the foundations of societal well-being

🏭

Deindustrialization

The financial sector pulls talent and capital away from real production. It's easier to make money on speculation than to build factories.

Fact: Financial sector's share of U.S. corporate profits grew from 10% in the 1980s to 30-40% in the 2000s
💰

Asset Inflation

Trillions of QE dollars raised stock and real estate prices, but not wages. Housing became unaffordable for young people.

Data: S&P 500 rose 400%+ since 2009, real wages — about 15%
🎰

Short-Term Thinking

Quarterly reporting and stock price pressure force companies to sacrifice long-term development.

Mechanism: Buybacks increase EPS and executive bonuses, but don't create innovation
⚠️

Systemic Risks

Market interconnectedness means a crisis in one place instantly spreads to the entire world.

2008 Lesson: Losses are socialized, profits are privatized
📊

Growing Inequality

Every percent of S&P 500 growth increases the wealth of the top 10% disproportionately more than others.

Math: 93% of stocks with top 10% means market growth = inequality growth
🔮

Creating Money from Thin Air

Derivatives, leverage, QE — the financial system creates claims on future value not backed by production.

Scale: Derivatives volume exceeds global GDP by 6-10 times

Alternative: Economy of Creation

The Earthlings people are building an economic model based on creating real value, not extracting rent

📉 Extraction System

  • Money created from thin air through derivatives
  • Information asymmetry as a business model
  • 70-80% of participants systematically lose
  • Profits privatized, losses socialized
  • Buybacks instead of development investment
  • Control concentration with the "Big Three"
  • Short-term maximization at the expense of the future
  • Market growth = inequality growth

🌱 Earthlings Economy

  • Investment only in real projects with measurable benefits
  • Full transparency through blockchain
  • Equal access to information for all members
  • Democratic governance through DAO
  • Orientation toward long-term development
  • Minimization of intermediaries
  • Value creation, not rent extraction
  • Fair distribution of results

🎯 The Fundamental Difference

The stock market is designed for extraction — transferring wealth from the majority to the minority. The Earthlings economy is designed for creation — creating real value that serves all participants.

From casino economy — to economy of creation

📚 Sources and References

All data and statistics in this document are based on verified sources

📖 Additional Sources