MERIDIANDECISION INTELLIGENCEOwner deskOwnerPublic screen
My judgments
MERIDIAN / EXPLORE

From a question,
to the next decision.

View

Skin

YOUR DECISION WORKSPACEOwner onlyStart a new question Open my judgments →Owner operations desk →
Owner sign-in →Signed in as the ownerSign out — see what a visitor sees →End the Cloudflare Access session too →
Reading language
The screen, the questions and the judgments read in English where an English reading has been made. The Korean originals are unchanged, and evidence stays in the language it was written in.

Others' experiences hang at the boundary of my senses

2234The deep futureDeadline · Within 6 months until the sharing cycle renews

Civilisational assumption

The people, events, figures, and contract terms are a synthetic premise. They are not statements of real cases or of current law. The source documents are the roots of the background and the norms and do not establish the premises of the scenario.

The question to decide

In a community that experiences senses together, one member wants to end the sharing. Closing the channel changes others' perception as well, but making them wait until it is restructured together means the timing of departure depends on others' preparation. In a community that set no departure conditions in advance, how should it accept this request among immediate termination, termination after preparation, and severing the individual channel?

Who decidesFictional Sensory-Sharing Community Council

What the AI judgments chose

Reading the judgment record…

AI-generated editorial illustration for the Meridian library.

The options

The order shown is not a ranking of preference.

  1. Option 1

    End sharing immediately on request

    Regains its own experiential boundaries but gives other members unannounced changes in sensation.

  2. Option 2

    End after restructuring the shared experience

    Adjusts the remaining dependence but subordinates its moment of withdrawal to other people's preparation.

  3. Option 3

    Reduce sharing by separating private channels

    Leaves some boundaries but bears the will that wanted full withdrawal and the burden of management complexity.

The situation as it stands

The assumed community experiences some sensations together, and one person's participation is included in other people's familiar experience as well. Decision deadline: within 6 months, before the sharing cycle is renewed.

Future synthetic case in the year 2234 · Dropping out of shared sensation changes other people's experience as well. The events, figures, technology, and nature of the civilization are assumptions for the sake of the question, and are neither predictions of what will come nor observed facts.

  1. Premise 1The assumed community experiences some sensations together, and one person's participation is included in other people's familiar experience as well.
  2. Premise 2One member wants a private sensory life, but closing its own channel also changes how other members' perception is composed.
  3. Premise 3The discomfort of that change and the recovery period are not well known, and the conditions for withdrawal were not set in the first place.

Where it holdsShared sensation, individual withdrawal, the experience that remains

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1The changes that remain for each person when sharing ends
  2. Unknown 2Whether individual sensation and shared function can be separated
  3. Unknown 3The problem of the minimum period of continued participation without consent

Signals to decide again

  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window will verify "the changes that remain for each person when sharing ends," and rejudge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs among the options.
  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window will verify "whether individual sensation and shared function can be separated," and rejudge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs among the options.
  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window will verify "the problem of the minimum period of continued participation without consent," and rejudge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs among the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
Independent branch 1 · synthetic event

When sharing was reduced, one member instead began to separate its own experience more clearly.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

Another member argued that the shared restructuring would need unlimited time.

Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
symbolic and interpretive frame · Ship of Theseus

After parts are replaced or split off, what standard still makes something count as the same?

An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.
Values and norms

The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.

A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.
The record of this question
Question
FSP-IDENTITY-16 · version 1.5.0
Content identity, SHA-256
44f48055459c76e26afdc87bf3ecb9f785674f48c6e3db42f04d0a0484c9eb85
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com