Tier lists from worst to best (ideally backed by good data), ESG ratings (environmental, social, & governance) - like social credit scores for companies (and politicians?) - aren't perfectly done, yet, but I see that as a primary way forward..

Along with better cyber-models of existing operations and proposals for review.

Of course a lot more effective when more consumers, investors, skilled workers, contracts, & government funding are going to good X over evil Y.. but we can make that more obvious and easier with better ratings and platforms.

A.i. can absolutely help to gather that data, crunch those numbers, make comparisons, 'Amazon' recommendations (ideally an eco/socially beneficial alternative) and eco/social beneficial investment portfolios.

​

Obviously a bit more complicated to achieve true, deep, sincere environmental and social concern and virtuous action among oligarchs and business students & politicians and media..

(we can probably help this along with better engineered cyber-world education, training, guidance, therapy, community.. + medication, psychedelics.. )

But in the meanwhile, we can do better to help people, workers, consumers, voters, city councils.. move their $ and labor towards the better, away from the worst.. make 'the game' only winnable by the more ethical, most ethical, the most eco/socially beneficial..

to make low wages, exploitation, energy footprint.. on par with obvious racism, sexism, pollution.. generally bad for business.

Clearly some executives and boards and politicians were just going along with being not-racist and not-sexist only on the surface .. to win the game .. but for the purposes of this experiment, that's progress..

Meanwhile, genuinely good, beneficial, ethical, effective etc. shops, projects, programs, program coordinators.. should be getting more support, investment, skilled ethical workers, contracts, community partners, smart cooperative network help.. and so on, while evil mega-corps and bags-of-crap are trying to change gears.