Using "voluntary tax" redistribution to clear multi-lateral barter loops in a decentralized (leaderless) way?
10 views
Skip to first unread message
Johan Nygren
Jan 3, 2026, 12:36:15 PMJan 3
to Network Money
Michiel De Jong's Ledger Loops does decentralized loop clearing with loop finding and 2-phase commit and "chunked clearing" (as I understand) and is very good invention.
I have a project from 2012 (which I finished last year, while solving coordination for decentralized multihop payments, see here) that as a "byproduct" or accidentally happens to potentially clear multilateral barter loops, although I cannot say exactly how it behaves.
I do "voluntary taxes" (yes, actually voluntary) by people choosing to add tax to their IOU and this assigns the "conductance" of the IOU, and IOU at a node compete for tax being redistributed (a governance function, it does not mean you get the tax, as you tend to usually pass it on. It means more you are entrusted to control the redistribution flow).
The thing is the tax continues to hop from node to node until it reaches a person without income (without incoming IOU). This means it will loop if there is a loop, as people all by definition have incoming IOU... But, it also diverts from loop if there is branches. But, even if it diverts (say half diverts), the remaining half does another pass, and then diverts half, so that the full amount actually passed both through the loop and the branch.
The tax is guaranteed basic income to people with no income. It lifts everyone out of poverty, is the idea.
I cannot say how this behaves in an actual network with many loops and branches and loose ends. I assume it may relate to how much is loose ends and how much is loops, i.e., how many have income and how many are "free loaders" (in Resilience people are meant to be able to live off the basic income, but here the issue is to what extent the redistribution will be clearing loops).
If, by any chance, the redistribution does tend to clear loops, you get "chunked clearing" without loop finding and without 2-phase commit with "hash lock" along nodes in loop.
But until it is verified, this is a, well, wild guess partly, but grounded in a true possibility.
Since my main project is multi-hop, this possibility was interesting to me (very interesting actually) but not essential. But the question now is: could a stand-alone multilateral barter system use this to do decentralized loop clearing!? Such a system would then be extremely minimalistic, and include a decentralized guaranteed basic income system as well. Pretty cool possibility.
Anyone who is very good at simulating these things mentally or mathematically, feel free to mention if you think it would tend to clear loops significantly enough to be used as a main clearing mechanism, or be mostly just very minimal clearing.
Peace Johan
I have a project from 2012 (which I finished last year, while solving coordination for decentralized multihop payments, see here) that as a "byproduct" or accidentally happens to potentially clear multilateral barter loops, although I cannot say exactly how it behaves.
I do "voluntary taxes" (yes, actually voluntary) by people choosing to add tax to their IOU and this assigns the "conductance" of the IOU, and IOU at a node compete for tax being redistributed (a governance function, it does not mean you get the tax, as you tend to usually pass it on. It means more you are entrusted to control the redistribution flow).
The thing is the tax continues to hop from node to node until it reaches a person without income (without incoming IOU). This means it will loop if there is a loop, as people all by definition have incoming IOU... But, it also diverts from loop if there is branches. But, even if it diverts (say half diverts), the remaining half does another pass, and then diverts half, so that the full amount actually passed both through the loop and the branch.
The tax is guaranteed basic income to people with no income. It lifts everyone out of poverty, is the idea.
I cannot say how this behaves in an actual network with many loops and branches and loose ends. I assume it may relate to how much is loose ends and how much is loops, i.e., how many have income and how many are "free loaders" (in Resilience people are meant to be able to live off the basic income, but here the issue is to what extent the redistribution will be clearing loops).
If, by any chance, the redistribution does tend to clear loops, you get "chunked clearing" without loop finding and without 2-phase commit with "hash lock" along nodes in loop.
But until it is verified, this is a, well, wild guess partly, but grounded in a true possibility.
Since my main project is multi-hop, this possibility was interesting to me (very interesting actually) but not essential. But the question now is: could a stand-alone multilateral barter system use this to do decentralized loop clearing!? Such a system would then be extremely minimalistic, and include a decentralized guaranteed basic income system as well. Pretty cool possibility.
Anyone who is very good at simulating these things mentally or mathematically, feel free to mention if you think it would tend to clear loops significantly enough to be used as a main clearing mechanism, or be mostly just very minimal clearing.
Peace Johan
Johan Nygren
Jan 4, 2026, 5:30:36 AMJan 4
to Network Money
My analysis many years ago was that swarm redistribution for loop clearing works as that X% tax on average clears loops when there is less than X% loose ends while links build up when there is more than X% loose ends. Why? A loop with a branch, tax goes in full through both, per x * (1 - 1/2^n) which at limit is x (here x == tax amount...). Many loops and many branches probably evens out to, on average, full tax package through loops even if it is spread over many loops. Thus you get clearing if loose ends is below X%.
Johan Nygren
Jan 6, 2026, 11:18:18 AMJan 6
to Network Money
"Loopsilience" system in 300 lines of code... https://gitlab.com/bipedaljoe/p2p/-/blob/main/app/loopsilience.go
JASON
Jan 21, 2026, 6:21:48 PM (22 hours ago) Jan 21
to Network Money
GOOD DAY,
I AM CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING A RESTRICTION WITH MY BANK ON AN OUTBOUND INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER.
I AM SEEKING A RELIABLE THIRD-PARTY IBAN HOLDER TO TEMPORARILY RECEIVE FUNDS.
COMPENSATION WILL BE PROVIDED UPON COMPLETION.
ONLY DIRECT RECEIVERS, NO AGENTS.
SERIOUS PARTIES ONLY.
CONTACT ME DIRECTLY VIA WHATSAPP.
(https://wa.me/447935333496)
I AM CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING A RESTRICTION WITH MY BANK ON AN OUTBOUND INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER.
I AM SEEKING A RELIABLE THIRD-PARTY IBAN HOLDER TO TEMPORARILY RECEIVE FUNDS.
COMPENSATION WILL BE PROVIDED UPON COMPLETION.
ONLY DIRECT RECEIVERS, NO AGENTS.
SERIOUS PARTIES ONLY.
CONTACT ME DIRECTLY VIA WHATSAPP.
(https://wa.me/447935333496)
Elusio
3:18 AM (13 hours ago) 3:18 AM
to JASON, Network Money
?
Best
Elusio - Founder
Book a meeting
URL: creationrights.com
------------------------------------------
Company information
DEPTH TECHNOLOGY LTD is a Limited Company registered in England and Wales.
Confidentiality notice
This message is intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to us, and immediately and permanently delete it. Do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.
Privacy policy and terms of use
For information about how we process data and monitor communications please see our Privacy policy and for terms of use please see our Terms of use policy.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Network Money" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to network-mone...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/network-money/c237c222-b188-4a53-a374-7435342e9193n%40googlegroups.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages