Re: [OpenUDC:650] An algorithm for completely decentralised governance over the % of basic income

[Matthieu Vergne]

If you can formalize it, whether in mathematical language or in code, I would prefer that to such an informal description. If you do so, be sure I will check it. Otherwise, there is too much vagueness and for now I feel their is some inconsistencies. So probably I did not get it. I am the kind to stress, explain and simplify, so if I get it I can improve the formalization and find the metaphors for you. But we need to be aligned.

2014-05-05 23:17 GMT+02:00 Johan Why <emailsar...@gmail.com>:

"It´s almost impossible to plant an idea, as Christopher Nolan says in Inception. It has to find it´s place in people´s reality, and the more alien the idea, the harder it is to get it in there."

This algorithm contrasts with the patterns of the current financial system, and with the patterns of OpenUDC´s solution. In order to see them, a mind would have to trip outside of their presumptions.

Forget what you think you know, open your miNd.

You´ll have to reverse engineer what I see, since I lack metaphors to describe it. Your current beliefs will tell you the patterns are false, there will be conflict between memes. Open your mind if you want to see it.

And the language is biased, you´ll have to interpret the words the way I mean them.


***

There are multiple layers to this system.


Each person sets their own % of dividend. Each person. Every account. Every wallet. Every wallet sets their own %, a value between 0% and 100%. The rest is based on this.

Whenever a transaction is made, the two people who make the transaction will have set their own % of dividend. The lowest value of these two % will be used to tax the transaction.*

The tax/dividend-redistribution block-chain (get what I mean !?) works similar to OpenUDC. Except, there´s an extra layer added to it. Each account receives dividends relative to the values the have set. How this is achieved is complicated to explain. THis is where you need to think. The other parts of the system are pretty obvious, but this is complex (the patterns lack metaphors). Every transaction ever issued by an account, both incoming and outgoing, attach the value that was used to tax (see *). This list of transactions creates a profile for each account, and each account is dealt with uniquely. (the patterns of this might sound instinctively unfair, but not when you see the big picture, give it more thought, reverse engineer it). The list of incoming transactions regulates how much of the dividend-pool are received to the account (this creates incentives to receive payments with high %s). The tax-pool is sort of divided through the block-chain based on every accounts unique profile.The list of outgoing transactions regulates how much dividend in total will be received by the account. (each outgoing transaction secures as much dividend in return, and the list is gradually processed from top to bottom, in real time.) An account can be part of multiple dividend-block chains, multiple trade-networks, and this will all work. It´s totally p2p, and there are no central nodes. An account can trade with multiple isolated networks, and receive dividends from all of them based on their activity.

A pattern that reveals alot is that producers and consumers get different roles in the governance. consumers will choose producers that provide them with fair amounts of dividend. it´s a free market, governance responsibility is on the ventures, as well as the consumers, and since memes spread from mind to mind, the communities should find altruistic balances.

I was lazy as I wrote this. If anyone understands any of this, and if this sparks some thoughts in someone, then I might try to describe it better, preferably in code. Again, reverse engineer a system based on the first 2 rules. That will make you see the 3rd layer, that which is complicated. The first two make no sense at all without the third. Design a system that is fully, completely, decentralized.




If anyone understands this, then make contact with me, and then we can evolve these ideas and design a roadmap towards putting them in code. I need more people who get this, so that we can break them down better then I can do myself. I´m to tired to try and do it by myself. They work. It´s genius. I designed them as parts of my original cryptocurrency-basicincome design some years ago, but gave up trying to spread them since people couldn´t even understand basic income, let alone cryptocurrencies. If you get this, then I´m yours at any time anywhere. This algorithm is important.

--
OpenUDC aims to provide a open standard for Universal Dividend Crypto-Currencies.
 
homepage: http://openudc.org --- git's home: https://github.com/Open-UDC/open-udc.git --- Multi User Chat: open...@muc.jappix.com.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenUDC" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openudc+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Matthieu Vergne]

Well, actually it is not clear to everyone how OpenUDC works exactly. Even for me, I tried to make sense of the theory behind (and it seems I was able to do it to some extent) but I did not look at the code of OpenUDC, so I can't say what is actually (or planned to be) implemented, nor compare it to what you describe.

However, if you have an idea, you don't need to know how OpenUDC works in order to formalize this idea. And understanding how OpenUDC works will not tell you what is your idea neither {'^_^}. So whether you want to share an idea and make the effort to help people understand, whether you throw a stone in the water hoping some fishes will come... but fishes here are quite busy, so don't hope too much.

2014-05-06 0:03 GMT+02:00 Johan Why <emailsar...@gmail.com>:

In this system, dividends flow through "block-chains", completely p2p. Each account taxes to every other account that is connected to it through any of the number of "block-chains" that they´ve traded through. Does OpenUDC work that way too ? Could an account receive from an infinite number of other accounts without those accounts necessarily being connected ? Sorry about my language.

I need to know this before I try and formalize the rest. Could you help me understand if it works this way ? This was my design in my original system, and I´ve assumed that OpenUDC works the same way, but I realized just now that I don´t know if it does.

[Michele Bini]

Hello Johan, a few basic questions about your scheme:

How are account balances calculated?
Are forms of trust necessary?

Can the account-relative dividend percentages change over time?

Who sets this percentage or how is it calculated?

Ciao,
Michele

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Johan Why <emailsar...@gmail.com> wrote:

any outgoing transaction will inherit dividend% from the list of incoming transactions. every transaction is processed relative those values, and this decentralizes everything completely. the pattern here is that everything circles around. everything runs interconnected. each transaction influences every other transaction. 

A system that is completely p2p. It can self-organize and scale infinitely. Some of it might sound like it overcomplicates, but it doesn´t. It puts the control of the system in the hands of collective intelligence, and third-party apps can be used on top of it to centralize some functions. My ambition was that the lowest-level protocol achitechture should be peers. And then interaction design on top of that layer.

I believe it should be easy to factor this system down to the simplest iteration. I´m hoping that a genius read this.

On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 1:06:42 AM UTC+2, Johan Why wrote:

The protocols are such that each transaction is processed in real time. The data-flow is as decentralised as I could make it to be.

Incoming transactions are added to a transaction history, with a record of the % of dividend that was taxed from each transaction. The account will then receive from all dividend-"blockchains" that it´s part of, relative it´s transaction history.

Outgoing transactions are added to a transaction history, and an account will receive as much dividends as their outgoing transaction history. Each outgoing transaction will grant an equal amount of dividends received. This is a measure of who should receive dividends from whom, and how much. If I live in Paris, and trade mostly locally, but buy something from Ebay for $100, then I´ll recieve locally based on my transactions there, but I´ll also be recieving from the tax-pools connected to that ebay-transaction (until I´ve gradually recieved $100, which takes a long time since the dividend-amount is pretty low.)

Each account sets it´s own %, and each transaction is taxed relative the lowest of the two % involved. It is then divided along blockchains, and relative each of the blockchains accounts unique transaction history. It´s completely decentralised. I could talk more about the large-scale implications, but these are the basic rules. Incentives emerge based on them.

Not that formalized, but I´m throwing a stone hoping that a better adapted mind might come across this. It might not work, it might not be the best solution. Or I might be right. Now it´s in cyberspace. I called it "project resilience" and this algorithm was "the resilience algorithm", a way to optimize cultural resilience (based on my ethics). Good luck my meme. <3

[Stéphane Laborde]

Le 06/05/2014 00:03, Johan Why a écrit :
>
> I need to know this before I try and formalize the rest. Could you
> help me understand if it works this way ? This was my design in my
> original system, and I´ve assumed that OpenUDC works the same way, but
> I realized just now that I don´t know if it does.
>

The concepts of OpenUDC and uCoin are the same, it's simple and clear
and were designed by jbar and OpenUDC team during 2011 - 2012. See in
Github the RFC normalised specifications.

(A) Members are identified by a specific OpenPGP Web of Trust, o study
OpenPGP to understand what it is exactly and how it works :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_of_trust

(B) The rule of Universal Dividend is set at initialising a money
system. This cannot be changed to respect the Time-Space Symetry.

Then the Money System is created in a specified time frequence (example
: every month) by adding a new "creation sheet" (OpenUDC) or "amendment"
(uCoin) to the old ones, based on (A) and (B).

So every unit of money has a know and verifiable member OpenPGP key
creator (that cannot change), and a know and verifiable member OpenPGP
key owner (that changes after any transaction), and is physically
located in a determined "creation sheet" - "amendment".

It's not a "block chain" like in Bitcoin, neither a "tax" as someone
could dream about.

It's a free money system, every human member created the same % of money
during a 1/2 life time that reach the average M/N (Money Masse divided
by number of members) for every one coming in it right now in 2014, or
in the future in 2045, 2170 or 2590 or whatever.

It's also possible to own money thru a not-human OpenPGP Account Key,
but this account won't be creator of any money unit.

That's all you need to understand how OpenUDC / uCoin works, you can
also listen to the french podcast
http://www.monaielibre.creationmonetaire.info , read the
http://www.openudc.org blog and project site, access to all the Github
information.

Galuel

[Michele Bini]

Thanks a lot for your clarifications, I'll reformulate the first question about account balances:

What determines the maximum amount an individual can spend at a given time?

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Johan Why <emailsar...@gmail.com> wrote:

I don´t understand the first question.
yes. people with multiple accounts dilute the system. requires a networks of trust system.
every account can change their dividend% in real time, it´s the % taxed each transaction that the system goes by.
each account sets this percentage. 

On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 2:59:05 AM UTC+2, Michele wrote:

Hello Johan, a few basic questions about your scheme:

How are account balances calculated?
Are forms of trust necessary?

Can the account-relative dividend percentages change over time?

Who sets this percentage or how is it calculated?

[...]

[Johan Why]

Galuel

Brilliant. And brilliant answer. I´ve tried to read about OpenUDC for a year, but now I understand it and it is genius. Put that answer on the blog perhaps. You can change the topic of this thread since what I wrote isn´t relevant since I think your solution is smarter.

[Johan Why]

Galuel,

I posted that answer on a blog I curate, The Resilience Network Project

http://projectresilience.tumblr.com/

(story: I Invented my own cryptocurrency-basic income currency that I called Res (resilience) spring 2013. It was based on ripple, and IOU´s, not a "mined" money-mass. It used a redistribution-system instead. It also works, but I prefer the "mined dividend" solution now that I´ve read your answer. That spring 2013, I also wrote some about culture, memes, basic income, and the future. Pseudonym @bipedaljoe. end of story.)

Thread closed.

On Monday, May 5, 2014 11:42:08 PM UTC+2, Matthieu Vergne wrote:

[Johan Why]

I´ve though for 4 hours, and.

I have an improvement to OpenUDC. 

THe amount of dividend you can get in a currency is equal to the amount received / earnt / incoming transaction history. If your participation in the $network equals $100 annually, but you´ve had a yearly £network budget of $100,000 dollars, then you´d recieve lots more dividend from the £network.

This solves the trust-contract (trust is then measured in trusted transactions, much simpler then having to validate each other p2p, since that´s what we do when we trade.), and it prevents people from being part of multiple networks and leeching from all of them (plllllayers), since they´d have to be "living" in the communities that support them.

The patterns are there, give them a chance. Perhaps you´ve already solved this in a smarter way (like you did with what I started this topic about), but I think not.

The "problems" that aries, are easily solved. If cash is the trust-contract, then someone would have to be trusted by someone else to recieve dividends. And there could be a function to automatically repay whomever trusts you, so that them giving you cash just results in you getting dividends (them saying you should get to be part of the community.)

I think this scales better then what u use now.

This makes the ID-system superflous, and decentralizes the whole even more.

[Stéphane Laborde]

Johan,

What you did is very good, as communicate to others how OpenUDC works on one's own blog is one of the best thing you can do to contribute to OpenUDC development.

May I suggest to go forward to see the two videos (without sound comments only music) :

TRM Light Speed View : http://www.creationmonetaire.info/2014/04/video-light-speed-trm-view.html

TRM Light Speed R&Q View : http://www.creationmonetaire.info/2014/04/video-light-speed-rq-trm-view.html

With theese videos you will have a whole view of the fundamentals elements of the Relative Money Theory (RMT), and also a description in R&Q View of the demonstration of the RMT theorem that there is no inflation neither deflation although there is always "mined money mass" only because of the use of the good money unit : the relative one.

I wish this will be helpfull (see RMT in french here : http://www.creationmonetaire.info/2012/11/theorie-relative-de-la-monnaie-2-718.html )

Galuel

[Stéphane Laborde]

You should study RMT with RTM - R&Q Light Speed View Videos. RMT demonstrates there is only one class of solution to create a free money system and absolutely no other one.

It is not about designing what you think is good, bad, improved or anything else. It's about only one solution of differential equation that are direct mathematical expression of the 4 economical freedom for money.

So study the RMT first, and then you'll be able to understand what is a free dividend rule and what is a not-free one.

[Johan Why]

Of course it inflates. Giving more then you recieve, as altruistic species do as a way of getting more in the long run, means what you currently have inflates. becomes less. you give it away. if I have $400 and the money-mass increases, then my $400 become proportionally less. Look, you´re awesome, and your language is useful. And perhaps we use the term inflation differently.

But you don´t need any other web of trust then cash. Reflect on the solution I put forward in my last mail. It solves other problems too.

[Stéphane Laborde]

Study the RMT first, thanks.

[Johan Why]

What I´m hinting at is that money-masses are heterarchical, they´re as complex as the internet. Any one person is interconnected with multiple money masses, there´s no single "M/N" but an infinite amount of them.

In ripple-language (ripple has developed the best terminology IMHO), the money mass is the sum of all debt in the system, all IOUs in circulation. Since it´s p2p, there are an infinite amount of money-mass circles.

All these money-masses have members, it´s already in the system. http://youtu.be/ySzqM5dpF7s?t=7m34s. They´re already connected through a web of debt.

Couldn´t dividends be implemented in proportion to those ripple-networks ? Or does OpenUDC already do this ? My solution was to treat each unique "money-mass", each debt, as an M/N, and scale that up. That decentralizes it more.

The questions really where to draw the line of M/N. How to design an algorithm for that. I don´t know how your current solutions scale. 

The "block-chain" approach I had was that everyone who´s in some way connected through a line of trust (cash-based) would be recieving dividends (up to sum of their cash-based line of trust, their M/N). (It requires a peer-based web of trust too, to solve ANOTHER problem, that of multiple accounts.)

I guess what I´m saying is that your identification system solves the problem of multiple accounts, but it doesn´t solve the problem of M/N. From how I understand it.

This is a humble question from a very interested fan. Do you see what I see and if I´ve misinterpreted something ?

[Stéphane Laborde]

Debt is not a free money system. Please read the RMT first. Thanks.