Sorry, but I’m an anonymous user (kinda privacy-paranoid)… ¯_(ツ)_/¯
No problem… It’s 2:00 midnight here anyways…
Is there any voip channel you can use?
Wouldn’t want to disturb those around me… It’s 2:00 midnight… (my mechanical keyboard already makes one hell of a noise; my voice would literally get me killed; :–) )… Sorry…
I’ll wait till whenever you’re free. Just drop your post here, anytime.
What you describe here is just a credit limit being maxed out. Credit is supposed to do that. In a simple chain like this, each participant can demand payment or forgive their trustees. The problem becomes visible when you zoom out. Imagine a million zambian people buying smart phone and selling bananas in a global network. Because the monetary value of their exports is greater than their imports, they will collectively accrue a negative balance. But because mesh credit has no borders and no politics, it will be very difficult to restore balance.
With nation states, we have governments who talk to each other to try to resolve these long term problems, through investment, loans, or aid, otherwise trade would stop when credit ran out.
1 Like
Makes sense. When might your voice be acceptable? And by what channel? Typing is a pain, and so often a waste of time, energy and goodwill.
Ought to say, I never really thought of it that way before… Makes me feel like Ripple is still incomplete. The problem is grave indeed, very grave…
But then don’t you think that rather than trying to fix a broken system (via. Credit Commons), one should start over from scratch and try to figure out why on earth did a peer-to-peer accounting system ended up so horribly in such an edgy situation? Anyways, if I understand correctly, Credit Commons does just that: fix a broken network?
Would DM (privately Direct Message) you whenever I’m free to speak (sadly, my freedom is seriously restricted under the current homely-code-of-conduct-protocol forced upon me; what a fate; hahaha)…
That explains why Ripple was meant to be a payment-settlement system, as opposed to a full-fledged value-exchange system, as even I’ve noted in the document (although I didn’t imagine the zoomed-out grander picture when writing that):
Because of these limitations, Ripple in its current design is only best
suited as a mutual payment/debt settlement system for big multiple co-dependent institutions with
high bandwidth of value flowing mostly among each other (as opposed to a full-fledged value-
exchange system), which is exactly what it advertises itself to be: a payment settlement system.
matslats is just spewing nonsensical memes. There is no scenario where payments can exceed income. Ever. And, the nonsense is also seen in that he reverses the words. exports (income) greater than imports (outgoing payments), but, acruing negative balance (more outgoing payments than incoming). the reason what he says is incoherent is because he is trying to make 2 + 2 = 5.
1 Like
Whoa… this thread went bit crazy and there’s some dicey assumptions built into a bunch of it that I’d like to respond to.
First, let me say that I think it’s cool that you’re thinking about, designing, and seeking to implement your own ideas for currencies, whether Vril or Reslience or whatever. Let me also say Ripple (before becoming tokenized XRP) was a cool design… with good intentions.
I just request that we try to refrain from attacking everything that doesn’t match our vision for just not matching our vision? HoloFuel isn’t “dead” for not being your plan, it is a currency for powering a hosting network, not for private charity, nor the perfect wealth distribution plan. However, you can feel free to build those things on top of Holochain.
@The-A-Man said: How does a mutual credit system prevent or limit credit defaults?
The only people with credit limits other than Holo (whose business relies on the integrity of the system) are hosts. The hosts have a contractual agreement with Holo LTD which includes a clause about defaulting on HoloFuel debt authorizing us to collect the defaulted amount in national currencies at the current exchange rate.
Some people die (or abandon accounts) with negative balances. Some die with positive balances. We only need to chase a few that seem to be intentionally defrauding the system to discourage this as a pattern.
Plus, the implication that would be a problematic behavior is unfounded. Think it through:
- A host’s credit limit is based on their recent few months of earnings.
- Holo does KYC, knows who you are, and might come after you to collect.
- If you’re earning enough in hosting credits that 3 months of credit is a large enough sum to risk #2, why would you want to block all future opportunity of earning, by trying to rip off the system? It’s gonna earn you a lot more to just keep hosting.
@The-A-Man said: Again, no form of KYC is scalable and is in general a terrible idea!
And yet you provide an example of a scalable KYC system and a currency based on it. You realize KYC means KNOW You Customer, so by only extending credit to those you KNOW (like Ripple), you are making an extensible KYC-based currency.
There also are many other approaches to making KYC scalable. I would agree that KYC via a single central authotiy has scaling challenges. But we don’t have to be the group performing KYC. It can be proxied it to states, other companies, social networks, and more. KYC is nowhere near the growth-limiting factor for adoption for Holo or HoloFuel.
Not to mention, that the fact that HoloFuel users have been KYC’d can allow others by proxy to lean on HoloFuel as an anti-Sybil protection for their app. Just send us ten cents of HoloFuel when you join. Or for that matter, don’t send any payment, just sign your joining request with your HoloFuel key.
3 Likes
@The-A-Man said: If only @artbrock considers re-modelling Holo-fuel as a Vril contract…
Let’s build HoloFuel to just do the job of HoloFuel, okay? Let it prove secure, performant, scalable P2P currencies on Holochain so it can power Holo hosting, and then a lot more will follow when people see no consensus, nor Proof-of-Work, nor Proof-of-Stake is required to power decentralized currencies.
Then you can work to get support for Vril or Resilience on Holochain after something proves it can work. And I think we’re only going to get there by sticking to the focus of what it is, not slip into trying to make it the perfect currency design to solve all other problems.
@The-A-Man said: I definitely am implying that we should ditch Holo-fuel as a currency for trading anything other that Holo-hosting.
Let people use it for whatever they want! It will already be built-in / readily available to any hosted app. For many it will be worthwhile for them to use something already built-in, proven, and secure, than to build their own if they want to collect subscription fees, service fees, or whatever for their app. It probably will probably cost them a lot more to build and maintain their own currency than to pay 1% tx fees.
And I also just showed above how it can be useful for things other than transactions (like Sybil defense).
@The-A-Man said: …countersigning, anonymous calls, and especially ‘calling remote DNA/zome’s functions in a validate routine’. Does any of these assumptions break some Holochain invariant that I’m unaware of?
Paul already addressed these pretty well… but a couple more things.
Countersigning: In the next few months we should have phase 1 countersigning in place. In this scenario, Holochain “knows” about countersigning roles and that validation routines will need a header for each countersigner showing they committed it to their chain.
Anonymity: We’re not going to be doing anything to try to enable anonymous calls, but if someone wants to build an anonymizer that interfaces with Holochain, they are free to.
Cross-DNA calls in validation: Like Paul said.
@resilience-me said: I agree that multi-hop mutual credit is superior as the money layer of something like Holochain.
Holochain does not have a money layer.
HoloFuel powers the Holo hosting network. HoloFuel itself an application built on Holochain. You can build other currencies on Holochain, but you don’t need any currencies to run Holochain P2P because everyone just hosts themselves and provides a little extra processing and storage to validate and store a portion of what the rest of the users in that app are doing.
But that overhead is small… Blockchains have to pay people to run nodes because the overhead is high and inefficient.
5 Likes
@The-A-Man said: Sorry for being critical or anything, but truth be told, wealth redistribution is a dangerous idea! It kills the very incentive of why we (as a species) have chosen to have a wealth-system in place. […] And I doubt they would choose to live in a monetary system that has wealth-redistribution functionality built-in.
Every national currency is a wealth-redistribution system, and yet you participate. In most, a privileged class of people (bankers) get to create money from nothing and charge you interest for it. This transfers massive amounts of wealth to the bankers. Every dollar that exists is debt they they are earning compounding interest on. Note: When you repay principal on a bank loan, that dollar goes out of existence (is retired / un-issued) - that’s why they like to charge you all the interest up front on long-term loans like mortgages.
But I do agree with many of your thoughts on the difference of the experience of entitlement receiving from a nameless/faceless government vs a private charity where there’s a possibility of relationship and maybe even mutual respect/appreciation.
@The-A-Man said: What is a mutual credit currency? …although Holofuel should rather be called a private currency and not a mutual-credit economic system
Mutual-credit is a method of issuance and has nothing to do with how public or private a currency is. There’s a lot of confusion about mutual credit mostly because people don’t understand currency issuance at all, and tend to think fiat is the only way currencies are issued. However, currency can be issues in 3 (and half) ways:
- Fiat: A declaration by an authority creating units from nothing. All national currencies an blockchain tokens are created this way. Value is typically managed by keeping credits artificially scarce.
- Backing: Units are created only when another item (gold, another currency, assets, commodoties) are deposited to back the unit, which is typically redeemable for the things backing it. Value of units issued should be equivalent to the assets on reserve backing the units.
- Mutual Credit: Units are created in the act of spending them by allowing an account to go negative. Sum of positive balances should equal sum of negative balances for a net zero supply. Value is rooted in the fact that this is basically just supply-chain/communal accounting, so the game is managing credit limits with integrity.
- (or really 3.5) Computed Currencies: These are not really issued on their own at all, they are derived from other currencies. Example: Dow Jones Index is computed from the stock prices (other currencies). There are index funds that trade against the DJI, but it is never issued as it’s own units, but always derived via computation from another source.
HoloFuel is mutual credit because accounts mutual extend credit to each other (to the few account types who receive a credit limit).
@The-A-Man said: It requires us to have access to a benevolent God that grants just and appropriate credit-ratings to individuals in such an economy.
Or maybe a simple algorithm that uses past earnings as a predictor of future earnings to repay credit drawn against… Then all accounts of that type can be treated equally without any special dispensations from God.
This is how HoloFuel works.
4 Likes
@The-A-Man said: There’s very little incentive for a member of an open-and-publicly-accessible-ledger mutual credit (LETS-like) system to perform thorough extensive inspections (or audits) on the system before staking (i.e., participating) in the system, and any benefits of doing so are far too distributed (the public-goods problem of externalities), neither is there any incentive for the official maintainers (the powerful ones) to be vigilant in assessing the credit-worthiness of the individuals on behalf of the members of the system
In a mutual credit system run as a Holochain app, the algorithm is just coded into the validation rules that EVERYONE enforces with each other. No special benefits to friends. No mental effort required from lazy people. Computers are good at math, they can compute and enforce it equitably.
How does that algorithm get set? That’s a governance issue for the people creating and maintaining the currency, but no more difficult than anything else they’re making decisions about. And those decisions can be unilateral or as inclusive of the community as you desire using voting or whatever means you want.
@The-A-Man said: Re: HoloFuel… Is it a mutual-credit system… Is it a private currency… Either one or the other, please. It can’t be both! [LMAO]
As mentioned above, it can absolutely be both.
HoloFuel units are issued via spending into the negative. It is a mutual credit system.
A mutual credit system is one in which the participants mutually owe each other for the favors they did to one another.
No… That’s a credit clearing system. Those are good too. But if you’re tracking indebtedness between parties, that’s credit clearing (or mesh credit as @matslats mentioned) not mutual credit issuance of currency units.
e.g. https://beyondmoney.net/monographs/credit-clearing-pure-and-simple/
@resilience-me said: Also, Holochain is overkill for [implementing Reslience]. And, if it were to use public-private key public ledger infrastructure…
I doubt you’ll find a decentralized public-private key ledger lighter weight than Holochain. All the other’s I’ve seen use some form of consensus which means every node has to sync full state with each other and they have to come up with an absoulte time ordering for transactions.
The mutual validation rules for your currency don’t have to be about a one-size-fits all credit limit algorithm, it can be that transactions don’t exceed the trust levels set in a Ripple-like manner. It just makes sure everyone follows the same rules. The rules can include the individual’s ability to customize some things, but not other things (like me spending 100 credits subtracts 100 from my account and adds it to another rather than only subtracting 5 from me and adding 500 to another). Those are rules everyone must follow.
If you find something lighter weight and Holochain for that, I’d be interested to hear about it.
4 Likes
So how does that process start? Surely it has to start from somewhere, right? And as far as I know, no one has any “recent few months of earnings” yet.
I remember the time when the communist Soviet Union got so so excited about the advent of computers, all because they thought that was the answer to their central-planning inefficiencies; “Now we have computers! Now we can perfectly model our economies on our central computers and decide the best allocation of resources!” they said… But surely that didn’t turn out that way, now did it? You see, the point I’m trying to make is that algorithms are only good insofar are your problem is. Some problems just aren’t algorithmic. And in this context, sure an algorithm that takes into account a host’s history can certainly aid in getting you from 1 to 100, but how on earth can that same algorithm get you “From Zero to One”?
There’s a huge difference between Knowing your Customer and Knowing your Peer; Ripple is anything but KYC; although one may argue that KYC when decentralized to the most granular level metamorphoses to become KYP, but in that sense, one can also argue that capitalism is nothing but communism on a molecular level (a business still operates as a community with a common motto, so do families, and so on), a biological cell is nothing but an animal on a cellular level, and so on… The reason we have different names for such things when there’s no fundamental difference between them other than that of scale is that at different scales, things change properties! And those intrinsic property-changes are radical if anything. So I think the argument that Ripple is nothing but KYC on a molecular level misses the fact that it’s often the scale (of KYC, of decentralization, of particles, of planets, of qubits, or what have you) that makes all the difference in areas like these (I’m sure @resilience-me would want to add something here)
That sounds like you’re suggesting that KYC can be made scalable by becoming Ripple (or at least approaching Ripple)! Haha!
That’s partly what got me excited as hell when I first delved deeper into Holo-fuel and the future that it envisions… Sadly, that’s not the case anymore… Not to mention the fact that not every Holo-fuel user is KYCed; only hosts are (correct me if I’m wrong though). And it’s a far-fetched dream for Holo to think that every person would want to be a host so would naturally be KYCed.
Looks like you didn’t read my document (it’s so hard to get people to read something these days; maybe my writing-skills aren’t very engaging… so sad…). Anyways, that won’t be the case once we have Vril deployed and ready-to-go! On Vril, it’ll cost nothing for businesses (and individuals) to issue their own Vril (backed by their Vow); moreover, there’s no 1% fee or anything even close to something like that on Vril, making Vril suitable to be used for any number of Goddamn micropayments (on Holofuel, that just isn’t the case; you can’t transfer 100 units of Holo-fuel a dozen times to-and-fro without having a substantial amount of fuel being wiped out of what was initially 100 units, thereby incentivizing people to build “lightening-networks” on top of Holo-fuel and move the underlying fuel as little as possible, which is completely at odds with the world’s vision for the future of micropayments). Moreover, issuing your own Vril takes sovereignty to the next level; business (and individuals) will have full sovereign control over the Vril they issue, and won’t be under the whims of anyone else for that matter; I guess that’s something that people at Holochain can and should resonate with unless they’re under DMT (haha).
As for anonymous function-calls, this is what I was referring to:
Alice tries again and is connected to a host that has an ‘anonymous’ instance running. This is a special case that lets hApp developers give anonymous users (both humans and search engine crawlers) an appropriate amount of access to the app’s data without letting them actually create data themselves.
from https://blog.holochain.org/how-to-break-a-holo-app/
Have talked with Paul (DM) on the subject… Again, this isn’t a necessity for Vril contracts per se; it’s just that it got me intrigued with its usefulness for a use-case like that… But since Vril runs (or would run) on Holochain, it’s no problem if we have to (in the implementation) fire-up a contract DNA with a random (use-and-throw, or rather one-time-use like OTP) agent ID and make the required queries that way.
Again, looks like you didn’t read my document…
I’m future-aligned by default, so what I meant was that I doubt that the future-man would want to live under such a system like a state, given the choice. The choice is what we don’t have at the moment. However, I’d like to envision (and work for, even if in vain) a future in which man does have the choice (the ancap dream). In that case, I doubt the state (and it’s filthy currencies) would have any chance of survival. However, Resilience is a very efficient, granular, decentralized, and most importantly libertarian protocol that’s more than fit to replace the welfare-system that the state provides (and even the more superior negative-income-tax schemes never adopted hitherto). It can go on to become the labor-money, the money that gets paid in the labor market to employees; companies would want to advertise that they pay their workers in Resils (Resilence units) for their work/contribution, so as to earn a good reputation for their business; kind-hearted people would want to be paid in Resils so as to let a portion of their earnings slip to the weak and the unemployed on the Resilience network. A Resil might buy you a biscuit or two, or it may buy you the Vril for a biscuit or two (albeit off-chain)… For everything else (especially private-property and indivisible assets), Vril should suffice.
I’d say that all currencies are backed by something, i.e., all currencies are backed-currencies. In fact the very word ‘currency’ means a token of something (or at least that’s how one should think of it). Fiat is backed by power/authority, Gold is backed by faith/fear, token based backed currencies are backed by the thing they tokenize, mutual-credits (and loan-based currencies) are backed by the future, Vril is backed by exactly what it says it’s backed by (the Vow), and so on… This definition of currencies makes them a unit of ‘promissory-note’; in fact that was the central idea behind Vril’s design. Don’t you agree?
EDIT (May 2021):
Was re-reading through the posts to reply to @noclue who’s waited a month (my reminder just went off)… Wanted to add that I no longer ascribe to the above statements… Hell, I no longer use the word ‘currency’ anymore; the word is just plain silly! ‘Money’ would be a much more precise term. Money is a commonly accepted medium of exchange. Note that a medium of exchange is a good (a good, commodity, or a service) just like any other; it’s just that this commonly accepted medium of exchange is more marketable (unperishable, easily storable, etc) than others. Money Substitutes (digital numbers) can be fully backed one-to-one with the Money they substitute, or partially (in which case it is called a fiduciary media). Money Substitutes issued by a bank or some other entity about whose solvency there exists no doubt can be used as Money (despite part of the Substitutes issued being unbacked, or fiduciary). Hence, credit money is qualifiable as Money. The tokens that mutual-credit systems represent are qualifiable as Money. Regarding which I must add that I have neither the energy nor the spirit to update the original document to reflect my new terminology; sorry Michael; I’d really love to update the doc to reflect my new Austrian thinking around the argument, to discuss a couple of setups in which Vril can be used (hint: reserve (commodity) tokens, credit-tokens, “thank-you” tokens, derivate tokens (what Art calls Computed Tokens)), to update the section on mutual-credit, and discuss the effects (and signals) of the issuance of all 4 of them, and finally differentiate between Wealth and Money, and also remove all the rubbish from the document that @matslats rightfully pointed (though I’d like to add that Matt’s joke about the homo-economicus certainly applies to all economists but not to the Austrian ones; we start from only one ‘given’: that man acts, deriving all our conclusions logically from this one axiom, meanwhile proving the case for liberty, all while sitting in one dark room. To deny our conclusions would be to deny thyself. Note that I’m no professional Austrian yet… Still learning my way through…). Let alone the best-practices document on writing Vril Contracts (especially for those contracts the tokens of which would act as Resources in some REA network)… Have picked up work on a minimalist (h)app as of now; won’t abandon it until complete…
Art Brock is right in his decision of backing HoloFuel with hosting power. Money-Substitutes (what you call currencies) not backed with real goods or services (i.e., what I described above as in Money Substitutes backed by “fear”, “authority”, etc) are not Money! It was plain silly to declare them Money, I admit. Didn’t know enough back then or was confused… Moreover, the word “currency” sounds like Money could be neutral, that it could just as well be plain numbers on a computer. That “medium of exchange” could just as well be replaced with a “system of exchange”. Again, the Austrians have already established that in this ever-changing world, Money can neither be neutral nor stable. Art Brock is right in insisting that all sound Money be backed by something equally sound (i.e., backed by consumable/vendible goods, commodities, or services that can be reasonably backed by). I don’t think hosting (as a service) is a service that can be reasonably backed by. If it is me issuing the promissory tokens that say “1 unit buys you 1 hour of hosting time” knowing that I indeed do have a nice working CPU, then given I issue a reasonable amount of tokens, I’d be able to guarantee that the tokens issued are fully backed 1-to-1. If I were the CEO of a big corporation with millions of such machines in its data centers, I’d be able to issue many more tokens and still be fully sure of my corporation’s solvency. However, if I have no idea how much “capacity” I have, I’m left in the dark. I won’t be able to safely calculate what amount of tokens would be okay to be issued. Or as Michael Burry would say, if you don’t know the amount of leverage involved, you don’t know enough (to make a move). It makes total sense for Holo to be a corporation in itself (like the AWS, Azure, etc) and do utmost KYC of its hosts (its employees, that is). Again, Art Brock is right with that regard too. Finally, one last question remains: that of stability. I’d love it if @artbrock makes Holo give up the pretense that it can create a truly stable currency. All mentions of the word ‘stability’ should be removed from its design papers. Price is a function of supply and demand. You may control supply, but you cannot control demand. Even supply too you can only control in one direction. Basically, the way I see it, ‘stability’ is a very nice excuse to engage in price manipulation. Hell, stable against what? Stable against the unstable Dollar? Stable against your so-called unstable Bitcoin? It’s gonna have to be stable against the currencies you’ve dubbed unstable and hence unworthy! That’s not all. The design of HoloFuel is full of inconsistencies! The latest medium article on HoloFuel reads like a joke! Not to mention that the video on it got taken private… And there has never been anyone to respond to the responses the article has received. Trust me, hiding under a blanket doesn’t help anyone. But wait, there’s more. It’s true that I WAS wrong about “backed currencies”, but you guys (the Holo team) ARE STILL WRONG about it, and that too in a lot more profound way! 1 HoloFuel isn’t backed against 1 clearly defined unit of hosting! When they say that HoloFuel is backed by hosting power, that’s not what they mean. Rather, what they mean is that the total amount (nothing to do with marginal utility) of HoloFuel buys you the total hosting capacity. There is a hosting price (denominated in HFs per unit-of-hosting) besides the HoloFuel price. And the hosting price is, by definition, subject to change. Plus the hosts decide the HoloFuel’s floor price; the whole attempt is “to reduces the volatility of HoloFuel prices, which makes it easier for our ecosystem to make long term plans”! Utter nonsense! I’ve never seen anything like it before; it’s worse than fiat! There is no such thing as a “currency designer” (something that they take pride in calling themselves); calling yourself a “currency designer” is calling yourself a conman! Those looking for sane money must look elsewhere. Their words are inconsistent; they say they do not wish to compete with Bitcoin or become a world currency (a competing money, that is), yet they go on to build a whole new currency for use in their hosting service. If they were true to their words, they’d have rather decided to use one of the existing ones to power their network, or created a derivative token on Holochain backed 1-to-1 to the reserve currency(‘ies’, in which case the LIFO mechanism would come in handy to manage the price relations between those multiple currencies). For instance, Ethereum Swarm doesn’t have its own brand new “revolutionary” currency; it simply uses Ether to compensate its hosts. At best, it would have made sense for Holo to create a “layer 2” lightning network on Holochain for Bitcoin and use those tokens to compensate whoever (in whichever (h)app) needs compensating, or in other words, a bullion bank that stores Bitcoins and offers HoloBits, a promissory token that says “I’m fully backed by 1 Bitcoin”, a token that takes full advantage of Holochain’s (or perhaps, Vril’s) technological superiority when it comes to creating, anonymizing, transacting, and translating (converting one token/claim into another) such tokens. In fact, that’s one of the first tokens that I expect to be created on the Vril network. Plus it would have made perfect sense for such a HoloBank to charge a wee bit amount from its customers for keeping the reserve safe (basically the private key(s) of the bank’s accounts on those traditional crypto networks) just like Bullion Banks charge from its customers for keeping their Gold secure. This revenue could very well have funded the continued development of Holochain. A distributed, decentralized, global, open-to-join (h)app that offered hosting-service would never be in a position to issue hosting-backed tokens since (and as I’ve said already) it would not be able to ensure that the tokens it issues are backed by its reserve (its total hosting capacity) without extensive KYC (which destroys openness), but it could very well have structured itself such that it wounds up not needing to issue its own tokens. For a simple Swarm On Holochain (h)app that offers storage service to store encrypted files on its great-many hosts’ devices, the (h)app would act as a marketplace cum match-maker for customers and hosts; hosts list the ‘maximum amount due’ that they’d tolerate (before deleting the user’s data from their device) and the price per GB per day that they’d charge, the customer uploads his data to the (h)app (automatically selecting the cheapest hosts, thus fuelling competition between hosts). The customer pays periodically so as to never let that maximum be reached. The unit of those payments being someone else’s token on Vril, be it a Precious Metal Backed Tokens issued by a Bullion Bank, be it an Index Token (a Derivative Token, that is; what Art calls a computed token) that indexes top corporate stocks (all issued as independent Vril tokens in and of themselves), be that a Ripple-style token that can be translated from and to tokens of users who belong in that little isolated independent shard of the web of Vril Tokens’ Trust Network, or something else. Simple! Basically, the point is that the design-decision of creating a dedicated token (the HoloFuel Token) that (as is evident, falsely) backs hosting was a choice, a choice that could very well have been avoided entirely just by flipping the design.
@noclue, another clue would be https://www.artbrock.com/threebles/strategy. Clearly, anyone who advocates for using Triple Bottom Line as a prospective (let alone effective) strategy to fight climate change is either genuinely unaware of the ludicrousness of the scheme (and thus unaware of sane economics) or is aiming at image-improving! Radical privatization and radically accessible tort law infrastructure is THE ONLY rational way to allocate our natural resources appropriately whereby the market is let to decide on their rational (over)usage. Art B., check out this article (https://mises.org/library/economic-calculation-environmentalist-commonwealth) where Art C. (Art Cardon) addresses this issue; what a coincidence, no?
Let’s stay positive, though. I have got a hunch that they’re secretly up to something… Last time, it was RSM (Refactored State Model) for Holochain, and it was awesome! Let’s hope that this time the refactoring ends up looking equally awesome (and equally hot! ;–)
Yet, https://open.coop/collaborate/mutual-credit/
To summarize,
I’ve defined what sane money is; it’s a medium of exchange (and not a system of exchange).
Digital tokens of such Money count as Money Substitutes, hence good enough.
Credit Money arose out of the use of Money Substitutes; under specific conditions, it’s good enough.
Mutual Credit (and the truly p2p multi-hop Mutual Credit that Ripple is) is good enough.
Mutual Credit is good enough as long as it is clearly specified what 1 credit token entails, and as long as the solvency of the debtors is undoubted. You can’t say “1 unit buys whatever sells for 1 unit”. It has to be explicitly stated as to what 1 unit entails. That’s the one thing I don’t like about Ripple…
You (@artbrock) can reject the Austrian definition of Money altogether and vouch in favor of the ridiculous-sounding “neutrality of Money”, in which case I’d be at a loss to argue any further…
If HoloFuel’s design does away with the internal hosting-price mechanism and rather makes 1 HoloFuel be strictly backed by 1 unit of hosting (you’re free to define what that 1 unit might be), I’d be happily able to say that HoloFuel is also “good enough”. Until then, HoloFuel, in my opinion (i.e., seen from the Austrian lens, the only lens that can show reality) is perhaps a currency, a current-sea (whatever), but not sane money.
I hope this clarifies that which I don’t like about HoloFuel, @noclue. You didn’t get a response for 30 days, so I felt like responding myself. I’d love it if you could share the link to the medium article that talks about banking (or blockchain, whichever it was) being a Ponzi scheme! You may call blockchain a speculative bubble, but a Ponzi scheme? That doesn’t make much sense. As for banking, though I don’t understand the intricacies, my general understanding is that the modern banking system is qualitatively different from the Fractional Reserve Banking that existed in the times of the Gold Standard. The bank you serve is a product of forced coercion on the citizens and of unjustifiable discrimination against private banking (and the issuance of private currencies). Not only is it immoral from a Libertarian perspective, but even from a Utilitarian perspective, a society that adopts Free Banking prevents resource misallocation by virtue of keeping a check on inflation, thanks to the fact that under Free Banking the limit to the issuance of Fiduciary Media is much narrower than it is when there exists only one “monopolistic” Bank, let alone when the bank doesn’t even promise to be backing every note with the said commodity (Gold or whatever) as is the case when the bank has ties with the military! [I think @MaxxD will agree…] I don’t see how you may ever attempt to justify the existence of such a bank (the FED as it exists today); that is unless you’re a Keynesian, in which case you’re just as hopeless! Anyway, you’re right that Holochain is the future. Holochain is a priceless piece of art, the epitome of perfection! Those behind it (Art, Eric, David, et al.) are geniuses beyond doubt. It’s understandable to have high expectations from its other projects too. It’s up to Holochain (or rather, it’s our (Holochain’s) moral obligation) to realize the dreams that Blockchain showed us but could never realize by itself. The way to do it is via radical scrutiny where necessary. Anyway, gonna go back to learning & coding… I’d shut up for now. I hope you appreciate the reply; took hours to get it right and tame it down…
Enjoyed the article. Thanks for pointing that out… I guess that’s what LETS systems were: mutual-credit credit-clearing systems. Right? In fact, even Ripple is a mutual-credit credit-clearing system by this definition.
Credit clearing is the highest stage in the evolution of reciprocal exchange, which, in effect, makes money as we’ve known it obsolete. The fact is that goods and services pay for other goods and services, whether we use money as an intermediate payment medium or not. Direct credit clearing makes the use any third party credit instrument, like conventional money, unnecessary.
I was always searching for those words! Thanks for the link. It made my day! (bookmarked the link; gonna add the paragraph in my document for note-keeping; ¯\_(ツ)_/¯; thanks a lot…)
Found this great article while exploring beyondmoney.net; would love to share (as it shares so much with my conclusions with Vril; it’s enlightening to see how two independent people at independent time-frames can arrive at the same conclusions).
For those of you who’re too busy to read my google-drive document and even the above article, look what I’ve found (in the above article; thanks to @artbrock for suggesting beyondmoney.net)!
This perfectly explains the Vril System of Value Exchange. Note that one notable difference is that Vril does away with Silver altogether; goods are priced relative to other goods; no Silver coins required! BOOM! Plus the Voucher Exchange Coach is actually the Rippling Vril Exchange in the Vril system, thereby being a million times more efficient and at the same time being entirely decentralized! Also, note that in Vril, you only accept Vows(promises) that you’ve listed as trustable (as in Ripple; in Ripple, you only connect and share IOUs with peers you trust). Also, note that everyone can issue vouchers backed by their promise to provide back, in which case the Vril system behaves like the pure p2p Ripple system of payment settlement.
This is the free-trade trading system that the free-market needs! Vril is the framework/platform over which to do all this, hassle-free! And Holochain is the breakthrough it needed!
#theGreatestReset
LATEST EDIT:
Another comment to add: the baker in the above tale can be thought of as Holo-fuel. But note that the baker is just one out of the many people who provide basic goods/services that everybody needs; why then should the issuance of private-currencies stop at the baker? The answer is that it shouldn’t, despite whatever Holo may have you believe.
Issue your own currency and seize fate by the throat!
I agree. Ryan Fugger’s invention is incredible. The ideas behind Holochain are, at least some of them, also really good (I have more to explore around them), and I think the combination of Fugger’s ideas with some of the ideas from Holochain could be really good. I happen to like the name Vril a lot too.
1 Like
The point is that a money layer for Holochain is part of the standard conversation about Holochain. For example, @The-A-Man suggested with this post that Holo-Fuel was dead since it is ideally replaced by multi-hop mutual credit system. This was labelled as an attack on Holochain. It cannot be, if Holochain is completely neutral. So, if it is, it could be good to have neutrality then, and not force @The-A-Man to call it an “alternative” solution (not that you did, but, @pqcdev did sort of. )
1 Like