|
ProfessorProf posted:So is eating at restaurants you like just not feasible in the Strangeconomy Among just about any other form of economic exchange.
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Oct 13, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
RealityApologist posted:As far as I know, this is the most sophisticated discussion of these kinds of issues anywhere on the internet, though you get glimmers of it in the P2P and liquid democracy communities. Alrighty then. /Rolls up pant legs, prepares to wade through the sludge
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Kane posted:Alrighty then. You should read the 'attention economy' thread too, especially the bit about thanksgiving.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
So Strangecoin is a fusion of Reddit upvotes and various altcoin tipping?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:So Strangecoin is a fusion of Reddit upvotes and various altcoin tipping? Eripsa is fascinated with reddit, twitter and every other form of social media that was super cutting-edge back in 2007 when he still had a tenuous link to the real world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
The Silicon Valley VC mindset as applied to knowledge production.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
I've been here for half the thread and I'd struggle to come up with a concise label for "these kinds of issues."
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:I've been here for half the thread and I'd struggle to come up with a concise label for "these kinds of issues." 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:I've been here for half the thread and I'd struggle to come up with a concise label for "these kinds of issues." "nonsense"
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Eripsa is fascinated with reddit, twitter and every other form of social media that was super cutting-edge back in 2007 when he still had a tenuous link to the real world. My favorite part of the infamous hangout is how excited he got when Strangecoin relationships were compared with youtube celebrities.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
Malmesbury Monster posted:My favorite part of the infamous hangout is how excited he got when Strangecoin relationships were compared with youtube celebrities. To be fair Eprisa gets that excited if you show him any form of attention that isn't immediate ridicule.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:So is eating at restaurants you like just not feasible in the Strangeconomy On the other hand, you can be Goku
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:No, your primary, secondary and tertiary expenses are to Little Rick's Finance Emporium, the service that sprung up to pay all other services for a mere 1% support fee, and is connected to everything from Bob's Hardcore Porn and Highway Infrastructure to the Red Cross. They've got twelve billion corporate and personal couplings, so good luck drawing any information whatsoever out of that morass. What you should be getting from comments like this, Eripsa, is that whatever financial system you implement will be gamed. It will be gamed as hard as possible by very smart people who devote their entire lives to gaming the system because even the most minor exploits offer ridiculous rewards. The more complex the system is, the more gameable it is- and a financial system is necessarily one of the most complex systems there are, because it has to deal with every possible kind of financial transaction. Now, our current financial system has most of it's complexity at a relatively high level, where it's amendable by legislatures and bureaucracies and such, but you're trying to put all of your complexity down at the lowest level possible, where if there's a exploit nobody can fix it except by abandoning the entire Strangecoin system and adopting something else. Strangecoin isn't a currency. It's a replacement for the idea of currency, the idea of simple symbolic exchange of value. You're taking that incredibly simple, elegant idea that commerce has been based on ever since we got the idea of symbols, and replacing it with a ridiculously complex system that requires AI to run and postgraduate math to balance your checkbook, and if something goes wrong nobody can fix it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
I felt a great disturbance in the marblechain.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
 A SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO ENDORSEMENTQuestion: Is there any aspect of StrangeCoin that is not fundamentally and irreversibly broken? Observations: 1. Any amount leaving your StrangeButt account is an expense. 2. If your account balance is zero, TUA foots the bill for your expense. 3. Endorsements are one of the ways that amounts can leave your StrangeButt account, meaning that it's an expense and thereby backed by TUA. Hypothesis: This is an incredibly bad idea, and fundamentally broken. Experiment: I have no money whatsoever because I am a leech, a despicable Randian untermensch living in some festering sewer. I endorse literally every human on the planet for 100% for the next 100 years. Result: You buy a hotdog for 1.35, and, because of my endorsement, the sausagemeister receives 2.70: half from your balance, half from "me" (but drawn from TUA). This process repeats for every one of the trillion transactions that occur every single day. 4chan notices this and, 4 the lulz, every poster on /b/ does exactly the same thing. Now, when you buy a hotdog for 1.35, the sausagemeister's account is immediately brought to the balance cap, with a thousand percent extra cycling straight back into TUA. She's now literally unable to make more money that day, so she closes up shop after vending one steaming dog and goes home to play Skyrim and eat her extra hotdogs. Society collapses into ruinous shambles. Analysis: 
Muscle Tracer fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Apr 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
I'm kind-of bored so here's a random suggestion for RA. I don't pretend to understand much of this, but I keep noticing a bothersome tendency in your mechanical descriptions of the Strangecoin system. That tendency is to pin down system parameters to fixed types, like percentages or colors. When you do that before you've worked out the nature of all these network relationships, and the sorts of transactions (in the system architecture sense, not the economic sense) that will have to happen for things to work, you're severely limiting yourself. Before you know exactly what sorts of information needs to be retained for a "coupling" relationship, for example, it's backwards to decide up front that "coupling" involves a commitment expressed as a percentage. Maybe it should be two percentages, or thirty, or something totally different. This idea of "color blending" is similar. A color is basically a tuple of some sort, but it's also a particular kind of tuple with its own semantics. Why decide that it's an appropriate way of conveying some information before you really know what that information means and how it operates in the system? An analogy from the software world would be that it's like typing in a database schema before you really know what you want to do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Now, when you buy a hotdog for 1.35, the sausagemeister's account is immediately brought to the balance cap, with a thousand percent extra cycling straight back into TUA. She's now literally unable to make more money that day, so she closes up shop after vending one steaming dog and goes home to play Skyrim and eat her extra hotdogs. Society collapses into ruinous shambles. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Is this the right moment to close the thread, or just move it to E/N?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Can someone write a speculative fiction where the universe gets split through a quantum anomaly and one parallel universe proceeds using StrangeCoin for all monetary transactions and the other universe only barters using severed hands ala the Belgian Congo. The story starts when the split collapses like in the Mario Brothers movie and there is a clash of societies between the thriving, handless peoples and the starving strangecoiners.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:
Tua transactions are unmodified; this was in the original spec and hasn't changed. Only bare payments are backed by tua; if you are drawing from tua your endorsements mean poo poo. I'm preparing a longer response to the issue of gaming. But I saw a siren and couldn't help myself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
RealityApologist posted:Tua transactions are unmodified; this was in the original spec and hasn't changed. Only bare payments are backed by tua; if you are drawing from tua your endorsements mean poo poo. The actual transactions being made to the hotdogmonger aren't TUA transactions, they are "bare payments." The buyer has the 1.35, and thereby are conducting /b/'s sweet sweet endorsement cash. The original spec does not say that endorsement payments cannot come from TUA, and does in fact refer to them as an expense in the context of i/e ratio balancing: RealityApologist posted:If X has sufficiently large income, they must take on equally sizable expenses to avoid balance penalties. These expenses can come in the form of support and endorsements for other members of the network X wishes to support and endorse, effectively growing the network on the basis of their prosperity. Before speculating further about the implications of non-TUA-backed expenses, I'll wait for an updated version of the spec. I'm intrigued to hear what you have to say about "the issue of gaming." e: additionally, TUA can make a payment only in the following situations: posted:X's account balance = 0 at t. Any additional transactions outgoing from X at t are drawn from TUA. Muscle Tracer fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Apr 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Really hoping the new spec actually defines modified/unmodified. Looks like you've got definitions for them? Is it the definition I posted above or is it still uncollapsed? I see that it's proving helpful to tell people they're wrong about the system being crap, but until you give us a peek at the actual cards you're holding it's entirely reasonable to think you're just making it up as you go along. I don't think it's helpful to present a bunch of out-of-spec discourse on gaming. Once again it'll lead to heated discussions about various implementations of a vague spec wherein everyone thinks they're right because the substance of what is being discussed isn't clear. A spec would clear this up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:
This is a great explanation of why, despite everything Eprisa says, endorsements are fundamentally broken and can only be a detriment. There is absolutely no scenario where it won't immediately collapse in on itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
My name's Wendy, and I am a professional TUA miner for my own personal corporation, WendyWallet. I do one thing, and I do it well: I make zero-balance, unmodified TUA-backed transactions from my completely empty personal account to WendyWallet, which then makes payments to Rick's Finance Emporium, who makes transactions to my clients. I put three degrees of separation and one impenetrable curtain between you and the filthy, degrading, instant-pariah-status activity of getting coins out of TUA. Do you need to buy a boat for 27,500 from Enrique's Softcore Furry Foot Piss Videographers and Boat Megastore, but you don't have that 27,500? Don't worry, just contact WendyWallet. I'll pull that 27,500 straight out of TUA, send it to Rick, and he'll send it to you. That means that you've now got the money you need, and can make a transaction with all the benefits of the fine folks making endorsements at /b/, or any other people who might have endorsed you. All the benefits of being a vile, depraved TUA leech, and none of the drawbacks. In exchange, all you have to do is support and endorse my girlfriend, Alice, at rates of 0.1% each. Alice has a perfect history of making reasonable payments, because she's just a regular lady: and besides, she's got so many supporters and endorsers from WendyWallet, she has no incentive to go hog wild: merchants are going hog wild for her. And what's in it for me, Wendy? Nobody'd do business with me—I'm the lowest of the low—but that doesn't matter at all. After all, Alice, with all her endorsers, is a hot commodity in the customer relations world: every business on Main Street invites her in, her endorsement levels are so high, and give her huge discounts—after all, they're still coming out ahead. So she buys anything and everything I need for me. The best part? Alice has no network connection at all to WendyWallet: she's never made a transaction of any kind with me or my business. And this is a computer-networked finance system / currency / regulatory structure combo, not some Orwellian hellscape, so nobody knows that I benefit from her purchases in the slightest. Or—er, wait, are we still assuming that there is a literal omniscient AI behind Strangecoin with smell detectors hooked up to every hock of meat at the black market underground butcher's for the purpose of monitoring the quality of meat inspection? Ah, gently caress it then. This would NEVER work if there was an omniscient computer that ran the justice system and tracked all barter transactions in play!!!! Muscle Tracer fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Apr 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Or—er, wait, are we still assuming that there is a literal omniscient AI behind Strangecoin with smell detectors hooked up to every hock of meat at the black market underground butcher's for the purpose of monitoring the quality of meat inspection? Ah, gently caress it then. This would NEVER work if there was an omniscient computer that ran the justice system and tracked all barter transactions in play!!!! Well duh, The Computer is vigilant in its protection and oversight of every citizen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Even if you ignore all the reasons why this idea 1. isn't necessary and 2. wouldn't be reasonably possible to implement, there's still another key problem: most people don't have the time, will, or capacity to analyze a massive amount of data about each purchase they make. This is a problem that also exists with ideal "Libertopia" societies; even if there's perfect transparency and everyone has access to all information, people aren't able or willing to do some complex analysis for every purchase they make.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Even if you ignore all the reasons why this idea 1. isn't necessary and 2. wouldn't be reasonably possible to implement, there's still another key problem: most people don't have the time, will, or capacity to analyze a massive amount of data about each purchase they make. This is a problem that also exists with ideal "Libertopia" societies; even if there's perfect transparency and everyone has access to all information, people aren't able or willing to do some complex analysis for every purchase they make. Oh, that's easy. All it takes is the complete good will, faith, and transparency of every single person involved in it. With that one little thing, people can just ask if the person they're coupling with has been involved in any shady business and expect a perfectly honest answer. Simple as that. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to my volunteer shift at the local lithium mine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
emfive posted:I'm kind-of bored so here's a random suggestion for RA. I don't pretend to understand much of this, but I keep noticing a bothersome tendency in your mechanical descriptions of the Strangecoin system. That tendency is to pin down system parameters to fixed types, like percentages or colors. When you do that before you've worked out the nature of all these network relationships, and the sorts of transactions (in the system architecture sense, not the economic sense) that will have to happen for things to work, you're severely limiting yourself. Before you know exactly what sorts of information needs to be retained for a "coupling" relationship, for example, it's backwards to decide up front that "coupling" involves a commitment expressed as a percentage. Maybe it should be two percentages, or thirty, or something totally different. This idea of "color blending" is similar. A color is basically a tuple of some sort, but it's also a particular kind of tuple with its own semantics. Why decide that it's an appropriate way of conveying some information before you really know what that information means and how it operates in the system? RA, I checked and this poster didn't make fun of you, so you can actually listen to him. The idea of laundering transactions is similar, however -- if somebody who insulted you has an idea, they could have somebody else who you haven't filtered out yet post the idea for them. So absent The Computer to verify, you should probably ignore all advice, just in case a troll had any contact with it (assuming you're still using your heuristic of "people who are mean prima facie have no good ideas.")
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Even if you ignore all the reasons why this idea 1. isn't necessary and 2. wouldn't be reasonably possible to implement, there's still another key problem: most people don't have the time, will, or capacity to analyze a massive amount of data about each purchase they make. This is a problem that also exists with ideal "Libertopia" societies; even if there's perfect transparency and everyone has access to all information, people aren't able or willing to do some complex analysis for every purchase they make. That's what the Aura thing is for. Color is visually apparent and obvious, but it's saddled with its own slew of problems that are addressed above.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
^^^ The whole "aura" thing is a good example of my complaint. Given that a whole bunch of stuff in this "system" is going to involve some sort of implicit automation, why does that particular aspect of network participation need to be something designed for a physical sense? Why do I need to "see" auras, in other words? What needs to be conveyed to me in order for me to process that information? Color is problematic anyway. What's the arity? Do we think about it as a simple RGB value? If so, what are the semantics of larger and smaller values for the color channels? Why is that a good way to convey "goodness" or "evilness"? Is it, alternatively, a hue system (HSL or HSV)? If so, what are the compass points? What are the semantics of saturation (is pale red better or worse than bright red)? Also note that there's added complexity stemming from the fact that the range of possible values in any workable color system is normally limited; adding colors together is a mess. Even if you solve that with some normalization measure, it's still the case that if somebody glows with HSL(274, 85%, 32%) they could have gotten that way as a result of an infinite number of possible combinations. Choosing color is just a premature decision here. Forums Barber posted:RA, I checked and this poster didn't make fun of you, so you can actually listen to him. Yes that was serious. Honestly I think RA has been a surprisingly good sport through these 2000 some-odd posts, though I agree that the topic of discussion is bewildering. That suggestion is serious commentary based on my intuition as an old software developer and system architect. I am not a SedanChair sock puppet or anything like that. emfive fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Apr 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
emfive posted:I am not a SedanChair sock puppet or anything like that. that's exactly what the real SedanChair would say! j'accuse! I'm going to need to see your last thousand posts, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Forums Barber posted:that's exactly what the real SedanChair would say! j'accuse! I'm going to need to see your last thousand posts, sorry. No I'm pretty sure the real SedanChair would be unable to resist the urge to say something completely bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
In my job of Building Real Things we recently had to think a lot about color. Human eyes can differentiate individual sources that are a few nm apart, 1nm at best, but there's about 1e7 distinct colors we can map out. Then you open the door to chromaticity and mapping colors humans can't actually see into the normal color space and I've already made an utterly terrible error in the domain because I'm not an expert. One cool thing is that experienced metalworkers can reasonably guess temperatures based on the black body curve from the color of molten steel. If you're trying to solve the general problem of guessing a temperature from a black body equation and an IR wavelength you run up against emissivity and scuffed paint versus regular is enough to throw your calculation wildly off target.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
emfive posted:^^^ The whole "aura" thing is a good example of my complaint. Given that a whole bunch of stuff in this "system" is going to involve some sort of implicit automation, why does that particular aspect of network participation need to be something designed for a physical sense? Why do I need to "see" auras, in other words? What needs to be conveyed to me in order for me to process that information? Why not fill out a personality/values quiz and have it calibrate your good/evil aura (so you don't have to worry about the colour/hue). It would just reduce the whole thing down to a simple scale (how closely do the person's values align with yours); then you can ask glass to break down the scale into finer granularity if you need more info to make a decision. Or you can skip to the part where you take a values quiz that determines which Burbclave you will swear your undying loyalty and allegiance to. Then you can live a life in a community where you never have to see or deal with the 'undesirables'. Yeah, he is trying to architect a solution to a problem that hasn't been thoroughly scoped/defined. Kane posted:Alrighty then. You can just scroll past the posts that don't appear to contribute anything to the discussion; You can probably tell those from a glance. Even if you skip over some good posts, the issues get raised multiple times so you'll probably get everything from a thorough skim. Tokamak fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Apr 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:In my job of Building Real Things we recently had to think a lot about color. Human eyes can differentiate individual sources that are a few nm apart, 1nm at best, but there's about 1e7 distinct colors we can map out. Then you open the door to chromaticity and mapping colors humans can't actually see into the normal color space and I've already made an utterly terrible error in the domain because I'm not an expert. One cool thing is that experienced metalworkers can reasonably guess temperatures based on the black body curve from the color of molten steel. If you're trying to solve the general problem of guessing a temperature from a black body equation and an IR wavelength you run up against emissivity and scuffed paint versus regular is enough to throw your calculation wildly off target. There's a really great book called "Catching The Light" that's all about how complicated light and color are. It's not a simple concept, and for that reason I think it's a terrible go-to for something as basic as a fundamental part of a socio-economic system. Like, for a very simple example, what do color-blind people do? Also, color "good" and "bad" norms are entirely determined by culture. Red is "bad" in some cultures but "good" in others.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
This is a problem five steps beyond the current difficulties in the system. This is like the dry wall of the building. And concocting this while the foundations haven't even been fully set is what's going on here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Dude it says "red25" right in the aura metadata, all you have to do is enable overlay view. Or maybe people with true achromat colorblindness could set it to dynamically synthesize tones in four part harmony. Soprano is number of endorsements, alto is civic responsibility, tenor is carbon footprint and bass is tax exemption status, if any*. Major chords indicate primarily Democratic political contributions and minor chords, Republican. Libertarian political contributions could be represented by mu major, aka the "Steely Dan chord." Also, Eripsa just happened to pick glaring, evil red for the Koch brothers (I always want to capitalize "brothers" because they're supervillains). He's not saying that Strangecoin makes value judgments, just that individuals (or corporations, incorporation spec TBA) can now be nodes on a network, and you can see how they're connected to each other. Colors, nodes, networks. Now you're thinking with networks. Strangecoin. It Has Information. *how does taxation work in Strangecoin?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
M x V = P x Q Where: M = the supply of money V = the velocity of money P = the overall price level of the economy Q = aggregate production of the economy. Simply, the quantity theory of money. The velocity of money is simply how fast money changes hands - if I pay 1 dollar for a burger, and then the restaurant holds the money for a month before spending it, velocity might be low. If they immediately use it to purchase more beef from the butcher next door, velocity is high. I can't keep track of this, but to keep things simple and ideal let me say that in Strangeland M and Q will naturally rise together in such a way that there is no natural inflation or deflation. All new goods are immediately matched by rises in the money supply, and the same will happen in reverse when productivity falls. The whole system is still in danger of hyper-inflating itself to death. The account balance cap is a real problem that I feel needs to have a second look at its current implementation, as if I understand it correctly it is quite binary: either the cap is so large as to be pointless, or low enough to be crippling. If you say "There are too many billionaires in this world, and we shall eliminate them thus" and your cap is set very high then it will have no effect. As with any system, the wealthiest are the best able to find ways to slip through the system, or turn it to working for themselves. Either by distributing the wealth among a cluster of close knit cronies, placing it into liquid assets or otherwise hiding the money they will likely find ways to subvert the cap altogether. Let's say they don't - they are going to find things to spend the money on. In fact they are going to have people that are paid to make sure all the money is spent on things and not sent to the universal account for no further benefit. You could make them get super auras +1 for donating to the TUA for whatever reason, which lets them get a special color or whatever the gently caress assuming they care. However problems will start to show up - that's a lot of income that is being forcefully shot back into the system. And each time someone manages to hit the cap we get the same thing. It'd be dumping billions onto an economy that has fundamentally not changed from the previous day, and the process would continue forever because the wealthiest still maintain their inherent advantage of being able to stay the wealthiest and expand their wealth - only now they look to us As Gods Amongst Men, with the awful brilliance of the almighty. Indeed, the more people try to spend their money the more expensive things will get. Some of this might be accounted for by taking slack out of the economy, but what can't happen won't happen - industry can't possibly match purely monetary growth rates. The lower the cap goes, the worse the problem becomes. Everything becomes a bidding war - a bidding war with no limit, because everyone has the ability to draw from the universal account. As people get close to the limit, they start buying, coupling, anything - and the economy will explode because of it. Velocity will go through the roof as the Capitalists - let's say the Koch brothers - are forced to immediately, within nanoseconds transfer their funds away before they are lost to the ether that is the TUA for no benefit. Everyone's money starts chasing the same goods, with say the top 50% of people (and a great majority of the income) immediately buying and selling from each other trying desperately to avoid their personal caps. What counterbalances this? How does strangecoin account for the massive increase (indeed, a practically mandated) increase in money velocity? And why is it desirable? It induces spending/prevents hording, but really all it does is reduce the opportunity cost of impulse buying what you immediately desire compared to saving/investing for the future. I mean, I may be alone here but I don't think I've ever heard anyone look at our current system and say, "You know, this is good, but you know what it really needs? More loving consumerism."
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
ProfessorCurly posted:I can't keep track of this, but to keep things simple and ideal let me say that in Strangeland M and Q will naturally rise together in such a way that there is no natural inflation or deflation. All new goods are immediately matched by rises in the money supply, and the same will happen in reverse when productivity falls. The whole system is still in danger of hyper-inflating itself to death. Taking this part of your post on its own: the supply of Strangecoin and the supply of goods are completely unrelated. If I have no money, I can say to you, "Hey, would you like to perform a transaction with me where I give you the maximum amount of SC it's possible for you to hold?" and if you say "Yes," then it's drawn out of the ether and everyone thinks I Am A Bad Person for some inexplicable reason. The thing about Strangecoin that Eripsa has pontificated on least, but seems to be the most central thing, is that he does not view wealth as the end goal of people in Stragecoin, but "income" or "impact on the network." This has never been quantified, and it's never been explained why anyone would value this, how it would be measured, and how it would differ from either 1) having loads of money or 2) making loads of transactions or 3) both. Something something you can buy goods by paying a mystery amount equal to 1% of the other guy's expenditures for the next month something something something. Why do you want that? Hold on I'm being trolled and bullied, I don't have time to answer that. Note that this is not some intrinsic property of Strangecoin, this is right up there with "all-seeing AI" as far as hoping that the world inexplicably transforms in such a way that any of this would be even marginally feasible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Oct 13, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
Hey hey, before society collapses there is one thing we need to clarify: there will be no mud colours in Strangetopia, because---RealityApologist posted:But the idea is that everyone has a unique hue assigned as an identity, but their overall glowing aura will reflect not just their hue but also the various network entanglements they've committed to. Imagine the aura is stratified into layers of color, with the width of the layer signaling the strength of that influence. So I'm blue15, and I glow as if I'm covered in a thick, deep blanket of blue15. But my extended family has incorporated (id=green196) and serves as a primary source of support and coupling, so my blue blanket appears as if it's set alight in the green flame of my family's color. My employer's orange255 occupies a strata in the aura above that, and my many other more minor transactions appear as sparks flying off my aura like solar flares. The interface should quickly convey a lot of information about the extent and distribution of my various network obligations, and if I know of particular shades to be wary (for whatever reason) I can tell at a glance if the person I'm transacting with represents interests contrary to my own. So we will in fact all wander around with sparkly rainbow halos, with clearly delineated colour layers (plus various flames and other effects). Let's have no more of that FUD now, colleagues. But do I really want to wear a rainbow halo always and ever? Can I turn it off when I go to bed? Wouldn't some sort of numerical marker make more sense? This guy is +15 (moderately non-Koch), that man is -38 (spawn of Paul), etc. Maybe add letters to signify degrees or connections to specific "industries/behaviours" (P for the flourishing trade in children, G for nurses at old people homes, U for selfish swine never reciprocally coupling with me). (original idea do not steal)
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 16:44
|
|