BitLaw - Polycentric Law in Crypto-Space (part 2)

Apps
162

All of the answers is on 150. Yeah, I am working on compiling some stuff, and formalizing. I got all of the ideas down, and learning how to coding. I got another project I am working on that involves meshnet. It is a stepping stone to allow us to build bitlaw, and sea steading. It is not part of bitlaw project, but with that project, I hope it’ll generate me some money so I can move over into bitlaw project.

This is the basic layout on my plan…The first part of the series is to focus on the jury / / court system. It is a uber style app mixed with moon is a harsh mistress jury system.

Second or Third part of the series is to build a reputation ID system. It is still on going investigation. It is put on hold for now. Safex will allow this to happen. The basic concept is to generate token between two parties right before the contract is completed. That token is a deem of reputation. This person gains a token as a mean of gaining trust… Think similar to Dota 2 reputation system. To give another person reputation only occurs during the game. You don’t know that person but based on his reputation, he seems like a great leader with lack of easiness. That kind of thing.

Keep in mind that we have conclude that actions does de-anonymize you. Even on tor, I2P, freenet,etc. just as long it is anonymous, and not able to track you is fine. Poly-centric law isn’t about anonymizing users but is about building a higher trust society, that is transparent and to prevent corruptions, and lastly to give more power to the individual, rather than collective.

The second or third part of the series is to build a COLA. New revolutionary idea. Jury nullification is the default. You can create new communities, new charter, new cities, sea steading, spaceships, and all of the things. This will emerge with jury system. We can now solve things ourselves, and hold each other accountable without the need to have a state court system, and it’s laws. Individuals get to establish the rules regardless of the imaginary lines, and the majority. Cola will abolish the democracy ruled system. If a minority cola lives in the majority ruled cola, they still cannot pose the rules on minority. Aka, I didn’t sign the contract. Also this will allow private property to have their own security. IE, mall security. So majority cannot invade the minority with violence. One could have two cola that overlaps, but does not support each other clause. One could fork both, and emerge into one. Boom, new cola This will allow stackable cola system. It will tighten up the community for sure, but it will also build a prosperity.

Cola is forkable. Forking is healthy for the universe. Every contract comes with git version.

Lastly, the security is being development by others, and can be used. cell411 or peacekeepers. So no worries there.

Cola could used in gaming as well as larping. It could used in grocery stores. Scan the barcode, cola pops up and gives you list of details of the product, and reviews. That said cola is a 3rd party contractor that gives an stamp of approval for quality assurance. So it is very flexible system here.

2 Likes
163

Yes but what ensures anyone respects any given COLA? And what prevents the conventional legacy government from trampling all over the new system?

164

I just build a very basic cola creator. It takes a header (Article of Whatever), body (insert rules here), and signature, (the creator of contract).

I have been thinking how to deal with signatures and would like some feed back. There are several ways to do this but by unitizing safenet, I am uncertain how it plays out.

1: When user enters the establishment, the phone notifies him about the rules, and such. It only needs one time signature from him, and he could re access to the establishment without resigning it. The contract is created, and signed. It is stored in establishment directory, and also stored in user directory. However, this cost safecoin. This also means a lot of duplication of same contracts.

Which leads to a different perspective…

  1. Same scenario as above but all of the signatures are stored in one file, and attached tor the contract.The contract itself is copied to user directory. The establishment user pays the coin for updating the contract signatures. Signatures needs to be linked to the said contract by using non collusion hash. This could reduce the duplication, and the cost.

Or another perspective…

  1. There is no signatures. By downloading the contract, you agree to the rules. Removing the contract from your directory means you nullified the contract. Contracts are active when users enter the establishment. This could be a good choice. Different example, when user downloads a 3rd party food certification, it can scan food bar code, and see if there is a stamp of approval. If there is a stamp, the food is trusted. The contract inside contains list of products that are approved. If he removes the contract, he could scan the bar code but will not see the 3rd party certification. No signature needed. However, the question arise, if there is no signature how do we make a proof that a user did violate the rules without the proof of signature?

edited: I have no clue numbers are not working. It says 1. 1. 1… In the editor, it says 1. 2. 3. >.>

165

How about option 4. Create modular contracts. I’ve always, always, ALWAYS hated electronic contracts because the idea of signing a complete contract without being able to edit or negotiate terms seems insane to me. More so is the idea that by downloading a contract you agree to it. You could just want to download it to read it or share it.

So how about this. What if we stop think about a contract as a piece of paper that one must agree to or not agree to but rather like… a collection of gems. Each “gem” represents a different value. Each “gem” is unique and represents one specific belief or rule. Like one gem could be for “Thou shalt not kill.” And that’s it. Another could be “If you are caught killing you get hung upside down over an active volcano.” Obviously not everyone is going to agree to the SAME rules and the SAME consequences. So while some people might agree with “Thou shalt not kill.” They might opt for a different “gem” for a consequence like “You get 20 years in prison.” A COLA could chain these gems together in sequences like a collection. However the gems, rules, beliefs, would still exist in a database somewhere for others to assemble into new collections of their own. When a user “signed” the COLA they would simply be collecting these “gems.” Another way to put it would be that a requirement for a particular COLA would be that one have a prerequisite that one agree with a set of rules beliefs, similar to how there is a prerequisite of minimum software and hardware requirements when you want to run any particular app. If you haven’t collected the right (or perhaps have collected the wrong) gems then you can’t join the community in question because you don’t meet the minimum belief system requirements.

So how this might be coded is each belief would have it’s own hash. It would be a very simple rule, preferably binary. It COULD refer to other rules but must in itself be extremely simple. If else statements or true or false statements. Nothing more complicated than that. Another reason for this is so that if one rule links to another rule one can set it into code. If person is proved to do x and punishment is to be fined y then system automatically deducts y from his account and awards it to plaintiff. Minimum of beaurocracy. Or situations like that. Of course it can’t be that simple as there’s things like poverty and what not but you get the idea.

1 Like
166

Great explanation there. So there would be two different folders. One folder is for collecting contracts to modify them and such. Another folder is the “gem.”

I’ll fork cargo repository, and do some modifications. It’ll use toml for the dependencies. Here’s an example…

[package]
name = "safe_community"
version = "1.0"

[Dependencies]
thou_shall_not_kill = "1.0"
repercussions = "0.6"
geo_location = "1.0"

Inside of the repercussions,

fn repercussion() {
let put_user_jail = 1btc_fee + 10years_community_service;
}

fn main () {
if thou_shall_not_kill == true {
    pass;
} else {
    repercussions.init(); 
}}

Inside of the “gem” folder, it will contain many different kinds of folders. For this example, safe_community is a folder. Inside of that folder contains all of the contracts.

Awesome. That really helped out.

1 Like
167

I really need to learn rust so I can follow your code. I may not be able to code that well but I can do logic. :smile:

168

Well the first part is the cargo.toml

cargo build is the command to compile the project. After the compile, you can cargo run which runs the program. Cargo can push the project to the crates.io repository when requested. So cargo needs to be forked, and do some modifications so that it’ll push to bitlaw repository.

The second part is way too basic, but that’s the gesture of it.

You should learn rust, so you can help me. :stuck_out_tongue: It isn’t that hard once you pick up the pace. The logic is actually harder than it seems. I started studying rust when it went stable 1.0 back in may but I didn’t have time to actually mess with rust until last month. Now I got all the time in the world so I’m putting all energy into rust, and this project.

1 Like
169

I just met the founder of https://followmyvote.com/

These guys are legitimate. It is really beautiful piece of technology. They want to release it in July-ish to get ready for the 2016 election cycle. The reason being that they want to expose the voting fraud. One could use their software, and gov software and compare of the two. The non-anarchist will soon realize how corrupted the system is. That is their goal.

I told the founder about the COLA, and bitlaw. He happens to be thinking exact same thing and want to build that kind of platform. They want me to collaborate, and contribute their project. I may able to. This is just amazing!

1 Like
171

I created a theme for BitCola. The application doesn’t work but it’s a progress. This is something I had in mind, and something that it should look like. All ants has it’s own thread. The colony (organization, crowd funding, etc) has it’s own thread and is immutable. When the ants plug into it, the Colony creates a new thread which any ants can plug into, and interact with mutable data. This is very flexible.

I just set up the gitlab repository. Anybody can look it up now!

BitLaw

172

If you recall from Heinlein’s MIAHM, the Judge was also selected and paid, and presided over the trial. Also note that bad behaving jury members (like the jury member that fell asleep during the trial) were penalized. This kind of thing should be worked into BitLunar. Perhaps you should reread MIAHM if you’re going to base parts of BitLaw on it. Also I’d suggest citing Heinlein in the documentation as it was his book. :slight_smile:

1 Like
173

Ah right, I did forget about that part. I’ll have to re-read it again.

Also, if you read the roadmap, it has a theme around it. :stuck_out_tongue:

174

Why no windows support? You know if you don’t add it your code will either be forked or rejected.

175

Good point. Just changed it. FYI, I am against spydoze 100 percent so… Anybody is free to contribute to build for windows.

176

If it’s about spying then I don’t see why you support Mac then given that Mac is proprietary software as well and also reports to the gov’t. Just look at what they do with icloud. Yeah Apple is in a battle with the FBI right now over crypto so they don’t break cryto on an iphone but that doesn’t change that information on icloud servers can be leaked. While I agree windows is an epic fail from a security standpoint Mac is no better. Android isn’t actually much better either considering it’s been forked so much and filled with google bloatware.

People don’t use corporate software for the security. They use it because of the majority adoption rate. And if it isn’t supported you’re going to take an adoption rate hit.

177

Question: Is mankind going full-circle regarding “Law”?: While “Polycentric law is [defined as] a legal structure in which providers of [legal systems] compete or overlap in a given [jurisdiction], as opposed to [ monopolistic] [statutory law] according to which there is a sole provider of [law] for each jurisdiction.” - according to Wikipedia; The [American/English] Common Law is defined and adjudicated by “the People”. This is true regardless of jurisdiction.
As a matter-of-fact, “statute” is NOT law. It’s statute. If anyone finds this hard to believe, simply pull historical law dictionaries from the 1800’s til now. The most memorable instance of the use of “common law” is the Neuremberg Trials where the criminals could not be tried by their “…I just did what I was told…” notion of “law”.