Here is a quote on how the economics of an OVN works
"A contribution of a member can be any product, service, time spent on tasks or projects, physical space offered for activities, prototype, ideas, data, information, financial investment, social connection, manufacturing, distribution channels, sales, assuming liability of a product, providing insurance, certification, evaluation, and any other tangible and non-tangible input that a community member provides to satisfy a desire, want or need. In other words, any effort that is a part of the use value is a contribution. By allowing “contribution” to be defined in such a wide spectrum, an OVN does not differentiate between financial and non-financial contributions and therefore, all contributions are evaluated and rewarded as per the defined governance of the project and network.
There are three types of contributions: project-contribution, network-contribution, and commons-contribution. Project-contributions are those contributions that are applicable to the scope of the project; the governance of these contributions is defined at the project level. For instance, perishable or consumable materials could only be a part of the project. Network-contributions are those contributions that are applicable to the scope of the network; the governance of these contributions is defined at the network level. For instance: a physical tool can be shared across projects. Commons-contributions are those contributions that are applicable across networks; the governance of these contributions is defined at the global governance level. For instance: use of standards, legal framework and knowledge."
What is a builder really?
SAFE Network can copy certain aspects of the Open Value Network design. It can for example track contributions such as those listed in the quote above and then pay the users who contribute. To the Open Value Network anyone who contributes any kind of resource is a contributor.
SAFE Network has builders. Will builders just be computer programmers or will be include anyone who provides value to SAFE Network? How do we determine who gets what?
Open Value Network is designed to use the “value accounting system”. I suggest that SAFE Network use something similar. We need this so that builders of all kinds can contribute and receive Safecoins according to some sort of community consensus or value equation. This is hard so I don’t know how we measure that.
It could be something which is necessary to do on an app by app basis. How do we account for every possible kind of human contribution and pay Safecoins?
An example could be the Sensorica Open Value Network framework. This framework describes how all of the above can be done
Another stab at a time based model
What follows is time based without a guarantee of spending or effort. Its missing shares and other interesting features.
Propose that end users be paid hypothetically on a third of ppp-gwp/year seconds per second of attention basis and with the expectation that a good portion of that will be spent on crypto micro payments for future works possibly on an end user controllable increment with a default increment that would gradually up increment if a given end user’s time based funds accumulated. This model means that tangible economy incumbents may be less able to lock in attention. Incumbents not having easy access to attentional enclosure could achieve a more level playing field for attention.
If the same pay out rates for attention are kept across regions this model will put comparatively more into the developing world. In the developing world currency can go further with economies that aren’t already built out, at least with regard to existent non virtual economies. End users would be strategically seeding those who best respond to their needs using their attention to discriminate. This could amount to a direct empowering investment in the developing world, but include flows that were large enough and pinpoint enough for change in the developed world. .
One problem in considering a time based accrual pay out for end user attention is getting caught up in trying to track log in and mouse movement and all of that. It would seem more efficient to assign an average pay out per month based on average estimated usage (probably a lot less than a US style cable payment.) It would seem easier to focus on establishing legitimate end users with reasonable precision corresponding to every human that uses the system.
Does it make more sense to drop the “founder” group, hypothetical 33/33/33 vice 30/30/30/10.
I think we really want an economy that puts the power of choice, decision and attention solidly in the end users hands or base of society.
Pay for learning (already proposed I know)
If end users are assets to the network then one who develops personally in a way that serves the network build out (learning C++…) could be paid assuming it involved an activity that could in some way be tracked by the network? I think you already proposed that with kids for instance getting shares for playing games. It would be like improving the health or function of a neuron in a network of neurons. As for a value accounting system, a no strings attached arrangements like safecoin micro payments for future works invests in the people, and the people with more specific expertise value the tools they need and spend in turn in a way that enhances value globally.
The Open Value Network is very very close to what I’m picturing with BuildItHub. This is amazing stuff! It’s a new economy, a free economy! I will be studying and contacting Senserica soon. I don’t have time right now but I’ll share my proposal for how to determine fair compensation later today.
This is a proposal for Builder Compensation in a nutshell…
The compensation is based on how much of the project you worked on and help develop. This will be more than just dev work. It could include designing, testing, marketing/evangelizing and developing. Each task, chore, feature (ie stories) will be estimated based on comparing them to the complexity of past stories. “is this new story more/less complex than this completed story that had X points assigned to it?” Only contributors of the past can estimate what these new stories are worth, because in essence they are diluting down the percentage of past work they have done and those that have contributed need to know the new stories are worth adding. Stories are added to the iteration(s) that we decide to work on next. Iterations will probably have a theme and all stories that get completed during that iteration will be focused on that theme. Once those stories are completed each person that worked on the iteration will be able to do their own assignment of “recognition for work done”. Each person will assign a percentage to every other builder in that iteration. Those percentages will be aggregated together and each person will get that % of points assigned to them. This will continue for each iteration. Builders who work hard on a project will end up with a bunch of points while those that work little will receive few points. All the builder points they have accumulated will be divided up by the total builder points that exist for the project they are working on. Each time a micro payment is made to the app, it is divided up among the builder points percentages and passed along to the builder who owns those points.
I want to do a bunch of study on Senserica algorithm because reinventing the wheel is not something I’m interested in. It looks like what they are doing is pretty complex and works well with all the open systems the TED talk mentioned. We should make sure we are picking the best solution and one that can evolve and change over time.
This is a proposal for Capital Investment in a nutshell…
I’m also thinking there is a way to help a project by passing capital into a project for work being done on a system before the project is in production and producing safecoin. This would have to be debated until we figured out the correct way to make it happen. In summary I’m thinking that as each point that the builders estimate and complete, an extra .1 point is added and will be for sale to the world through some type of auction tool. Those points will be purchased and those safecoins go toward the current builders who have builder points. Then when the app is live those “investors” will get profits just like the builders who put in their hard earned sweat equity. I’m also thinking there would be nothing to stop builders from selling their builder points either. In fact there could be a whole market for these builder points.
@dllasoff, and a couple other contributors are working on a vision statement and an info-graphic to explain the whole buildithub ecosystem. We should have it out in the next couple weeks. Buildithub will be the first app built using buildithub (chicken and egg joke here somewhere). It will be a builder hub built by builders that belongs to builders. If you want to be involved and have a say in what it will be then we invite you to join us. I’ll have more on how that will be possible later.
There will be more posts by @dllasoff but here is an intro into what we are doing with BuildItHub and other Open Value Networks. I’m glad to be a part of this future we can all help create. It’s ours for the making…
With regard to SAFEx here is a business model which I think can be duplicated and would work very well as an OVN: https://mcxnow.com
MCXNow gave the users interest for using their exchange. It also introduced the concept of the “FeeShare”. The point was to distribute a portion of ownership of the exchange to the users in some fashion.
SAFEx could do something like this only better if it’s an OVN. This would be necessary because you need an incentive for users to switch from the exchanges which exist on the regular Internet to this one.
I don’t know how to set it up because honestly I don’t know the legality of setting up SAFEx but if it’s all cryptocurrency (no fiat) and done right then it’s a lot less risk. MCXNow is a good example because they got everything right so I suggest whoever is behind SAFEx to study that particular exchange very carefully, study everything from the interface design to the marketing.
Thanks for the heads up; we’ll look into this and yes, we are open to any good ideas to get this ball rolling w/ momentum. I can’t overemphasize that we are using the OVN principle of open VAS-based ownership. You are welcome to work with us and apply your own skill set and reap the rewards.
As far as the construct called “legality” is concerned, I suggest you consider rebooting your own thinking about this. We are not asking permission of any authoritarian regime to do what we are doing. We are liberty-lovers who realize that the SAFE Network once deployed is unstoppable. Don’t take my word for this, ask David Irvine. There is nothing that will stop SAFEx once deployed either.
By the way, there are no legal constructs, precedents of law for such a structure as the OVN. And, why should there be? This is antithetical to authoritarian regimes the world over. We are rebooting civilization itself by deploying a private, secure and free internet which certainly isn’t a welcome development by the authoritarian regimes (weak or strong) that run the world as we know it.
Sorry no link, but Russell was suggesting elsewhere (I probably dont have this quite right) that while Safe coin or its net may have traction as a medium of exchange for info, communication, entertainment- but not necessarily for tangible good or the broader economy. At least the odds would be against it. But Id ask why not. Is it not generalizable and would that not be a desired characterisitic. Presumably people vested in older mediums of exchange might see a loss in conversion and resist?
BitCoin is becoming a viable currency already. Now if you have a coin that has instant transaction validation, ease of use (no worries and necessity for hyper security as with bitcoin), ease of mining by anyone with a decent machine and a built in business model with app devs, I don’t see why it will not be used for tangible goods and services everywhere in the years to come. My 2 cents…
I’m considering helping with SAFEx in a way which you and the community would feel I’d be most useful.
On the legality
That is fine for SAFEx but I’m an individual who can have my liberty taken away arbitrarily. While I like the idea and can appreciate SAFEx in principle it doesn’t mean I can break the laws of my jurisdiction without consequence. Unless somehow my lawyer fee’s would be paid for if something goes wrong then assurances from David Irvine is not going to settle any concerns.
Any time fiat is involved in the exhange it provides an opening for nation states because now you’re messing with their currencies and breaching their turf in a way. Crypto to crypto is not the same as crypto to fiat.
So if there is a fiat to crypto exchange as part of SAFEx then that part of SAFEx has to in my opinion abide by the laws of the community which governs fiat. I think for crypto exchanges that would be a sovereignty issue with the SAFE Network because crypto isn’t considered legal tender. At some point I think crypto is going to be considered a foreign currency but today in the United States it’s considered property.
While I understand what you’re trying to do and while I’m not saying that innovation should be stopped because of the possibility of regulation it should at least be made clear to the people who get involved in this OVN that it’s uncharted territory with unknown risks for participants. I think it’s fair that everyone who enters into the project understands the risks and what can go wrong (not just how the project can change the world).
On integrating Safecoin into the real world
I think if you’ve got the goal to try to integrate Safecoin into the global economy then you have to integrate with whatever rules are already in place which is a pain in the ass but it’s the only logical way to do it. If you want to have Safecoin “ATMs” / vending machines there are rules which have to be followed. The easy route of doing this is to contact people already following these rules and who already are building ATMs and convince them to integrate Safecoin into their infrastructure possibly by paying them in Safecoin as a builder.
I think integrating Safecoin into the tangible economy is wishful thinking. I don’t really think it’s necessary from a strategic approach. As long as you have an exchange like SAFEx then it doesn’t matter anymore as people could just exchange Safecoin for Bitcoin or whatever currency they want.
There will be plenty of tokens. credit vouchers, and personal currencies to choose from as well. Most of these currencies will be turned into Bitcoin, Blackcoin, or something which is already integrated into the legal frameworks of the banking system. Safecoin without this integration will be a black market currency but will not be very effective in the broad context that Bitcoin can reach. If you want Wall Street to trade Safecoin then you have to integrate it into that world. If there isn’t enough effort to do that or if it’s at first too expensive then it’s a better strategy to just trade Safecoin into Bitcoin or something similar.
Even in that case if there is money being exchanged which is completely anonymous there is risk. Suppose nation states determine that all Safecoin is foreign and they don’t let people turn it into fiat? People can sneak and do it but then they risk being charged with money laundering or something worse.
So considerable thought must go into how to move Safecoin in and out of fiat. It’s not going to be as simple as people think because it’s not entirely a technical problem. Good programming skills will not solve every problem.
Governments control all the choke points as well as the ability to tax people. So that means if you try to move Safecoin into the real world you have to go through them. You can try to find a technical way to do it without their permission but if you get caught doing it then their laws allow them to label you a money launderer. They control the infrastructure which makes virtual money tangible and once something from SAFE Network reaches tangible space it’s on their in their sphere of influence.
They don’t have jurisdiction over what goes on in SAFE Network itself but once you make it tangible now you’re subject to their jurisdiction. This includes making physical Safecoins, it includes trying to integrate with banks and ATMs.
I think in the short term it’s not going to matter but I think it’s going to be quite a challenge to get money that is put into the SAFE Network out into fiat. I think in the long term a lot of the success of SAFE Network depends on it’s integration with the fiat infrastructure. At some point a symbiotic relationship between nation states and SAFE Network has to be identified and encouraged because if that does not happen SAFE Network will never grow out of it’s infancy.
In most reasonable governments because they have to prove intent, a tangible exchange directly for safe coin may track like barter. In the long run like in resource base I think fiat goes away.
Thought that was the inspiration behind bit coin. Getting rid of speculation, state and bank manipulation is important. A lot of equitable just efforts get quashed because this fiat money is another way in which the power of money is not checked even as its a big improvement over earlier formats like metal money,
SAFEx is an OVN. You can contribute to the development of the project like anyone else. It belongs to you as much as anyone. SAFEx solves a basic problem: exchanging SafeCoin for fiats, altcoins and even precious metals at some point. Capitalizing it is an interesting concern as well as integrating it with the real world. My view isn’t that SafeCoin as a currency will find its way directly into the real world. Maybe it could and maybe it will eventually, I don’t know. My view is a simple one based on the idea that SafeCoin will become valuable in terms of its exchange rate to other money. Therefore, a way needs to be created whereby people who hold SafeCoin are able to use that wealth in the real world by exchanging it for other currencies, etc. I envision SAFEx as a dealer of sorts who simply facilitates the transaction along the lines of http://www.coinffeine.com/ Assembling the team is where I’m at. I’m looking for people who will walk this out with me. I am especially interested in people who see things differently than I do. I am definitely NOT looking for people who have to agree w/ me. I’m looking to assemble a wise crowd to determine project development priorities. Esoteric discussions are great but let’s move this along into being a more substantial project, shall we? Email me at firstname.lastname@example.org if you’re interested in working with us.
Seems like a default first step. Taxing authorities might not like it long term but we also have a problem with captured government using incentives in ways that prevent level playing fields. After the fact crypto micro for future works if we want and only exactly what we want is a no strings approach that can cut out Wall st and negative state manipulations especially if organizations are rated on openness and having no conflicts.
Thanks @luckybit for posting this question. I feel the need to provide more info.
The OVN project aims at developing a new model to sustain peer production. This model relies on an infrastructure for network resource planning (NRP - as opposed to ERP) and value accounting system (VAS) http://valuenetwork.referata.com/wiki/NRP-VAS
Our first prototype was built on Google Spreadsheet, using Java Scripts to stitch them together into a larger application.
After that, we started to build our own web application.
The problem with this is that it is not a p2p infrastructure. We made it to look as if it was, in order to advance the model and the SENSORICA pilot project. This allowed us to build a culture for peer production, to build our legal structure and our governance. We also prototyped a lot of processes and methodologies related to peer production.
It is now time for us to go fully p2p, i.e. to go from our server-based application to a truly p2p infrastructure for network resource management and value accounting.
Now, for the redistribution of the rewards, the problem is not simple. The value accounting system’s functions are:
record individual contributions, evaluate these contributions and turn them into fluid equity. The last part is done by using what we call a “value equation” [see the link above]. The value equation is NOT trying to objectify value. It is a social contract meant to establish a sense of fairness. It puts relative weights to contributions and has some parameters that can affect the “how” in value, i.e. affect behavior.
SENSORICA and the OVN is, in my opinion, the most advanced pilot project in peer production. We are talking about hardware here, so we are dealing with the material economy!
At this point we are establishing relations of collaboration with groups around OuiShare labs, but we need to grow a larger coalition. We are also talking to p2pValue project. If you are interested please contact the SENSORICA community!
Hey @happybeing - awesome to have @Sensorica_Group here! - @vijayee and I have been talking a lot about Prometheus. I can’t lead a project right now but I can help on one and there is some good complimentary philosophy between us. I’m still all ears and willing to put some effort into something. I like vijayee’s vision so far and keep adding my 2 cents.