May 16, 2013 at 05:05Kriya Money. Part 2. Idea
Kriya Money. Part 1. Introduction
KriyaMoney. Part 2. The idea of
KriyaMoney. Part 3. Theory of
KriyaMoney. Part 4. Problems and their solutions
KriyaMoney. Part 5. Software implementation In the first part I tried to describe the shortcomings of the existing financial system. And also considered alternative options. In this part I will try to describe in the most intelligible way what real value is. And then, I hope, it will become clear why existing money cannot be value (that is, it cannot be a reliable means of accumulation because of its lack of security). And so, let's continue.
From everything written in the previous part, the conclusion follows that you need to offer a new reliable payment system with clearly defined emission rules. But the question is how to distribute new money in the system? Bitcoin is distributed randomly, one might say - this does not suit me. Something better is needed than a dumb selection of a beautiful hash.
At first I thought about distributing new money among the participants in the system evenly, but everyone can create millions of wallets. So this is not an option. Then I thought for a long time that it was possible to somehow tie the data transfer and distribute the new money as a reward for ensuring data transfer in the system (that is, actually paying for ensuring the Internet is working). To do this, I mentally sorted through the options with encrypted packets (I2P) and the accrual of some points for the transmission of a certain number of packets with confirmation of delivery from the recipient. But all the options that he was considering were all worthless. The system can be made, but by agreement of a dozen nodes they will simply generate empty traffic with a mark-up.
Now I have an idea how to distribute the new money (issue emissions) the most fairly and correctly. But before you describe the essence of the system, you need to decide what is generally worth.
I propose to pay attention to labor * (or rather to the result of labor), as a truly real value. But how to evaluate labor? Evaluating the number of energy joules spent or the number of time spent - no. To implement this idea, you need to use a crowdfunding system. That is, to distribute new money for the implementation of real projects that people need.
* Wikipedia: Labor is an expedient, conscious human activity aimed at meeting the needs of the individual and society.
In the work of Marx there is the concept of surplus value (or rather surplus value , surplus labor) The meaning of Marx’s surplus value is that the final value of the manufactured goods consists of the cost of material resources spent on the production of this product and some surplus value. The surplus value here is the labor of the worker.
Moreover, the labor of the worker, on the one hand, is kind of like the cost of 1 hour of labor in the market for workers of this specialization. The cost of labor is determined, like the value of any other product, by the costs of its production.
But on the other hand, labor is not just time spent, but PUBLICALLY USEFUL efforts.
Among these terms and quotes, one can easily lose the sense of surplus value. Namely: price (costs) and value are not the same thing. I propose such a definition of the value of the result of labor (goods or services):
Value = Costs + Surplus Value
where
Surplus Value is the SOCIALLY USEFUL efforts of the employee.
At the same time, I’m sorry to note that not every work is useful and not every work is public (that is, needed by someone else). An example is the opposite of labor - a hobby , as an activity that (mainly) is not a socially useful effort. And so a hobby does not create surplus value.
Now the question arises of how to quantify socially useful work (human labor). But very simple. It is necessary to enable other people to evaluate the activity (or rather the result of labor), and so it is possible to determine who worked better and who is worse, and by how much. In this case, only completed projects with a known cost can be more or less adequately evaluated.
I note that the real value (Costs + Surplus Value) and the value inspired by advertising and other methods are, as they say, two big differences. Nevertheless, the market as a whole more or less independently balances the value of the goods / services and the value of these goods / services imposed by marketers. Naturally, marketers will continue to wind up value in every possible way (the next new super-duper smartphone, etc.), but after some time the value of value and value are balanced anyway.
Next, I will try to describe how to calculate surplus values and how to tightly tie the issue of new money for surplus value (surplus value). I want to note right away that new money during the issue will be provided with surplus value. That is, in fact, they will be provided with the socially useful work that was accomplished during the implementation of the project. There will be no unsecured money!
1. The right to issue belongs to all users.
2. Issued new money is allocated only for socially useful work performed.
3. To obtain emissions, it is necessary to successfully implement a socially useful project.
4. The usefulness of a project is determined by open vote.
5. Voting is carried out after completion of work on the project for a fixed period of time.
6. All users of the community can vote.
0. The main objects in the proposed system are “User” (wallet, account) and “Project”.
1. Regular payments and an emission record should be implemented approximately as in Bitcoin. That is, once a cycle generate a block in which to record all transactions, as well as record the transaction (transaction) of the issue of new money. One cycle, for example, can be equal to 256 seconds, which is about 4 minutes.
2. A project in the system is some record that a specific user has created a proposal for the implementation of a particular useful activity with the stated amount, indicated a deadline for fundraising and other parameters. The minimum and maximum terms for fundraising can be limited by the algorithm. For example, from 10,000 to 20,000 cycles, which is equivalent to an interval of 1-2 months.
3. As you know, the most rational way people distribute their money to their own need. This is a rather important psychological feature of all people. So, if we were to make it possible in the system to “vote” for NOT our own projects, but not with money, but simply giving preference to a particular project, then we could calculate the number of “votes” for a particular project and distribute new ones money to the authors of these projects.
4. To reduce the influence of the “vote” markups, it is necessary to introduce the concept of “voice weight” and determine it depending on some indicator of the “credibility” of the voting user. In fact, I suggest some kind of karma, as it is implemented on Habré. In this case, there will be separate “karma” of the project and “karma” of the user. Having great authority and having voted for a certain project, this project will add more money than for a project for which a user with little authority voted.
5. The issue of a certain amount of new money must be distributed among all projects in proportion to the votes received. Issue will lead to an increase in the money supply. Although the new money will be provided with surplus value, there will still be some inflation (an increase in the money supply). At the same time, one still needs to think about the percentage of inflation not to be very small, but not to be very large. According to my personal observations, inflation of 2..15% is quite adequate. Moreover, the more inflation there is, the more incentive is not to save money, but to spend it. But inflation should not be very large so that the money does not “squeeze”. In this way, conditions will be ensured that it is not very profitable to keep a lot of money in the "capsule". We need a system for payments and as a platform for the development of projects, and not just as a deposit bank for savings.
Once again, I note that an increase in the money supply without an increase in real goods (goods and services) leads to inflation. But in our case, the benefits are actually completed projects approved by the community. That is, the community itself, plus the project, announces the work done as a real value (surplus value).
Continuation: KriyaMoney. Part 3. Theory
KriyaMoney. Part 2. The idea of
KriyaMoney. Part 3. Theory of
KriyaMoney. Part 4. Problems and their solutions
KriyaMoney. Part 5. Software implementation In the first part I tried to describe the shortcomings of the existing financial system. And also considered alternative options. In this part I will try to describe in the most intelligible way what real value is. And then, I hope, it will become clear why existing money cannot be value (that is, it cannot be a reliable means of accumulation because of its lack of security). And so, let's continue.
What to do?
From everything written in the previous part, the conclusion follows that you need to offer a new reliable payment system with clearly defined emission rules. But the question is how to distribute new money in the system? Bitcoin is distributed randomly, one might say - this does not suit me. Something better is needed than a dumb selection of a beautiful hash.
At first I thought about distributing new money among the participants in the system evenly, but everyone can create millions of wallets. So this is not an option. Then I thought for a long time that it was possible to somehow tie the data transfer and distribute the new money as a reward for ensuring data transfer in the system (that is, actually paying for ensuring the Internet is working). To do this, I mentally sorted through the options with encrypted packets (I2P) and the accrual of some points for the transmission of a certain number of packets with confirmation of delivery from the recipient. But all the options that he was considering were all worthless. The system can be made, but by agreement of a dozen nodes they will simply generate empty traffic with a mark-up.
Now I have an idea how to distribute the new money (issue emissions) the most fairly and correctly. But before you describe the essence of the system, you need to decide what is generally worth.
What is value?
I propose to pay attention to labor * (or rather to the result of labor), as a truly real value. But how to evaluate labor? Evaluating the number of energy joules spent or the number of time spent - no. To implement this idea, you need to use a crowdfunding system. That is, to distribute new money for the implementation of real projects that people need.
* Wikipedia: Labor is an expedient, conscious human activity aimed at meeting the needs of the individual and society.
In the work of Marx there is the concept of surplus value (or rather surplus value , surplus labor) The meaning of Marx’s surplus value is that the final value of the manufactured goods consists of the cost of material resources spent on the production of this product and some surplus value. The surplus value here is the labor of the worker.
Moreover, the labor of the worker, on the one hand, is kind of like the cost of 1 hour of labor in the market for workers of this specialization. The cost of labor is determined, like the value of any other product, by the costs of its production.
"... I ... must amaze you," he says, "with a statement that seems paradoxical to you ... A thing like COST OF LABOR in the usual sense of the word does not really exist ... What the worker sells is not directly his LABOR, but is his WORKING POWER, which he transfers to the temporary disposal of the capitalist. "
Criticism of the "Capital" of Marx
But on the other hand, labor is not just time spent, but PUBLICALLY USEFUL efforts.
Surplus value is created, which comes at the disposal of the capitalist. Where does this surplus value come from? Does capital itself generate it, just like a chicken laying eggs or apples growing on an apple tree?
Surplus value
Among these terms and quotes, one can easily lose the sense of surplus value. Namely: price (costs) and value are not the same thing. I propose such a definition of the value of the result of labor (goods or services):
Value = Costs + Surplus Value
where
Surplus Value is the SOCIALLY USEFUL efforts of the employee.
At the same time, I’m sorry to note that not every work is useful and not every work is public (that is, needed by someone else). An example is the opposite of labor - a hobby , as an activity that (mainly) is not a socially useful effort. And so a hobby does not create surplus value.
Now the question arises of how to quantify socially useful work (human labor). But very simple. It is necessary to enable other people to evaluate the activity (or rather the result of labor), and so it is possible to determine who worked better and who is worse, and by how much. In this case, only completed projects with a known cost can be more or less adequately evaluated.
I note that the real value (Costs + Surplus Value) and the value inspired by advertising and other methods are, as they say, two big differences. Nevertheless, the market as a whole more or less independently balances the value of the goods / services and the value of these goods / services imposed by marketers. Naturally, marketers will continue to wind up value in every possible way (the next new super-duper smartphone, etc.), but after some time the value of value and value are balanced anyway.
Next, I will try to describe how to calculate surplus values and how to tightly tie the issue of new money for surplus value (surplus value). I want to note right away that new money during the issue will be provided with surplus value. That is, in fact, they will be provided with the socially useful work that was accomplished during the implementation of the project. There will be no unsecured money!
Manifesto
1. The right to issue belongs to all users.
2. Issued new money is allocated only for socially useful work performed.
3. To obtain emissions, it is necessary to successfully implement a socially useful project.
4. The usefulness of a project is determined by open vote.
5. Voting is carried out after completion of work on the project for a fixed period of time.
6. All users of the community can vote.
Basic principles
0. The main objects in the proposed system are “User” (wallet, account) and “Project”.
1. Regular payments and an emission record should be implemented approximately as in Bitcoin. That is, once a cycle generate a block in which to record all transactions, as well as record the transaction (transaction) of the issue of new money. One cycle, for example, can be equal to 256 seconds, which is about 4 minutes.
2. A project in the system is some record that a specific user has created a proposal for the implementation of a particular useful activity with the stated amount, indicated a deadline for fundraising and other parameters. The minimum and maximum terms for fundraising can be limited by the algorithm. For example, from 10,000 to 20,000 cycles, which is equivalent to an interval of 1-2 months.
3. As you know, the most rational way people distribute their money to their own need. This is a rather important psychological feature of all people. So, if we were to make it possible in the system to “vote” for NOT our own projects, but not with money, but simply giving preference to a particular project, then we could calculate the number of “votes” for a particular project and distribute new ones money to the authors of these projects.
4. To reduce the influence of the “vote” markups, it is necessary to introduce the concept of “voice weight” and determine it depending on some indicator of the “credibility” of the voting user. In fact, I suggest some kind of karma, as it is implemented on Habré. In this case, there will be separate “karma” of the project and “karma” of the user. Having great authority and having voted for a certain project, this project will add more money than for a project for which a user with little authority voted.
5. The issue of a certain amount of new money must be distributed among all projects in proportion to the votes received. Issue will lead to an increase in the money supply. Although the new money will be provided with surplus value, there will still be some inflation (an increase in the money supply). At the same time, one still needs to think about the percentage of inflation not to be very small, but not to be very large. According to my personal observations, inflation of 2..15% is quite adequate. Moreover, the more inflation there is, the more incentive is not to save money, but to spend it. But inflation should not be very large so that the money does not “squeeze”. In this way, conditions will be ensured that it is not very profitable to keep a lot of money in the "capsule". We need a system for payments and as a platform for the development of projects, and not just as a deposit bank for savings.
Once again, I note that an increase in the money supply without an increase in real goods (goods and services) leads to inflation. But in our case, the benefits are actually completed projects approved by the community. That is, the community itself, plus the project, announces the work done as a real value (surplus value).
Continuation: KriyaMoney. Part 3. Theory