Hi Mildred, Thank you for your message. It reminds me of Ripplepay ( https://ripplepay.com/). Development on the project has stopped in favour of Ripple, which has some of the same functionality but focuses more on involving financial institutions. I don't know if there are any active projects that match your description.
James On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 at 20:14, Mildred Ki'Lya <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I had some ideas about a payment system that could help us survive the > next big financial crisis, and I wanted to share it here as I believe it > might be of interest to some. I come from the postulate that we don't > necessarily want a currency to exchange goods in a society. All we need is > a debt management system, and a currency is just one way of implementing > it. I also come from the idea that monetary creation is a critical point > for all currencies. It drives the economy. Too much money generated, and > it's over-inflation. Not enough money and you block the exchanges and the > economy. We should always be allowed to perform an exchange if both parties > agrees, without consideration for lack of money. > > Inspiration comes from the book "Debt: The First 5000 Years", see > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt:_The_First_5000_Years > > The question is how to create a completely decentralized system around > these principles, and I had basic ideas around that. To take the gnunet > terminology, the network would be composed of different egos, and each ego > would have debts to creditors and debtors ("créances" and "dettes" in > French). There is not really any notion of wallet balance there. > > When a transaction is made, a debt is recorded in the system and both the > creditor and debtor would record that debt. This makes a potentially cyclic > oriented graph. Think of the debt as an arrow coming from the creditor to > the debtor. > > When a debt is recorded, the system would look for cycles in that graph, > and when the debt to be recorded would complete a cycle, all debts in this > cycle would be reduced by the minimum debt in that cycle. Let's take for > example the following graph: > > A --[10]--> B --[20]--> C > > C is owing 20 units to B, and B is owing 10 units to A > > In that graph, if a transaction is made between C and A such as it would > complete the graph, with 15 units as amount, it would lead to: > > ,--> A --[10]--> B --[20]--> C --. > | | > `--------------[15]--------------' > > That graph could be simplified to: > > ,--> A B --[10]--> C --. > | | > `---------------[5]--------------' > > The debt from A to B has been purged because A. It's logical. What > happened is that A provided some goods to B in exchange of a debt, B > provided some goods to C, and C provided back goods to A. A received > something in return and B isn't owing anything to B. > > What's nice is that before A and C made their transaction, by querying the > graph, C knows who to ask to purge his own debt (A or B) and A knows who is > owing to him (B and C). If the graph contains with each ego their skills > and the goods they can provide, it's a decentralized market where we share > with our own network. Over time, we will know those people and it won't be > strangers. > > The system could record metrics such as the amount of purged debts and > non-purged debts. If someone has a great amount of purged debts, it means > they are contributing back to the community and we can safely exchange with > them. In contrast, someone with unpurged debts is someone that is not well > inserted in the economy and that is unbalancing it. In either case, that's > not a good thing, and people should be mindful of that and try to avoid > such unbalanced exchanges. > > Then comes anonymity. I believe complete anonymity is problematic on > decentralized systems. Only centralized systems when monetary creation is > controlled by a single entity can afford complete anonymity, because > everyone is trusting that single entity. On decentralized systems, you need > to know who you are exchanging with, and you need to know your community. > > That being said, you don't need to know anything that happens on the > network, you only need to know your local network. We can imagine a system > hierarchy where you have full disclosure about who is in your local > community, their identity, but when you exchange with people far away, you > only need to know what is your community relationship with other > communities. Then on a more global scale, you only need to know that the > relationship between your country and the other countries in the world is > balanced, and don't care about who exactly does the transactions. > > That were my ideas. Hope it can be of inspiration. > > Mildred > > _______________________________________________ > Help-gnunet mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnunet >
_______________________________________________ Help-gnunet mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnunet
