Quote from: HunterMinerCrafter on June 08, 2017, 11:13:48 PM

Quote from: rocanonz on June 08, 2017, 10:22:10 PM

Thank you Master HMC for opening our Nomic eyes but we, your slaves, have decided to disobey your supreme command and build the real Tau who speaks freedom, not for your self-satisfying spiritual egoism, but for a better world.
So be it.

(Ok, I'll bite...)

I'm very curious: what "command" do you believe I've given... and to whom, exactly?

Wow... this project and even the thread are just getting to the heart of it all. The heart of that which we as a spices have to resolve.We are social creature living in large communities like ants and bees yet we each maintain a sense of complete and separate entity, an autonomous being. The main contradiction here is that if each and one of us is motivated to do only the best to humanity as a whole, but each of us is a different entity we would all end up fighting each other. That is since in terms of information theory the information that Alice have will always be greater than that of bob regarding her experiences and vice versa. thus the more individuals we interact with the greater that gap of information between each individual in the group to the rest of them becomes. "culture" is one way to overcome that, separation of powers is the other way. The personal level that we see this mathematical and programming project turns in to, only emphasis the above even further when HMC holding the later one and Ohad the first one. however in fact each approach in order to work need the other to balance it out.

So let me review now how Satoshi resolved that (if he did at all). Satoshi trick was to apply the separation of power for the agreement using incentive architecture to compensate for the luck of a "culture" as a motivation then use the state of consensus as the culture on which to built the next block. that culture is enforced by all nodes who wish to take part in the "game" The consensus thus represent the social unity (culture) while the transaction verification is done by a separation of power.

Separation of power is an agreement all sides comply with, and so is culture. assuming that each individual is free to join or leave at any given moment by exercising free will, however.....no individual should have power over the other once enter the scheme. and that is where Satoshi failed. Lately that issue is named governing, and it threatens the entire bitcoin community of users. Or is it not?

A fork means that all information and all states are at agreement up to the point of forking thus at the moment of fork each individual can make a choice without losing anything. However this is not true since while consenting to the consensus some individuals (or groups with in) lost power gained by others..

In short the governing issue is not governing but rather information. in order to keep the separation of power, information have to stay at the hand of the individual entity. each entity have to have its own information, have to be one unique none cloned identity which only that individual can reveal. But.... that a verifier can verified .

The problem that both Ohad and HMC need to resolve together is how to built that verifier. If they each fork we will not get it. if they cant work together it means that they cant built it together and if they cant built it together even if working separately it can not be built.

So lets look at the verifier problem now. We need to trust the verifier and that verifier thus can not be a third party that can make gains in the game, unless it is the game itself. The trick is the game. I am me only in that game. on each game I will be a new me. each fork will restart all gamers as new entities thus they all will lose. its a game that if you enter you gain and if you leave you lose but whatever you gain or lose dont change the sum for the others only for the total of the game.

let me tokenize that, first as value of money, then we will be able to move on to see how we transform the token to information other then money.
lets assume every player get a token once enter the game and all other players get a fraction of a cloned token for each new player (equal to the new player added value). thus for each new player the system gains two tokens one for the new player and one to share between old players. Now these tokens have a unique quality. they can never be spend as a whole. meaning that the program can identify each fragment as part of that one. now lets assume that the token given to the new player is not divisible. thus the only thing that a new player can do is sent his token and by that "delete his account" and at the moment his account is deleted so are all the fragments of the cloned token. this way each individual carry the real power of his original membership even if never accumulated any more tokens.

my apology for making this too short of an explanation and jump now into exchanging the value token with information. My token is my identity in terms of information. all players shares the information but if use it together will loose it. thus are insenevise to avoid "knowing" all about who I am. I am still free to do as a wish but as a new player in a new game. however the players in this game have the incentive to keep me in the game since they lose their ability to participate without having my and each other fragments of tokens. and They can not eliminate me without coordination between them all to losing something themselves.

That tokenized rule of information is all that matters. All other rules can be reach as a consensus of majority while "identity" is the only rule that have to be 100% agreed on either by the individual or by the entire group.