All you explained here are true, except the solution itself. No one can change the system by revolution or overnight, neither we shouldn’t wish for it at all. The humankind examined all kind of revolution and reforms in last two centuries and almost all were failed.
Your simple solution is practiced many times and as you predicted truly, it will fail. Because the participators in this movement have to “scarify something” in order to “support some believes”.
The change must be gradual and must have benefit for participants and not punishment (something like early Bitcoin adapters). That’s why I told before: we need a “game theory” in which even evils prefer to chose good option. We must put these mechanisms in practice.
We, the “possess-less” people, must create our alternate “realm” and our alternate “value system”. We do not need to be a part of this system in order to get system resources, because “WE ARE the system”. We can form our system and impact on real world.
Of course in early days no one take us serious, and actually it is a very good chance for us to survive (like Bitcoin in its first 2-3 years), because they do not try to destroy us. Meanwhile we grow and educate our population and fed and bold our “core values”.
The system in which no one can cheat and everyone prefer to act like a good actor – something like Bitcoin hash puzzle solving which everyone prefer to follow rules and find new blocks, instead of wasting energy for cheating old blocks-.
Bitcoin could make these changes in world but it failed because it based on a flawed game theory. The point of power of Bitcoin was/is Proof of Work, and simultaneously the weakest part of Bitcoin – in sense of fairness - is PoW as well, since it couldn't achieve the motto “One CPU, one vote”. Because of its design it ended up in “Who has money, can make more money”. Who has money to buy mining machine and pay for electricity can mine new coins. Who has money can buy many Bitcoins, can manipulate market, create fake waves and endless pump/dump cycles and still riches getting richer and poor getting poorer.
The idea of “decentralization” is a crucial feature of any system wishes to work “fairly”. Bitcoin has a level of decentralization which is not enough to work fairly and just. So we need an alternate “crypto-value” and its proper system (game theory, monetary system, technical architecture, etc). Why I didn’t say we need alternate political regime or alternate ideology or system of thought? Because they are not what we -ordinary people- are facing every day in our day to day life. Instead Bitcoin could be what we face every day. It is about “money” and “personal wealth” -which gives us power to fulfill our needs, whether physical or mental-.
The “money” is our credit in the current society, whereas the real credit must be something else. The solution is to make, the money works in another context. That is, the way of earning money and its indication must be re-defined.
People (including you and me) always seeking for money, because we like the independence and power of having it. This strive for money had no beginning and will have no end and we will continue it forever.
So, what about defining a new kind of money (or better named “credit”), that you need to do some “good act” in order to have eligibility to earn that money?
Some can discuss and argue about “who” and “how” recognize “good act” vs “bad act” and this is another story which has proper answer as well. In short, I can address it, by referring to “justness” and “fairness” in a “real” decentralized system. But for now just imagine we have a perfect (or almost perfect) system that can evaluate your work (what ever work you do daily) and returns a number as usefulness index. The usefulness index represents the fact that how much useful was your job for society, or even better how much useful was your job for whole glob – since we have just one earth and we have to consider the fact that “someones benefit can be someone else lost”-. The system results your 8 hour day job in this new “value system” worth X amount of money, so you earn X coins today. In this system you prefer to follow rule as possible as in order to get higher rate. We have assumed system works enough good and evaluates your job fairly. You can not cheat system in order to earn more money, so you will decide to follow rules and act like a good actor. Not only you but all other investigate the trade-off and decide to act like a good actor.
It is what we were looking for, isn’t? In this system, we will have the rich guys who helped the world more than others. s/he is proud of her/his achievement, s/he is rich and explicitly helped to improve the life of others. It is a win, win, win game. The world is winner. The money supporter community is winner, and the individual person who earned the coins is winner.
One critical question is “Can we have this -almost perfect- evaluating system?”. Since I am a practical philosopher and a technical thinker, my answer is yes. Definitely we have all the technology and tools we need for establishing this realm.
Your simple solution is practiced many times and as you predicted truly, it will fail. Because the participators in this movement have to “scarify something” in order to “support some believes”.
The change must be gradual and must have benefit for participants and not punishment (something like early Bitcoin adapters). That’s why I told before: we need a “game theory” in which even evils prefer to chose good option. We must put these mechanisms in practice.
We, the “possess-less” people, must create our alternate “realm” and our alternate “value system”. We do not need to be a part of this system in order to get system resources, because “WE ARE the system”. We can form our system and impact on real world.
Of course in early days no one take us serious, and actually it is a very good chance for us to survive (like Bitcoin in its first 2-3 years), because they do not try to destroy us. Meanwhile we grow and educate our population and fed and bold our “core values”.
The system in which no one can cheat and everyone prefer to act like a good actor – something like Bitcoin hash puzzle solving which everyone prefer to follow rules and find new blocks, instead of wasting energy for cheating old blocks-.
Bitcoin could make these changes in world but it failed because it based on a flawed game theory. The point of power of Bitcoin was/is Proof of Work, and simultaneously the weakest part of Bitcoin – in sense of fairness - is PoW as well, since it couldn't achieve the motto “One CPU, one vote”. Because of its design it ended up in “Who has money, can make more money”. Who has money to buy mining machine and pay for electricity can mine new coins. Who has money can buy many Bitcoins, can manipulate market, create fake waves and endless pump/dump cycles and still riches getting richer and poor getting poorer.
The idea of “decentralization” is a crucial feature of any system wishes to work “fairly”. Bitcoin has a level of decentralization which is not enough to work fairly and just. So we need an alternate “crypto-value” and its proper system (game theory, monetary system, technical architecture, etc). Why I didn’t say we need alternate political regime or alternate ideology or system of thought? Because they are not what we -ordinary people- are facing every day in our day to day life. Instead Bitcoin could be what we face every day. It is about “money” and “personal wealth” -which gives us power to fulfill our needs, whether physical or mental-.
The “money” is our credit in the current society, whereas the real credit must be something else. The solution is to make, the money works in another context. That is, the way of earning money and its indication must be re-defined.
People (including you and me) always seeking for money, because we like the independence and power of having it. This strive for money had no beginning and will have no end and we will continue it forever.
So, what about defining a new kind of money (or better named “credit”), that you need to do some “good act” in order to have eligibility to earn that money?
Some can discuss and argue about “who” and “how” recognize “good act” vs “bad act” and this is another story which has proper answer as well. In short, I can address it, by referring to “justness” and “fairness” in a “real” decentralized system. But for now just imagine we have a perfect (or almost perfect) system that can evaluate your work (what ever work you do daily) and returns a number as usefulness index. The usefulness index represents the fact that how much useful was your job for society, or even better how much useful was your job for whole glob – since we have just one earth and we have to consider the fact that “someones benefit can be someone else lost”-. The system results your 8 hour day job in this new “value system” worth X amount of money, so you earn X coins today. In this system you prefer to follow rule as possible as in order to get higher rate. We have assumed system works enough good and evaluates your job fairly. You can not cheat system in order to earn more money, so you will decide to follow rules and act like a good actor. Not only you but all other investigate the trade-off and decide to act like a good actor.
It is what we were looking for, isn’t? In this system, we will have the rich guys who helped the world more than others. s/he is proud of her/his achievement, s/he is rich and explicitly helped to improve the life of others. It is a win, win, win game. The world is winner. The money supporter community is winner, and the individual person who earned the coins is winner.
One critical question is “Can we have this -almost perfect- evaluating system?”. Since I am a practical philosopher and a technical thinker, my answer is yes. Definitely we have all the technology and tools we need for establishing this realm.
Well the gradual change is not possible I believe. It's like with cancer - you either put all forces to kill it quickly, or you wait and hope for gradual recovery while the cancer kills you slowly (by sucking up you into the system in our case). But under both conditions - with rapid change, people will fail as I described, and moreover, they will maintain old mentality, thus will just reconstruct the old system with new (hopefully at least this will change) elements. If the change is slow - it will suck people into the system, or the ones who can really resist will die over time (because single human's life is not enough to make such changes), or they will be noticed by the system-owners and be arrested or something else.
But yes, you have a great idea that "we need a “game theory” in which even evils prefer to chose good option. We must put these mechanisms in practice.". I would say that is not achievable, but I do believe that anything is achievable in this world. Thus, if you or someone could make that, I guess that person would be forever in the memory of humanity and be the greatest among the greatest among the ones who changed the world (as opposed to bshit spoken in public by billionaires).
Bitcoin could make these changes in world but it failed because it based on a flawed game theory. The point of power of Bitcoin was/is Proof of Work, and simultaneously the weakest part of Bitcoin – in sense of fairness - is PoW as well, since it couldn't achieve the motto “One CPU, one vote”. Because of its design it ended up in “Who has money, can make more money”. Who has money to buy mining machine and pay for electricity can mine new coins. Who has money can buy many Bitcoins, can manipulate market, create fake waves and endless pump/dump cycles and still riches getting richer and poor getting poorer.
Your point about Bitcoin is really great! That's the system that was started for the good purpose and ended up being another speculative asset played around by the "wanna be rich" and occasionally ripped off by the large BTC and/or fiat owners. Isn't that a reason to call it a tool for "fake rich" also, who use it with the hope to uplift their own social status, since we are all clear that its not used as it was designed to be used (at least among the majority)?
And I think the idea of decentralization is good, but, as long as there's a living system - be it human organized system, monetary system or something else - there's going to be decreasing entropy, thus increasing centralization over time. Only as system energy declines (i.e. system dies), entropy and decentralization will increase. This is partially the reason why I wouldn't agree with you that purely new monetary tool would solve the problem. With old brains (thoughts), but new tools, people will end up gaming any system and eventually even one single individual will either find benefit to cheat the system, or entirely out of craziness (as you said there are possible tools to motivate even bad actors to act good by benefiting them) will try to revenge against the new decentralized system and fill find supporters with enough brainwashing power, thus just again - increasing centralization.
And the new system with "credit" for good acts, instead of money, I believe was implemented once or twice in several places in the world (once was in some Russian village, and once elsewhere - I forgot where, but can find and share the link if you want). Though it was not entirely same with what you refer to, that was a test-society without money as we know it. However, based on conspiracy theories (I wasn't there so cannot confirm it's true or not
), but the experiment was forcibly stopped by local authorities, because it was too good and successful that it was threatening state sovereignty and pose a thread to the governors. So if that's the truth behind, I guess that tells a lot that such thing will find it very very hard to be implemented in real life, until we, as humans will abandon our common thinking, beliefs, history, norms, and systems, and by the time we do so - we probably stop to be humans as we used to be / created to be...