The key to society of sovereign individuals

[grarpamp]

On 1/23/22, alessandrot at tutanota.com <alessandrot at tutanota.com> wrote:
> Decentralised Identity Trilemma (http://maciek.blog/dit/)
> Here's my proposition:
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/ir3gbumhgzc8khy/Themis%20-%20algorithmic%20equality.pdf?dl=1

There have been a few other cryptos posted that try
defining new frameworks for social and related models
beyond just agnostic cryptofinance.
There was also a proof of bandwidth/network coin posted.
The world needs more new ideas than its legacy offers,
thus you are encouraged in these and future endeavours.
Perhaps Human PoWs could be used with Prediction Markets
as oracles to determine completion of road building contracts.
Feel free to post updates and projects.






                                             Themis ­ algorithmic equality
                                          Proof-of-Used-Internet-Bandwidth
                                                Proof-of-Human-Work
                                                   Alessandro Toumi
                                               alessandrot at tutanota.com
                                                    January 16, 2022
     1. Introduction
    A press release from 2017 [1] states that the eight richest
individuals own the same wealth as half the world
(approx. 3.6 billion people at the time). The modern financial system
is not ­ as many would like to believe ­
a natural source of growth and adaptation, which operates similarly to
the evolution of species (which is based
on competitiveness). It is rather a "winner takes all" game. Nature
contains an element of randomness, inherent
to life itself, which allows for a specific state of equilibrium. Pure
capitalism does not involve so much
randomness ­ advantage is gained exponentially in relation to the
capital owned; therefore, the competition is
more reminiscent of a giant Monopoly game, which must finally end in
one person or a group taking possession
of everything.
    Every social structure was born out of a certain longing for some
equality that cannot be found in nature.
In order to achieve this, we always need to subject ourselves to a
force that is above us. We need to be equal
vis-à-vis someone. We cannot be equal by ourselves, as no system that
would allow this actually exists.
However, when our right to equality becomes exercised by a person
above, we become elements of a bigger
game played by the powers we submit ourselves to; this is based simply
on the assumption of a rational
behaviour in the context of game theory [2]. These powers are
human-based and they are instinctively seeking
wealth and control over others. Just as human beings treat their
environment and other species as resources to
extract and animals to farm and kill, they apply the same principles
to one another, treating others as something
to take advantage of and exploit. No ideology, political or other, can
change this fact ­ it can only obscure it.
Now, with the advent of the Internet, AI, Big Data, etc., this game
has certainly become more intricate, as
decisions can be made and enforced globally, almost instantaneously
and in an automated manner [3].
    What kind of a system should we develop to make it an equalising
power in itself; one that would be
resistant to manipulation by any individual participant? All
real-world resources (such as gold, coal, oil or even
hashing power ­ in case of Bitcoin) are or will inevitably be
monopolised. Ideologies are by nature hierarchical
and human-based. Is there anything that is available to all uniformly
(or almost uniformly) and cannot be
manipulated?
    What we propose here is a genuinely decentralised,
blockchain-based financial system that rewards its
participants by minting new cryptocurrency units through constant
increase in monetary supply and distributes
the units to competitors proportionally to the amount of time and
energy they have spent on solving
pseudorandom, AI-hard problems, which we call here
Proof-of-Human-Work. It is assumed that this process
can be optimised only marginally so that the probability of being
rewarded is approximately proportional to
the time and energy spent on solving the said problems. If implemented
in a proper manner (with a constant,
fixed increase in monetary supply, distributed mainly to human problem
solvers), it could become an equalising,
fair solution that would give everyone an equal chance to "mine", i.e.
to acquire coins. All that would be
required would be a computer and an Internet connection.
    This document describes a decentralised financial system,
operating as a peer-to-peer network and using
blockchain technology [4]. There are two components to the system: the
main consensus mechanism, called
Proof-of-Used-Internet-Bandwidth, described in sections 2-4 below, and
the mechanism for distributing coins
to human problem solvers, i.e. Proof-of-Human-Work, described in
section 5. Together, these two parts form
an idea for a financial system that will allow for a predictable,
uniform distribution of wealth globally through
a global Universal Basic Income.
    The existing solutions for a distributed consensus are not
promising. Proof-of-Work [5] proved to be
insufficiently decentralised. At first, this approach seemed ­ thanks
to its "one CPU ­ one vote" rule ­ to allow
for decentralisation. But with the manufacture of mining ASICs [6],
this feature was lost [7]. Some solutions
[8][9] aimed at increasing decentralisation in blockchains in which
block production requires the use of real-
world resources have been invented, but no substantial progress has
been made. Proof-of-Stake [10], on the
other hand, does not entail the need to use any real-world resources
in block production; however, it introduces
some new problems, amongst which are the weak subjectivity problem
[11] and the "rich getting richer"
problem [12].
   Sections 2 and 3 introduce some basic principles of
Proof-of-Used-Internet-Bandwidth. The complete
scheme of operation for the proposed consensus mechanism is described
in section 4. Pursuing this line, section
5 deals with Proof-of-Human-Work as a coin distribution mechanism,
which is to be implemented on top of
the previously described consensus mechanism, i.e.
Proof-of-Used-Internet-Bandwidth. The necessity of using
Proof-of-Used-Internet-Bandwidth as the basic consensus mechanism in
any implementation of Proof-of-
Human-Work is discussed in section 6. In section 7, our project is
summarised and compared briefly to other
comparable ideas.

...

   7. Conclusion
   Attempting to design a Proof-of-Human-Work blockchain was pioneered
by HumanCoin [20].
Unfortunately, HumanCoin utilises indistinguishability obfuscation
[21], a cryptographic primitive that is far
from being ready to be deployed and it is unknown if it ever will be.
A second attempt, called uMine [22],
proposed       CAPTCHAs           (Completely      Automated
Public       Turing      test    to       tell
Computers and Humans Apart), generated by consortiums of CAPTCHA
generators using secure multi-party
computation [23] instead of utilising indistinguishability
obfuscation, to create human-solvable puzzles.
However, some of the assumptions on which uMine's feasibility is based
are dubious, most importantly the
assumption that text-based, picture-based or sound-based CAPTCHAs can
be solved efficiently only by
humans; this isn't true [24].
   In the recent years, some new and interesting approaches to the
problem of verifying humanness in a
decentralised manner were proposed [25]. Out of those, only reverse
Turing tests and pseudonym parties can
be implemented in a decentralised manner. The problem with those
approaches is, however, that they cannot
scale as they are not permissionless and require verification of new
users by the users who are already verified,
which limits the pace at which a system can grow. To give an example,
it took about two years for the IDENA
network [26] to reach just 10,000 users. Furthermore, if the
verification of humanness involves a symmetrical
amount of effort on the side of the provers and the verifiers (i.e.
each verifier must sacrifice an amount of time
and effort similar to the amount invested by a prover proving their
humanness, e.g. a verifier must interact with
a prover or prepare some AI-hard challenge and verify the solution),
it further hampers the adoption of a system.
   We propose Themis, the first implementable Proof-of-Human-Work
blockchain protocol that is a secure,
permissionless and scalable solution for a new financial system
capable of establishing a global, borderless
Universal Basic Income.