This was a fantastic first release and had me reflecting on the disparate use cases for blockchain technology, particularly a system for micropayments.
The question of resolving spam in digital communications has been at the forefront of driving much of the technology in the space since the early days of the cypherpunk movement. Adam Back of Blockstream is credited with having developed the proof-of-work protocol for just this reason, to solve the issue of spam emails on the cypherpunks mailing list. Adam Back was then cited by Satoshi Nakamoto in the Bitcoin whitepaper as his proof-of-work mechanism was implemented in the Bitcoin code. It's easy to forget how nascent a technology space this is.
I do sometimes think that in attempting to solve one problem we engender another. Cryptocurrencies are often, as misguided as it is, criticized for their facilitation of laundering money. I could see that by utilizing shell companies and exploiting the selection criteria of disinterested third parties to be donated to, this system could be leveraged for just this purpose. It would permit the obfuscation of crypto payments in miniscule denominations to launder money across jurisdictional boundaries. That being said, this is a complication shared by all systems of money and not unique to blockchain or crypto, specifically. It's just an attack vector for policy makers if the second and third order effects of these technologies are not considered by their developers.
I like the idea of micropayments being utilized in value-for-value systems as we've seen arise in the podcast and newsletter writing worlds. The ability for individuals to stream or make small payments directly to producers enabling the reciprocal relationship between value producer and value seeker in a free and open market. I see this as an adaptation very similar to the model you've proposed here but with slightly different incentives.
This was an interesting and thought provoking read and I'll look forward to what's yet to come from the Human Ingenuity Feed, thank you.
Hello there, Fossilized Ideals! First of all, thank you for the time you dedicated to reading this essay. Thank you again for subscribing, and a third thank you (third time's the charm, they say) for being a Founder Member. That's... a very welcome and humbling surprise.
I admit I delved into this issue with no knowledge of Adam Back. Even though I did read the Bitocin whitepaper, I seem to have failed to delve into all of its references. This is a great tidbit that brings with it some required reading. Thank you for pointing it out and sharing that. And yes, definitely - blockchain is still a newborn as far as technology implementations go. For now, everyone is up in arms trying to understand it, overthinking on how to nurture it properly, realize why it's crying, and what all the fuss is about. But its utility and its insertion into the fabric of the human condition is undeniable, I feel. And it's bound to become even more so in time.
I understand your point on criminal organizations, and it's a good one for sure. Certainly, the programming of the destination wallet shouldn't be left to the user. It should have an element of centralization, such as consulting a credited list of institutions that have been approved by an NGO or Government body (regulation is needed). Of course, there's always space for fake institutions and shell companies, and perhaps this would be rerouted for one such, but... That's a problem that would have to thought through before implementation, just like you said.
Things are complicated further due to the irrationality of money laundering itself. It has one of the worst cost/benefit ratios between allocation and output that we know of. Here too, volume and scale make it worthwhile. $1M a criminal can use beats $10M it can't move anywhere. This increases the odds of exploitation, even if the odds are adequately stacked against such exploitations.
As for micropayments, this is certainly close to the liberal dream of money and services flowing freely, outside of government intervention. The thing here, I feel, is that it ultimately also places responsibility in both providers and value seekers in supporting and growing one another. It's based on what could maybe be called an optimistic vision of the world. But I'd say that we must strive for the world we want to live in, instead of just clamoring for it. Taking part in these value-added transactions that are more than the sum of their parts is, to me, a bold and necessary first step.
I can't thank you enough for your openness and taking the time to dissect my words in such detail and with such valid, interesting points. This is more than I hoped to gain in starting this project already. Kudos to you, and your very modern Fossilized Ideals.
Keep being curious, keep thinking, and most all, keep being human.
This was a fantastic first release and had me reflecting on the disparate use cases for blockchain technology, particularly a system for micropayments.
The question of resolving spam in digital communications has been at the forefront of driving much of the technology in the space since the early days of the cypherpunk movement. Adam Back of Blockstream is credited with having developed the proof-of-work protocol for just this reason, to solve the issue of spam emails on the cypherpunks mailing list. Adam Back was then cited by Satoshi Nakamoto in the Bitcoin whitepaper as his proof-of-work mechanism was implemented in the Bitcoin code. It's easy to forget how nascent a technology space this is.
I do sometimes think that in attempting to solve one problem we engender another. Cryptocurrencies are often, as misguided as it is, criticized for their facilitation of laundering money. I could see that by utilizing shell companies and exploiting the selection criteria of disinterested third parties to be donated to, this system could be leveraged for just this purpose. It would permit the obfuscation of crypto payments in miniscule denominations to launder money across jurisdictional boundaries. That being said, this is a complication shared by all systems of money and not unique to blockchain or crypto, specifically. It's just an attack vector for policy makers if the second and third order effects of these technologies are not considered by their developers.
I like the idea of micropayments being utilized in value-for-value systems as we've seen arise in the podcast and newsletter writing worlds. The ability for individuals to stream or make small payments directly to producers enabling the reciprocal relationship between value producer and value seeker in a free and open market. I see this as an adaptation very similar to the model you've proposed here but with slightly different incentives.
This was an interesting and thought provoking read and I'll look forward to what's yet to come from the Human Ingenuity Feed, thank you.
Hello there, Fossilized Ideals! First of all, thank you for the time you dedicated to reading this essay. Thank you again for subscribing, and a third thank you (third time's the charm, they say) for being a Founder Member. That's... a very welcome and humbling surprise.
I admit I delved into this issue with no knowledge of Adam Back. Even though I did read the Bitocin whitepaper, I seem to have failed to delve into all of its references. This is a great tidbit that brings with it some required reading. Thank you for pointing it out and sharing that. And yes, definitely - blockchain is still a newborn as far as technology implementations go. For now, everyone is up in arms trying to understand it, overthinking on how to nurture it properly, realize why it's crying, and what all the fuss is about. But its utility and its insertion into the fabric of the human condition is undeniable, I feel. And it's bound to become even more so in time.
I understand your point on criminal organizations, and it's a good one for sure. Certainly, the programming of the destination wallet shouldn't be left to the user. It should have an element of centralization, such as consulting a credited list of institutions that have been approved by an NGO or Government body (regulation is needed). Of course, there's always space for fake institutions and shell companies, and perhaps this would be rerouted for one such, but... That's a problem that would have to thought through before implementation, just like you said.
Things are complicated further due to the irrationality of money laundering itself. It has one of the worst cost/benefit ratios between allocation and output that we know of. Here too, volume and scale make it worthwhile. $1M a criminal can use beats $10M it can't move anywhere. This increases the odds of exploitation, even if the odds are adequately stacked against such exploitations.
As for micropayments, this is certainly close to the liberal dream of money and services flowing freely, outside of government intervention. The thing here, I feel, is that it ultimately also places responsibility in both providers and value seekers in supporting and growing one another. It's based on what could maybe be called an optimistic vision of the world. But I'd say that we must strive for the world we want to live in, instead of just clamoring for it. Taking part in these value-added transactions that are more than the sum of their parts is, to me, a bold and necessary first step.
I can't thank you enough for your openness and taking the time to dissect my words in such detail and with such valid, interesting points. This is more than I hoped to gain in starting this project already. Kudos to you, and your very modern Fossilized Ideals.
Keep being curious, keep thinking, and most all, keep being human.