Approaching things from the top down


Pushing the trees aside to see the forest

Do you believe there would be any advantages to a world wide 'currency' that:
   I. could not be forged/counterfeited?
      (You don't need a police force nor fancy presses to combat that problem.)
  II. could not be stolen or even lost as possession has no bearing on ownership?
      (Traditional banks [and dealing with accounts] are obsolete.)
 III. is entirely outside the control/purview of any government?
      (It cannot possibly be employed for social controls nor war toys.)
  IV. could be exchanged world wide with the same easy as a email?
      (So much for exchange rate chaos, Western Union, etc.)
   V. like the Internet and Free Software is a child of 'anarchy'?
      (It's cooperatively advanced at unprecedented rates with minimum costs and ingenious flexibility.)
  VI. has value in and of itself and NOT due to any gold or 'dollar' backing, etc.?
      (There are no storage fees or need to worry about fraud nor government confiscation.)
 VII. can be redeemed under any scenario specified by issuers?
      (Optimal solutions can be molded by competitive forces.)
VIII. is free? {Note: this is a near repeat of item V.}
      (It's wholly owned by those it serves and hence outside the control of authoritarian elitists.)

All the above is achieved simply by:
1) 'Currency' issuers digitally signing their serialized authorings and designating the first owner (by their PGP keyID).
2) The 'currency' (file) belonging to an owner by means of their digital signature and registration in the the GNU World Record database (GWR).  {Note: there is a critical legal technicality that could be mentioned here, but it would likely just obscure things for laypersons at this point.}
3) Hundreds of 3rd party free software participants who creatively invent (on top of the GNU.hope core system) scores of services (from indexing to voluntary regulatory bodies) all fulfilling an expansive range of needs & requirements.

[Remaining issues such as anonymity vs accountability, evaluations, tax liabilities, and good conduct enforcement are better addressed after digesting the material contained in showMe.html]

Lets bear in mind that this peep is from the "top" (the ultimate potential/goal/hope for this system);  whereas my first attempt started from the bottom with the worthy yet unassuming & un-threatening desire to (at the very least) encourage talented contributors of noble quests.  Nevertheless there is a small world in between, ranging from massive indexing of quality inputs to registration of capital shares.  In any event, the various services will naturally emerge as critical masses of GNU.hopes accumulate in the GWR.

Regarding the current 'currency' perspective of the system:  it may be helpful to roughly read my special term originator as "'currency' author", recipient as "'currency' owner", and comment as the "digital stuff of value".

-- More Specifics --

1) Money is the 2nd greatest invention of mankind (at least in terms of advancing productivity - i.e. keeping the human race alive and healthy).

2) As a consequence money is much too important to remain under the control of authoritarian establishments (as is currently the case world wide).

3) Regardless of what we do, a free system of money will necessarily emerge due to the demands/needs of an increasingly rational society.  PGP and the Internet has made this an inevitability.  The best anyone could hope to do is simply help move something like this into place a few months or decades sooner (along with its advantages of less human suffering and no wars).

4) To the credit of those in control of the world's monetary system(s), there are numerous legitimate technical problems that they have sufficiently addressed to enjoy enormous acceptance.  Nevertheless, the enslaving power this conveys to a few represents the 'Ring' which no one is fit to be Lord of.

5) The biggest problem that I see is just what should be monetized and exactly how to do so.  While I'm prone to 'gold-bug' sentiments, that metal is clearly way to scarce to handle current levels of global transactions (trade).  The US dollar (Federal Reserve Note) is based on monetizing (gasp) US governmental debt!  So if something that perverse (or should I say hilarious) can work (for a while) then why not something of real positive value???

6) Consider all the value people hold by virtue of their possessions, talents, experiences, or even their very reputations.  Yet all this remains wholly valueless at the lemonade stand.  Is it possible/practical to monetize all these kind of things?

7) To answer the above:  I think so, but I'm not entirely sure.  All I know is that I haven't got the talent to do it.  However, I believe that the genius and potency of free minds operating in free markets certainly have the ability to manifest solutions who's advantages far exceed anything some power elites could ever possibly hope to achieve.

8) Entonces:  It is my desire to introduce an arena in which cool collective brains can participate in building/evolving just such a new destiny.  In other words, I merely want to set the stage and then lay back to watch the genius of others unfold.

9) We start with the underpinning idea of a GNU.hope which provides a highly visible reward mechanism that recognizes competent individuals.  These are simply text files archived in the GNU World Record database (GWR) as a world wide open public record.

10) The originators and recipients of these files are unambiguously identified via their PGP digital signatures.

11) The recipient as owner has unlimited rights and power to transfer their GNU.hope to another willing owner.  Transfers are a supported service of the core GWR database.

12) The GWR will be capable of handling billions of GNU.hopes but long before these levels are reached scores of imaginative 3rd party services that ride on top of the core system will have come into existence to meet evolving demands and opportunities.

13) Why we start off with something as unassuming as moral support for deserving warriors and how this could possibly be of any extended value is beyond the scope and definition of an executive summary, but is hopefully covered well in showMe.html

accept/reject:  This is an attribute of the GNU.hope which merely reflects the basic propensity of the recipient toward said GNU.hope.  If not explicitly found within the {GNU.hope} iCandidate then the default rejection status is "reject:=no" (i.e. accepted).

candidate: This represents either an iCandidate and/or a tCandidate - see following.

iCandidate ( initial Candidate): A gesture that has been signed by recipient and is thus ready for submission to a registry-node.

tCandidate ( transfer Candidate): A transfer request that was first signed by current owner and then by the new owner-to-be, making it ready for submission to a registry-node.

casual: This is a gesture that lacks the recipient's PGP keyID.  The recipient will need to supply this before signing and submitting to a registry-node.

comment: this is the gist of a GNU.hope.  It can really be any digital content, and could amount to say 1) a compliment or constructive critique, 2) an ascii-armored binary (ogg/mp3/jpg/dvd/etc) file/work, 3) a corporate stock option, 4) a discount coupon, 5) an election vote, 6) etc.
[A {GNU.hope} comment, however, needs to be restricted to an upper size limit - say 8k.  Since compressing a DVD into 8k represents a stiff challenge, the originator would cite a URL that points to the file of interest along with its SHA1 digest.]

date of genesis:  This is when a GNU.hope first comes into existence by being entered into the GWR database. It occurs right after a registry-node verifies the signatures of the originator and recipient along with the iCandidate's UID.

angel:  This is a possible service run form a registry-node that (as a minimum) forwards only validated gestures to recipients via email, RSS, a messaging  protocol, the gnutella network, etc.

gesture:  A text file containing a comment for a recipient as identified by their PGP keyID.  They are created and dated by their originators.  Gestures becomes GNU.hopes after signing by recipient and entry into the GWR database by a registry-node.

GNU.hope:  [noun] A plain text file registered in the GWR database, and minimally consists of a comment digitally signed by an originator and further signed by the recipient.  A GNU.hope's file name is also it's UID (universal ID).  [adjective] Identified by, part of, or related to this system.

GWR:  This acronym stands for GNU World Record (database).  The very existence of a GNU.hope is defined by its presence in this database.  Registry-nodes are the unique administrators of the GWR.

inception-date:  This is the date of a {GNU.hope} comment as assigned by the originator, and likely the date presented to recipient.

originator:  a PGP keyID identified entity (person) who creates/originates a formal {GNU.hope} open text gesture containing a comment for a recipient

recipient:  the PGP keyID identified entity (person) who is the object of a {GNU.hope} gesture.

redemption status:  This is a basic category of state for any GNU.hope and is assigned by the originator when the gesture is written.  States include: "No", "?", or "Yes".
"No" (the default), means that the originator has no plans to extend any further reward to recipient other than the embedded comment.
"?" signifies that originator would like to eventually 'redeem' the GNU.hope if possible.
"Yes" indicates that the GNU.hope currently contains a redemption privilege and is thus basically a coupon.

registry-node:  This is where a {GNU.hope} candidate is submitted for inclusion into the GWR (normally but not necessarily done by recipient).  Established PGP key servers are excellent contenders for upgrading to registry-nodes since they currently fulfill an important related service and do many of the types of things desirable for this function.  It is also envisioned that registry-nodes will run a messaging system (angel) designed for the forwarding of gestures to recipients.

transfer-date:  This the date when a GNU.hope last changed ownership.

UID:  This is the universal ID and file name for a GNU.hope.  The UID is assigned by the originator before delivery to a recipient.  UIDs have the following format:  FFFFFFFF-YyMDd#.ffffffff
Where "FFFFFFFF" is the 8 digit hexadecimal PGP keyID of originator.  "-" is an arbitrary delimiter.  "YyMDd" represents the inception-date ("Yy"=last two decimal digits of year, "M"=hexadecimal month number [1-C], and "Dd"=day of the month [01-31] in decimal).  "#" runs the range of 0-9,A-Z,a-z and so allows for any given originator to create up to 62 unique gestures to the same recipient on the same day.   "." is a required ".".   And "ffffffff" is the 8 digit hexadecimal PGP keyID of recipient.
Note:  The arbitrary delimiter can be any character most convenient for the user.  Hence 85E756C6-061200.135EA668 is equivalent to 85E756C6@061200.135EA668 and indicates the exact same GNU.hope.  Hence this delimiter can signify anything desired within a personal collection of GNU.hope files (effecting how files are listed in a generic filer).  Using the PGP keyID of recipient as a file extension also makes for easy storing by this parameter.  In the case of a casual {gesture}, the recipient's keyID was not available and hence needs to be applied by recipient.
free:  As in free software or free thinking.

anarchy?:  OK, so my two examples are not 100% unadulterated anarchy but at the very least represent monumental steps in the right direction.

dollar:  In all sincerity, these things should properly be called Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) to avoid any vulgar insinuation that they have any moral relevance to the silver certificates that were also designated in dollars.

value:  Value could be derived from anything, including but not limited to: contractual commitments on future delivery of goods or services, the prestige of being the recognized owner a renowned file, or the mere anticipation that the file could possibly be redeemed in the future.

WAR?:  How in the world could any sane person be so presumptuous as to argue that the mere existence of a free world wide monetary system might possibly prevent something like future wars?  The days of the Sun-Gods and Power-Popes are gone.  However, the religious power of the dollar, yen, etc. still exercises enough control over vast populations that sovereign geographically defined governments can still quite easily pull off their wars (the ultimate validation of jurisdiction).  Without their traditional monopolistic control over monetary systems, governments will cease to function as a war making machine.  Moreover, this system welcomes the onset of competitive governance that transcends terrestrial boundaries and hence makes the very concept of war among these entities utterly meaningless.