Purpose of Bitcoin? A neutral intl reserve currency. The Satoshi Nakamoto model.

[InterloperRa]

A model for a decentralized Sovereign-to-Sovereign Peer-to-Peer web3 economy & Supranational reserve currency based on SATOSHI NAKAMOTO Protocol.
A monument not to our greatness but to our existence

Abstract: The root problem with conventional fiat currency of single nation as a global reserve currency is all the trust that’s required to make it work. The central bank of the reserve currency issuer nation must be trusted not to debase the currency, it also faces the conflict of economic interests that arises between short-term domestic and long-term international objectives known as Triffin’s Dilemma, but the history of global reserve currencies is full of breaches of that trust that have undermined global economic growth & stability. Moreover, the exorbitant privilege of a nation being the global reserve currency issuer provides access to cheap capital but comes with the exorbitant burden of running constant deficits as well as reduced domestic economic growth, loss of manufacturing & unemployment. Further, the transition from reserve currency of one nation to another has been preceded by wars or fiscal irresponsibility or natural disasters followed by economic woes for the whole world.

We propose a solution to peacefully aid transition to a global reserve currency which does not lead to loss of monetary sovereignty of states. A peer-to-peer ecosystem of a world economy would allow commerce to flow without going through trusted intermediaries and financial institutions of the reserve currency sovereign state that have come to dominate the internet and extract value by facilitating transactions. Furthermore, rich countries and monopolistic corporations leverage their geopolitical and commercial dominance in the world economy via reserve currency status to depress or cheapen the prices of resources and labour in the global South. Thus, as a result, for every unit of embodied resources and labour that the global South imports from the global North they have to export many more units to pay for it, enabling the North to achieve a net appropriation through trade. This is known as the theory of unequal exchange which has led to spread of global inequality. These conditions have been further exacerbated in privately issued cryptocurrencies as most of them are issued & backed by Venture Capitalists in advanced economies & are mostly pegged against the dollar which may lead to currency substitution in domestic economies.

Bitcoin and Layer-1 Blockchains provide a model of the solution by acting as a neutral mint & buyer of last resort, but the lack of a decentralized digital identity and absence of sovereign state participation in the ecosystem are the main issues which hinder adoption. Most benefits are lost if trusted third parties like centralized webhosting services, marketplaces, social media and centralized exchanges are required to function. We propose a model for a decentralized peer-to-peer circular economy that relies on a system where reserve currency can be earned from traditional commerce or issued for providing spare bandwidth, storage and computational resources to the network as well as spent in the same ecosystem for utilizing these computational resources ultimately transcending into an information society and ushering in the fourth industrial revolution. As a part of the model, we also propose a system of establishing social trust utilizing verified credentials. We also propose a solution for sovereign state participation in the network by symbolic purchase of national debts & foreign reserves in exchange for participation in the network and this reserve currency may be used to restructure debts, provide a platform for issuance and use of Central Bank Digital Currencies & tokenized assets or be used for storage, processing & transmission of information.
 
1. Introduction

Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions and corporations serving as trusted third parties to process electronic payments, host data, websites, marketplace listings and facilitate communication. While the system worked well enough, it has started to show its drawbacks which include disintermediation of users, censorship, collection of personally identifiable information and arbitrary commission rates. Some sectors of the internet economy such as advertising and social media have been monopolized at the detriment of users. Ensuring permanence of data is not possible since institutions and corporations cannot completely avoid regulations and security risks and represent a single point of failure. The use of centralized platforms for commerce which often provide paid premium features and advertising have increased the cost of doing business and this cost has been passed onto the consumers. These additional costs can be avoided by self-hosting data and websites, but no mechanism exists to facilitate commerce on the internet without a trusted party or expensive hardware or technical know-how. The original bitcoin code had a marketplace & messaging component to it which was deprecated due to unknown reasons by Satoshi Nakamoto. Today’s largest centralized internet corporations undermine privacy and collect user data which they sell in exchange for the free services they provide. The platforms also control who can access the data through their restrictive policies. These corporations sometimes hold more wealth than sovereign states and exert considerable influence over public opinion and public policy despite having no system of checks and balances in place. Various corporations today due their size, user adoption and accumulation of wealth and data have created a parallel unaccounted digital economic ecosystem based on rules decided arbitrarily.

A theoretical supranational reserve currency known as Bancor was proposed by Keynes at the Bretton Woods Conference, but the proposal was rejected due to its untenable interest rates on net surpluses in international trade as well as a lack of buyer of last resort. The main objective of the International Monetary was to promote global financial stability but it has failed in its objective by relying on Fiat Currencies issued by sovereign states. Bitcoin provides a model for a supranational reserve currency which can be anchored to a stable benchmark (Proof of Work) and is issued according to a clear set of rules therefore, ensuring orderly supply; second, its supply is theoretically flexible enough to allow timely adjustment according to the changing demand (consensus mechanism & hard forks); third, such adjustments & issuance are disconnected from economic conditions and sovereign interests of any single country. The current state of Bitcoin and crypto-technology ecosystem usually involves a high cost of entry. For instance, one must provide identity verification to centralized exchanges, conduct multiple asset transfers and incur fees along the way. The current state of Layer-1 Blockchains like Ethereum is no better. It involves the same pitfalls as accessing Bitcoin and involves installing browser extensions to interact with smart contracts & decentralized applications which involves hefty fees and complexity. Various Layer-2 solutions have been proposed for blockchains, but they usually involve bridging assets to the layer-2 solutions powered by their own tokens and add even more complexity in participating in the crypto-economy. Some argue that the most important part of the Bitcoin experiment is the underlying blockchain technology as a tool for distributed consensus, but we propose that model for a neutral decentralized mint & open-source nature of code running distributed systems and associated smart contracts & Dapps is arguably the most important aspect of the crypto-ecosystem. The implications of this open-source nature of software development as opposed to walled-gardens are far reaching as any improvements to a blockchain protocol or smart contract can essentially be utilized on other chains which have a superior network effect or user adoption. In our model of a web3 economy we propose two components, one is SATOSHI Protocol which represents computational resources, and the other is NAKAMOTO Protocol which represents decentralized identity, marketplaces and tokenization of physical assets. The protocol is neutral to anonymity but allows willing counterparties to choose the minimum information acceptable for commerce as per laws of the sovereign nation.


2.SATOSHI Protocol

A Satoshi is colloquially understood as the smallest unit of a Bitcoin. In this model, a SATOSHI may represent in whole or as part an application or a smart contract or an interface. The basic components of a SATOSHI are Storage, Autonomous, Transfer, Operation, Satellite, Hashing and Interface. Blockchains and cryptocurrencies with these utilities already exist isolated within their ecosystems. We do not offer any opinion on the price or economics of these cryptocurrencies but only the utility of their protocols.

a. Storage: Blockchain is a distributed ledger that records transactions using a shared consensus mechanism. This functionality of merely storing transactions has been further expanded to store any form of data. The most popular iterations of this are Filecoin, Chia & Arweave. While Filecoin enables storage of data for a defined period of time, the arweave protocol provides permanent data storage beneficial for verified credentials, tokenized assets & smart contracts.

b. Autonomous (Turing Complete): Smart Contracts that exist on the blockchain can be considered Autonomous. Even Bitcoin protocol contains various OPCODES that enable such autonomous transactions. This has been further advanced by the Ethereum Protocol via the Ethereum Virtual Machine.

c. Transfer (Double spending problem): This refers to the ability to transfer unique digital & tokenized assets and the prevention of double spending. Bitcoin was the first protocol to provide a solution to the double spending problem without a central entity. It may include interoperable CBDCs, tokenized assets, NFTs & identities (Soulbound tokens).


d. Operation (Proof of computation / Useful Proof-of-work): Useful proof-of-work blockchains such as the Ixec Blockchain & Helium Network have made it possible to reward users for distributed computing.

e. Satellite (Proof of Coverage/bandwidth): This refers to the ability to send and receive information over the internet via mesh networking. Blockchains that utilize spare bandwidth to enable mesh networking such as Helium already exist. It may also allow nodes & points of sale & commerce to monetize spare bandwidth as well as allow a greater population to access the internet by providing incentives to the general public & telecom & satellite operators.

f. Hashing: This refers to the cryptographic hash function which is a one-way hash function that maps any arbitrary data to a bit array of a fixed size (Hash value). It may also refer to the consensus mechanisms deployed to add new blocks to the blockchain.

g. Interface (Decentralized Social/Steem/Dapps): Nodes may also operate their own interfaces providing front-end services to users. Even though a node/interface may set its own rules & moderation policies regarding the content that is displayed by their interfaces. For eg. A marketplace may only allow users from certain sovereign state or credentials to display its products or a social media interface may only allow verified users or be open to all users. Popular interfaces may be able to charge a node fee or listing fees for content to be visible on their interfaces.


3. Nakamoto Protocol:

This proposed protocol refers to the physical & digital intersection of commerce. Even though, real estate, stocks & identities can be tokenized they hold little value without credible oracles & reputable sovereign institutions verifying such data. We propose a single unified protocol which captures data that is shared, compiled and stored by sovereign states in one singular database by providing uniformity in how the data is captured across various government departments and agencies. This may include decentralized identities through which a citizen may prove various credentials without sharing personally identifiable information using zero knowledge proofs. It includes a global marketplace protocol to facilitate Peer-to-Peer commerce in which various kinds of credentials & associations enable consumers to make informed choices. It may also include other stake holders such as banks, financial institutions, stock exchanges and other entities that may issue verified credentials as authorized by sovereign states. This will enable commerce & capital to flow freely with the counter-party risk that is acceptable to both parties in a transaction.  The basic components  of this protocol are Nationality, Association, Knowledge, Assets, Marketplace, Organization, Taxation & Operation.

a. Nationality: This refers to various sovereign states & observer members of the United Nations that may issue verified credentials to individuals or entities under its control. For eg. A Social Security Number, Aaadhar number or unique identifier for a government agency that may issue verified credentials to users or organizations or a national stock exchange that may issue credentials to companies listed on the exchange. This may also enable sovereign states to issue CBDCs that are interoperable and backed by their respective central banks. Central Banks may decide access to CBDCs or capital controls or models they want to pursue to distribute CBDCs in domestic economies or only allow them to be used for international trade.
 
b. Association: This refers to various associations that dominate the economic landscape for example industry organizations, political parties, international organizations etc. It may also include associations by private individuals of other individuals in the absence of a well-recognized association.  

c. Knowledge (Doctor / Lawyer / Accountant / Driving License/ Degrees): This refers to the verified credentials issued by educational institutions or trade bodies that may help the service economy to flourish. For eg. a decentralized version of uber may require driving licenses or a service marketplace may require plumber/electrician certification. Further, service marketplaces may flourish using these verified credentials.

d. Assets (Stocks, real estate registries, physical goods etc.): This refers to the tokenization of stocks & other physical assets. For example a stock exchange issued verified credentials by a sovereign state may further issue credentials to companies to tokenize their stocks further enabling capital inflows & foreign direct investment in a country. This may apply to land registries as well as other assets that can tokenized and verified by institutions & entities regulation such assets.

e. Marketplace: This refers to a marketplace protocol that may provide listings for physical goods. Particl Blockchain Protocol & Openbazaar have already demonstrated these capabilities. It may also include trade licenses, food licenses & other regulatory compliances needed to operate in  an economy. A marketplace that is decentralized at the protocol level may be centralized at the interface level as front-ends may only include products that are approved by the node administrator or may be open to all.

f. Organization: Employer organization or other reputable organizations may issue verified credentials to its employees or members providing access to confidential data or privileged access to certain services.

g. Taxation: Smart Contracts that enable taxation by sovereign states or Taxation IDs or taxation records that may allow government agencies to view a private blockchain. For example viewkeys in the Monero Protocol. It may also enable determination of income for uncollateralized lending.

h. Operation: This may refer to other records & data that is generated by sovereign or private entities in the economy. It may include websites, insurance records medical records, criminal record, traffic violations etc.

4. The Challenge & model for transition:
 
Apart from the humongous technical challenges of scalability, protecting privacy and developing this protocol sovereign participation is essential as trusted providers of verified credentials. We propose a global injection of liquidity in the global economy via a predefined formula to reflect current economic status of sovereign states. Sovereign States can distribute this currency to local governments and organizations that can provide verified credentials as well as distribute this currency to citizens alongwith CBDCs. For instance, a decentralized version of Uber would at the very least require verification of driving license credentials, a food delivery platform may require health authority licenses, land ownership can be verified by registrars, public universities may authenticate degrees. Users that do not have these credentials may still operate in this economy and compete if they provide a valuable service at lower prices. We propose the following formulae for allocation of the proposed currency at a fixed rate pegged to the dollar:

Public Debt Denominated in Dollars X 0.25 + GDP (PPP) X 2 + IMF Reserve  Currency Reserves in Dollar rates X 3

Private Participants may also purchase these tokens in exchange for leading cryptocurrencies at a pegged rate which would be sold to fund nation state nodes where required as well as used to allocate funds needed for a lender of last resort institution like the IMF by similar symbolic purchase as mentioned above.  

5. Use cases
a. International reserve currency & global unit of account for international trade.
b. Banking the unbanked & providing a standardized global ID system.
c. Permaweb & permanent data storage & decentralized distributed computing for AI & research.
d. DeFi: This can be used for availing loans against your tokenised assets such as stocks, digital assets as collateral for flash loans or over collateralized loans.
e. Access to credit: For example, if Alice is a member of a reputed farmer association or trade association that provides insurance against flash loans then they may use their association verified credentials & insurance credentials to procure a flash loan from a bank or financial institution to pay for farming inputs, seeds etc.


6. Conclusion

TBD! Or already decided? The Last Question by Isaac Asimov https://www.physics.princeton.edu/ph115/LQ.pdf



TLDR: A Supranational reserve currency & platform on which CBDCs can be issued & it can be used for transfer of CBDCs, digital assets, mesh networking, storage, smart contracts, processing, ID system, marketplace & tokenization of real world assets.

The TLDR technical part:
(S)torage + (A)utonomous + (T)ransfer + (O)peration + (S)atellite + (H)ashing + (I)nterface = Digital sphere (SATOSHI)

(N)ationality + (A)ssociation + (K)nowledge + (A)ssets + (M)arketplace + (O)rganization + (T)axtion + (O)peration = Digital + Physical intersection (NAKAMOTO)

The vision is a crypto economic system based on a supranational reserve currency system in which sovereign states can participate & issue CBDCs & verified credentials & network acts as a last buyer for storage processing & transmission of information & transfer of assets.

You may think of it as a combination of Helium Network, UTXOs & CBDCs/Bitcoin, Ethereum/Smart contracts dapps, Ixec Blockchain/Golem Network, Arweave/Filecoin, Encryption Protocols/Zero-Knowledge Proofs & Interfaces. & Decentralised Identities & Marketplace component built using side chains & subnets.

What’s next? How can you help?
There has been no development of code regarding this model. I am good with words & international law but not with code. A discussion is needed to decide a consensus mechanism & theoretical rewards for the various computational resources mentioned in the SATOSHI protocol. If you’re a developer, cryptographer, economist, lawyer or an enthusiast you can contribute to the project or make it your own! This paper is issued under the MIT License.

Disclosure:
I currently own 0.000219 BTC , 0.051 AR & 0.06 Deso.


References:
1. Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
2. Zhou Xiaochuan: Reform the international monetary system https://www.bis.org/review/r090402c.pdf
3. Archain:  An Open, Irrevocable, Unforgeable and Uncensorable Archive for the Internet https://www.arweave.org/whitepaper.pdf
4. Ethereum: A Next-Generation Smart Contract and Decentralized Application Platform. https://ethereum.org/669c9e2e2027310b6b3cdce6e1c52962/Ethereum_Whitepaper_-_Buterin_2014.pdf
5. Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later: https://vitalik.ca/general/2019/11/22/progress.html
6. Decentralized Society: Finding Web3's Soul https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4105763
7. Imperialist appropriation in the world economy: Drain from the global South through unequal exchange, 1990–2015 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095937802200005X
8. tbDEX: A Liquidity Protocol v0.1 https://tbdex.io/whitepaper.pdf
9. Helium A Decentralized Wireless Network http://whitepaper.helium.com/
10. Proof of Humanity https://blog.kleros.io/proof-of-humanity-an-explainer/
11. Chia Business Whitepaper https://www.chia.net/assets/Chia-Business-Whitepaper-2021-02-09-v1.0.pdf
12. Steem An incentivized,blockchain-based,public content platform. https://steem.com/SteemWhitePaper.pdf
13. DeSo: The Decentralized Social Network https://docs.deso.org/about-deso-chain/readme
14. Particl: A  Decentralized  Private  Marketplace https://github.com/particl/whitepaper/blob/master/decentralized-private-marketplace-draft-0.1.pdf
15. OpenBazaar https://github.com/OpenBazaar/openbazaar-desktop/releases https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/07/15/openbazaar-co-founder-explains-why-web-3s-answer-to-ebay-folded-its-tents/
16. The Last Question by Isaac Asimov https://www.physics.princeton.edu/ph115/LQ.pdf(Important for Non-technical users/readers)

[franky1]

you are not advertising bitcoin.
your advertising a new token that has multiple functions.
and then adding in words to make it sound like its about bitcoin..

plus looks like a poorly done copy and paste job from some website you found.
where they want to steal buzzwords like satoshi/bitcoin to pretend their token is bitcoin2.0..

funny part is it has not even shown any detail of dealing with the issues nor understanding the actual bitcoin network.

but hey nice try.
..
heres one issue to handle

something that goes back to the 2009 days.
bitcoins 'value' (not price) is based on the cost of computational power that people want to break even or profit from using.
EG bitcoin's base VALUE is over $20k but the price is above that.
this is because it costs over $20k of computational power to make a new btc this year.

lets say a country wanted to 'create' $1trillion of new token. where it has used $1trill of computational power in their 'pre-mine'
that would require alot of electric.

EG how people THINK a $1 coin is worth $1 of scrap metal (like the olden days of english money where £1 was thought of being worth 1pound(LB weight) of silver

to get back to matching this value exactly and proven. is not cheap and its time consuming. so not something you can just invent/release overnight

there will always be an element of value not equalling price.
even in the real bitcoin.
if we were to have mined at a constant 220exahash using modern asics. right from the start of 2009.
those 19mill btc that exist today would have been mined for under $50billion of electric. .. no where near the half a trilion 'market cap'
the reason we value the older coins as the same price as new coins. where people sell old coins at the same rate as new coins. is speculation.

in short.
trying to 'invent' a token that you think should have a proven value of say $20trillion to cover all the world reserve money conversion. would actually require trying to find a way to use $20 trillion of value to be USED in its creation. and then proven/locked into that token.. so that people then can buy something of proven value.. using their native currencies. to then destroy and remove the native currency at the conversion.. sorry but not gonna happen

[franky1]

I think the artificial difficulty defeats that definition of value. If the difficulty goes down due to some natural disaster or electricity becoming scarcer but bitcoin trades higher due to speculation, does it mean the value of bitcoin goes down? The computation cycles used is artificially enforced. Why not use the other computational resources like storage, bandwidth & useful proof-of work?

by having (like bitcoin has) natural difficulty adjustments that adjust based on competition(more hash=higher difficulty) means that from the start the 'value' is low and grows as things get more competitive.
yes competition can decrease too meaning value can decrease. aswell as mining efficiencies can make the value less if its cheaper to mine. so this is variable and not stable. and requires the desire to work to keep it up and growing.

artificial difficulty such as pre-setting the difficulty at a certain level can cause many things. such as a initial barrier of entry for the poor if too high. or no desire to get involved if too low..whereby if too high alot of investment is needed upfront just to be capable of reaching a high threshold from the start. and if too low, your adoption wont grow quick

you would need to think about what an acceptable threshold can be, that both doesnt become a barrier of entry, but also doesnt make it appear as under-over valued from the start.
bitcoin found the best method. starting low and allowing natural growth. it was in no rush to gain world wide adoption.

but if you are looking for a 'reserve' currency everyone adopts quickly before CBDC. you are going to need to find a solution that has a stable value aswell as not being a barrier or unvalued.


finding a stable value the world can agree on is tough.  
for instance with bitcoin. its value window this year is based on ~$27k to $74k window. due to discrepancies in electric costs in different regions.
whereby in africa. they dont see much benefit in bitcoin because to buy 1 btc costs them 200x more labour hours than america  for the coins.. $27k in america is a naverage 1 year salary. but in africa with is 200 years salary
 . and separately for the utility..
although america see fee's are only $1(6mins of min wage) africa see that same $1 fee as being 20 hours of min wage labour
(this is where american know africans wont use it for daily use. and americans dont want africans using it daily.. thus bitcoin is not thought of as a digital cash for the unbanked anymore)

so you are going to need to think of a hard solution that is of equal value for all around the world to have a equal 'reserve value' that is stable that the whole world values and wants to use/accept

if you want a stable 'reserve' where everyone around the world can all agree on one single long term number . you will have to find a 'proof of value' cost that is observable and workable across the planet at the same rate

some people envision this to be 'minimum wage' where by its not measured in currency amount upfront and then converted to minutes after. but instead in minutes upfront. whereby everyone on the planet works 1 hour. for 1 hour of token. and then and only then. that token is converted into a local currency amount.
the consequence of this is obvious.
knowing 1 hour in africa is worth 200x less than 1 hour in america ($0.05 vs $10) based on forex rates..  americans would use forex to convert dollars to m-pesa(african common currency) then buy 200 tokens on african exchange, instead of 1 on american exchange. and then sell them 200 tokens back on an american exchange for the price of american minimum wage value.
which would cause a arbitrage reaction on the forex fiat market where eventually $US crashes and the mpesa inflates to become on par, where an african min wage is equal to an american minimum wage... sounds good on paper. a token that can destroy the value disparity of different countries labour. but in reality. governments wont like it and will certainly step in to outlaw your token to prevent this

There is no one country creating 1 Trillion Tokens. It all countries receiving the incentive/premine in the proposed currency for transitioning away from the dollar & to issue verified credentials.

Also the dollar reserve currency status was due victory in world war 2 & Bretton Woods Conference by 44 nations & before that the pound was there due to colonialism. Should we wait for war or collapse of the US economy for the discussion to happen again? Should the global south keep accepting inflated dollars/euros in exchange for their natural resources & goods while global inequality increases?

sounds like you want a replacement of fiat/government agencies.. rather than a free/open choice beside fiat(future CBDC version)/beside government birth/death/identities agencies.. that people can use as a option to hedge against fiat(future CBDC)/government agencies.
the problem with thinking that you can replace fiat/government identity agencies is the problem of thinking you can destroy government first.
you dont need to wait for war to slide your token in. there are already THOUSANDS of tokens that exist now that have different functionality/utility/proofs. but they wont replace fiat/government identity agencies. so think more about a token that actually can store value and can work alongside fiat where people choose to use it. and choose to accept it. without the fight

Even the US had to come up with the Marshall Plan & IMF quotas to make dollar acceptable. So sovereign states running such nodes & issuing their CBDCs & bridging their economies to the proposed platform/blockchain would signify its 'value'

AGAIN this doesn't replace fiat currencies but allows them to be tokenized & inter-operable so sovereign states won't lose their monetary sovereignty.

you wanting a token based on identity registration and with a value element attached to the token. then becomes a barrier of people then having to pay to be registered for their identity.
again with the differential of 'value' based on regions/forex. you will have to overcome this.
EG if you set it at $5 a registration. yes cheap in america. but thats like 100 labour hours in africa, meaning africans wont want to register their child or become bankrupt/poorer for having to by force register their child.
and if your system has no requirement to enforce registration. you are just not going to have majority of the planet use your system.

you also run into the problem of then having to be recognised as legitimately proving identity to a high level that is acceptable to people as undeniable proof. or high majority of utility to warrent being recognised as valid proof
EG a UK 'disability concession bus pass' has a photocard that has been authenticated. but no one cares to treat that as identity proof.

also many crypto token enthusiasts have tried making identity ledgers, but many forgers have faked records.
EG there used to be a 'web of trust' where people would register their credentials to a public key and then have several random other users vote/sponsor/validate that identity. the issue became though that someone would set up several identities and then just sponsor his own new identities or identities of other nefarious actors faked ID's.
others would be that some cases were acceptable, but only in small niche communities. where everyone knew everyone, but didnt work outside those communities

if you make it too cheap to register an identity. those validating it wont put much effort into background checking such identities. if you make it too expensive. then you will find people reluctant to register. especially hard  to achieve if you are trying to get random people to authenticate other random people in a wide community where they dont know each other prior to registration request.

you would need to have a system of proven midwifes validating births, parents notarising, signing witness/proof of their new child(EG birth certificate system). just for a trust element.. and other proofs of real life authenticity.
without the reliance of integrating(partnering) with government identity agencies
(many people have photoshopped their driving licences when uploading to services)

this usually is done in the real world by witness statements of birth(doctors and parents signing birth certificates) and also the court system and laws of fines/penalty for lying/falsifying records.
but harder to achieve online amunst people that dont know each other. not close enough to meet each other to prove life.

other thoughts already looked at in the past are that you would need some 'penalty' system in place aswell. otherwise people would invent identities for profit if there was no consequence..
EG when coinbase first started and offered $5 of coin for signing up. everyone made multiple accounts using fake Id's.. coinbase has no system to self authenticate. and it now relies on government agencies to authenticate and coinbase has punishment terms in its service agreements for users that fake identities

however the consequences of these penalties, is that these too can be played with for profit. and/or overly enforced/used.
EG a method to steal tokens from someone under X circumstance becomes an incentive for people to cause such event just to profit from it.
(many have wanted a punishment added to bitcoin that if coins are not moved after 8 years those coins can be spent back to miners. (facepalm, glad they never added that))

some had already envisioned tokens that 'lock' (stake) tokens as a penalty collateral that can be lost if found guilty of falsifying records. but that too then becomes a barrier of entry of needing X token upfront to lock/stake just to be part of the system.

again if your not looking to replace the government then your token would need a robust authenticity and penalty algo that is not able to be abused and also self regulating to retain trust.  because you wont want to have to rely on integrating it into being a government to then have to have courts/law enforcement/identity agencies to validate claims

good luck with all that.
i personally think you are throwing out lots of idea's and lots of buzzwords of bitcoin and satoshi to make your advert(ooops proposal) sound like it has substance. but you are too aimless in your plan to have anything concrete. you say you dont want to replace fiat/government but then say it will. you want a valued token but a identity token. without planning on the deeper requirements/consequences of both
you are not ready for coding developers yet. you proposal needs more work on the fundamental nature and structure of utility and trust at the functional real world level before getting coders to code it for you