Perfect government by protocol

[Realpra]

The past 11 years I have been interested in leadership.

I'm about to hand in my bachelors project which is a program framework for expressing the distribution rules of an organization. Basically to avoid corruption you let a program "hold the bag".

That is pretty cool and my program is awesome. However it runs on a normal server so any attempt to control a corrupt elite also in control of said server would fail.

EDIT: Thread on framework that is combined with concepts from BTC here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=84505.msg935674#msg935674


Then today I think I finally found a way to make it perfect.

The key was leaving out storage!

Some explanation is due:
1. A protocol defines the rules of an organization.
2. The database of my project is turned into a blockchain type database.
3. People pay "taxes"/membership fees to the organization.
4. The taxes are immediately sent to the address specified in the org chain database.
5. All DB changing actions by users are signed/authorized using their key.

If you try to change the rules your block will not become part of the chain.
Since the chain does not store any value it can be made public without anyone emptying the "treasury".

Taxes would be paid with bitcoin.

Citizens who paid their tax would be able to identify themselves using their public/private key when applying for health care/school/other.


If this is possible it will be big. People will be able to organize themselves without fear that the politicians can break their constitution. Even the libertarians here should like that.

I myself believe strongly in government, but only when it is good government. I have seen what people can accomplish together and that is why governments are needed I think - joint investments beyond even companies.

After some quick thinking I believe my framework ideas can also be reused so that not every organization would need to be programmed from scratch.

Its fine if you don't get what I'm talking about I just got excited and had to tell someone. It's going to be a bitch to program this though...

[1715000171]

1715000171

[1715000171]

1715000171

[Bitcoin Oz]

With bitcoin taxes will need to go to consumption ones and also land taxes.

These are both fairer and less destructive to income and businesses.

[Realpra]

With bitcoin taxes will need to go to consumption ones and also land taxes.

These are both fairer and less destructive to income and businesses.

I think if you have a bad government spending unwisely it matters little HOW they get their taxes.

With this system taxes would have to be voluntary, however if you had not paid you would be charged for everything you used in the public sphere even the roads.

With all taxes voluntary the government actually has to care.

[hazek]

There is no such thing as voluntary taxes - it's an oxymoron. The appropriate name for what you call voluntary taxes is "a fee".

[Realpra]

There is no such thing as voluntary taxes - it's an oxymoron. The appropriate name for what you call voluntary taxes is "a fee".

I disagree:

A fee usually is accompanied by a specific benefit or service.

A TAX is paid to a government that may help others, but not YOU. If they DO help you that help is often diverse and not specific to just one service.

Its nitpicking, but I think it makes sense that people would pay a voluntary tax to government they believed in.


Whether the tax is entirely voluntary or collected as today I think my idea would improve governments by making it at least harder for them to break the constitution.

Voter fraud for instance would be made impossible and you could have elections every day if you wanted to. Put together that would make it near impossible to buy elections once/twice and then rob the country four-eight years in a row.

[hazek]

A TAX is paid to a government that may help others, but not YOU.

I don't understand. Why should I have to pay for something I don't want or wont get any benefit from?

EDIT: Actually now that I think about it a bit more:

A TAX is paid to a government that may help others, but not YOU. If they DO help you that help is often diverse and not specific to just one service.

Its nitpicking, but I think it makes sense that people would pay a voluntary tax to government they believed in.

Well.. if it's a government "they believe in" then the services the government provides, regardless of whether those services benefit them or not, are services that they want and are paying for, hence it's a fee.

[hazek]

I think my idea would improve governments by making it at least harder for them to break the constitution.

Why would anyone "not break the constitution"?

[Realpra]

Noun
tax (countable and uncountable; plural taxes)
Money paid to the government other than for transaction-specific goods and services.
-wiktionary

So in other words if you have a government with police/military authority and you are paying something to them - that something is a tax.

Non-specific is the key here where most "fees" pay for "bank", "health insurance" or similar.

However you can call it a fee if you want; not really the point here.

I think my idea would improve governments by making it at least harder for them to break the constitution.

Why would anyone "not break the constitution"?

1. Every citizen runs a client, similar in ways to the BTC client.
2. That client helps maintain a distributed DB (blockchain) over who should get taxes.
3. Different client users might have different powers as agreed upon with that protocol.
4. "Power" here would be the ability to change a government divisions proportional income from of the total tax income.
5. Such power holders could be "judges" or "presidents" that you vote on via YOUR client.
6. Any breach of protocol would be impossible just like with BTC - you would simply be creating a fork.
7. The DB tells your client that say "police" should get 10% of the budget.
8. Your client is used to pay the tax according to this public data.
9. If you pay 11% or 9% to the police it is not accepted and your public key = person number will not have a tax registered.

So in a system like that how can a president stay in power after being voted out?

Sure he could continue CALLING himself president, but all the flowing tax revenue would now flow to the new guy who would consequently come to hold power even if the old guy resisted a while.

Thus protocol/constitution is unbreakable.
EDIT: Or at least you would have to force a majority of the country to change habits etc. to do it.

I have written some 80 pages on this idea/subject already if you want a copy.

[hazek]

EDIT: Or at least you would have to force a majority of the country to change habits etc. to do it.

Precisely, that's why I asked

Why would anyone "not break the constitution"?

and not

How would anyone "not break the constitution"?

[Realpra]

EDIT: Or at least you would have to force a majority of the country to change habits etc. to do it.

Precisely, that's why I asked

Why would anyone "not break the constitution"?

and not

How would anyone "not break the constitution"?

Try to imagine Obama or another president actually in public saying: "Lets change that whole constitution thingie in my favor".
Even with all his money from the banks and media propaganda that would be an near impossible political fight.

The other road would be to change the way taxes are collected to a more normal way, however this would entail creating a completely new division of government and then convincing people that they should stop using their constitutional protocol.

Slightly easier, but still pretty hard.

Keep in mind that the system doesn't start out corrupted (or it wouldn't live a day) so a leader or bribe happy bank would have to:
1. Take control over one or multiple government instances; military, police, judges AND the leader.
2. Take control of the media.
3. Push the populace to abandon the constitution.
4. They would now control the government, but as BTC are used they still can't print money so the payback is limited/political consequences to taking from the taxes as it's more noticeable than inflation.
5. They convince people to abandon BTC for something they can print.

Until you do ALL FIVE steps you will see almost nothing in return on your investment - zilch.
What are these steps with the US?
1. Buy pres.
2. Buy media.
3. Buy/infiltrate FED board.
4. Done.

You also get payoff at step 1 instead of step 4. Notice the difference?

So yes it's VERY much a question of "how to do it practically", not why. You "could" also convince the majority of BTC users to switch to my alt chain that gives me 10% of all fees - but practically that would never effing happen.

Keep in mind it took the US about 200 years to get corrupted from start to finish, so with my protocol and BTC for national currency you could have a very long lasting stable wealthy society.

[hazek]

So you're simply going to stick your head in the sand and refuse to examine the more important question of why people shouldn't break the Constitution? Makes sense since there's no good reason not to..

Keep in mind it took the US about 200 years to get corrupted from start to finish, so with my protocol and BTC for national currency you could have a very long lasting stable wealthy society.

Wrong, it happened a hell of a lot sooner then that, more like 20 years or so after the war with Britain when the SCOTUS started issuing various opinions reinforcing the role of the federal government over state sovereignty.


Look, this is what I think you don't understand:

The constitution is just 4 pieces of paper, basically a PR statement of a small gang of people making rules for everyone else and enforcing them through the use of violence. It's not a contract, no one signed it and even if they did last I checked contract can't be transferred to the signatory's posterity so why on Earth would anyone follow the constitution when it so much more lucrative not to? Do you know of a single case where it's more than obvious they didn't follow the constitution and they faced any ANY negative repercussions at all?

What you are asking for is for human beings to act against their human nature by following a document they have no actual obligations to follow while forgoing huge rewards for the exact opposite actions, news flash, it's not going to happen, like ever.

It's simple really, the constitution either gave you the government that you have today or it was unable to prevent it, in either case it's unfit to fulfill it's intended role. Wake up already!


All there is is you and your freedom and if YOU aren't going to protect yourself and your freedom, no one will. Instead of trying to improve a dying idea, how about you instead examine what services does the government provide and try and offer those at a lower price and with a higher quality as a private business with a voluntary customer base. Because that's where the real solutions lies, no where else.

[Realpra]

I think you are confusing "THE American constitution" with "A future software protocol constitution".

There is no why, of course people try to exert their influence always! My solution makes the "how" much more difficult.

Given that you JUST made fun of the idea of 4 pieces of paper holding leaders responsible I find it weird you give no thought to software based alternatives.

Of course telling people on forums to "wake up" will surely stop the corrupt leadership, your solution is so brilliant.


As for when the US got corrupted I would say that since they helped defeat Hitler in the 40ies and went to the moon in 69/70ies things were holding up rather well until at least then.

[hazek]

I think you are confusing "THE American constitution" with "A future software protocol constitution".

There is no why, of course people try to exert their influence always! My solution makes the "how" much more difficult.

Given that you JUST made fun of the idea of 4 pieces of paper holding leaders responsible I find it weird you give no thought to software based alternatives.

Of course telling people on forums to "wake up" will surely stop the corrupt leadership, your solution is so brilliant.

Fuck the curse of knowledge is so damn frustrating.. Look, here's where your problem is. You assume, wrongly, that some form of government, which means a small group of people making rules and enforcing those rules through violence, is or can be a solution at all the problems a government is suppose to solve and I'm telling you it's not and it can't be. Because no matter how well intentioned this group is picked in the begging or how well their PR statements is written there is absolutely nothing to prevent this group from going corrupt and abuse their power. Nothing. Not a constitution, not a contract, not even a peer to peer protocol. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. As long as you have centralized power the auctions will always follow and the power will get bought and abused.

The use of violence to force people to pay for a service they don't want is not a solution, violence can't ever be a solution. No matter how you change the administering of this violence, it doesn't change this fact. The only valid solution is a voluntary one. Opening the market up and letting businesses compete for providing the services we'd like from a government on a voluntary basis.

As for when the US got corrupted I would say that since they helped defeat Hitler in the 40ies and went to the moon in 69/70ies things were holding up rather well until at least then.

Well this just shows me how little you really know if you thought everything was still gravy back then.

[Realpra]

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Yes what great secret knowledge you hold there.

If thats your bone then use the algorithm I thought up to write a protocol for a government with hundreds of leaders making small decisions and where they are up for re-election every damn hour.

Its possible.

Opening the market up and letting businesses compete for providing the services we'd like from a government on a voluntary basis.

Why would your "military providing company" not take control and just impose the taxes it wanted?

At least with my protocol idea in that scenario you would have an instantly funded and organized resistance movement.

As for when the US got corrupted I would say that since they helped defeat Hitler in the 40ies and went to the moon in 69/70ies things were holding up rather well until at least then.

Well this just shows me how little you really know if you thought everything was still gravy back then.
[/quote]
I didn't say "gravy". You are making strawman arguments.

But the country was not collapsing in on itself like it is now. China will likely be the biggest economy over the US in few years and in real terms probably is now.

Every US politician is competing to sell out their country.

Whatever you thought of 70ies and back you have to admit things were not as bad as THAT.

[hazek]

Opening the market up and letting businesses compete for providing the services we'd like from a government on a voluntary basis.

Why would your "military providing company" not take control and just impose the taxes it wanted?

Before I sign up with them, they'd have to convince me they wouldn't. I'm sorry but I can't even begin to imagine in what ways they might do that because obviously I'm not as smart as the market is, but rest assured they'd have to provide some pretty big fking guarantees they aren't going to turn on me.

But rest assured it is possible, just like it's possible to have a web of trust market place between pseudononymous people on the internet using bitcoins.

[hazek]

At least with my protocol idea in that scenario you would have an instantly funded and organized resistance movement.

What part of using violence to enforce rules is not a solution do you not understand?

As for when the US got corrupted I would say that since they helped defeat Hitler in the 40ies and went to the moon in 69/70ies things were holding up rather well until at least then.

Well this just shows me how little you really know if you thought everything was still gravy back then.

I didn't say "gravy". You are making strawman arguments.

But the country was not collapsing in on itself like it is now. China will likely be the biggest economy over the US in few years and in real terms probably is now.

Every US politician is competing to sell out their country.

Whatever you thought of 70ies and back you have to admit things were not as bad as THAT.

I don't give a fk about the economy. I was speaking in terms of FREEDOM. (Do you even know what true FREEDOM is or feels like?) In terms of freedom pre WW2 was getting shittier and shittier by the minute, not to mention once the war started. First UNDER THREAT OF VIOLENCE ALL AMERICANS GOT ROBBED OF THEIR REAL MONEY - GOLD. Then once the war started, if you remember, some 110k japanese Americans got their rights terminated OVER NIGHT just because of where their parents were born and hauled into concentration camps. And these are just the two most important examples. Not to mention all the shit they did pretending they're trying to solve the great depression.

Of course it didn't happen to you and you have no clue about history so all you can see is a few statistical numbers like GDP or what stuff was made available to be bought in stores. How severely ignorant of you.

[Realpra]

At least with my protocol idea in that scenario you would have an instantly funded and organized resistance movement.

What part of using violence to enforce rules is not a solution do you not understand?

Apparently the same parts as you since you did not contend that a military company would be needed.

Any military = violence. Imagining that you will never ever need to stand against bad guys is childish and has not EVER happened in the history of the WORLD.

Even chimps fight wars, its nature. Just try to minimize it, don't kid yourself you can ignore it.

Before I sign up with them...

Who cares? The world is full of fools, what do you do against all the others who join them for the sweet tax paid paycheck or the adrenalin rush of being a soldier?

You criticize my solution, while admitting provide zero alternative while trying to push kiddy cartoon logic.

Sure I would love peace and I believe there are rational nice people in the world with whom that might work - but I also know that there are guys who get rape-boners when they see an unprotected plot of land.

I don't give a fk about the economy. I was speaking in terms of FREEDOM.

First of all I know about the gold confiscation and the imprisonment of us japs. I also know the allies bombed civilians on purpose to slow nazi production under the guise of "de-housing".

All that shit is still better than Hitler who to their defense they were fighting.

I don't get why you are attacking my person and my knowledge, pretending you are so much more knowledgeable. Most of the "great wisdoms" you have cared to share are pretty darn well known to anyone who ever watched 10 min. of a BBC documentary.

Just because I don't mention something in my argument doesn't mean I don't know it or didn't account for it. And as for what I know I know freedom because I will accept nothing else - its a state of mind and a willingness to kick back once the iron bootheel comes down.

As for freedom vs. economy I believe the two are linked:
1. You will not have a good economy if you are oppressing your people to extreme degree. Even China had to open up.
2. More resources = more mouths fed. Dying "free" on the street isn't so great either.

Sure its not perfect, but its something.

Up until now minorities were also getting more and more rights in America, but now a reverse trend is starting to appear with excessive and increasing police brutality against blacks.

If the US was truly deeply corrupt all the way back in the 40ies or before as you claim then minority rights and the economy would not have been improving in many ways until maybe the 80/90ies.

Imperfection/non-utopia does NOT equal fascist dictator state.


Anyway unless you have something about the actual practicalities of my idea I don't want to argue with you anymore - I get that you are not interested.

[Elwar]

I was actually coming on here to get some coding advice to get started on something very similar.

My plan, however, was to start small. Instead of looking at how a government would work, look to something like a club.

Members pay dues, they vote on things and money flows to one thing or another. This is all done voluntarily and no force is used.

If such a thing can be done at the small level, it can eventually be ramped up to a small local "government". Imagine a community that already has some government services but would like to better manage their resources. The community can take donations and start improving their community through the use of this organizational software. They may raise enough money to hire a private fire company that serves the members of their club/community. Same with detectives, police, schooling, etc. It does not necessarily need to replace the current government but it may reach the point where enough people in the community are covered by the voluntary government that they vote in the majority to end the services that they are already receiving.

I like your implementation of using a blockchain to hold the treasury. My idea was to have everyone hold their dues/fees in a single wallet and vote by moving their funding to the treasury, if the vote does not pass, the funds are returned. Each organization would be able to determine the voting structure and the dues and what happens if dues are not paid.

Would love to see your write up, my approach was going to require a centralized location for holding the funds which would require a lot of trust.

[Vitalik Buterin]

Can we please not degrade every thread on innovative social organization into people yelling at each other about violence and coercion? I understand the moral concerns, but I would really like to see interesting discussions on how we can implement a society that can overcome issues such as tragedy of the commons and public goods problems without creating a centralized hierarchy of power. There are lots of political systems that can exist even within a constraint of non-coercion; both a communist no-private-property system and an ultra-neoliberal regime of privatizing every last square centimeter of nature and human creation are technically compatible with the concept - this insight is what ideas like the Political Compass are ultimately all about.

I personally find the idea of running elements of basic infrastructure on cryptographic protocols quite ingenious; it removes both private power and government power and leaves us with a simple set of rules that anybody can play by to participate in the network.

[Realpra]

I was actually coming on here to get some coding advice to get started on something very similar.

My plan, however, was to start small. Instead of looking at how a government would work, look to something like a club.

I was thinking community or my family, but yeah right with you.

Would love to see your write up, my approach was going to require a centralized location for holding the funds which would require a lot of trust.

My ideas where the same on that front, then it finally hit me that the clients don't need to hold, only distribute funds as per the social contract.

I would be very interested in working with you, even if you can't code, however I think we will need to be 3 minimum.

I am planning to program a BTC smartcard if possible as my next project to raise some funds, but a lot of the work overlaps.

If more show interest in working on this I might temporarily drop one project in favor of another.

Can we please not degrade every thread on innovative social organization into people yelling at each other about violence and coercion?

I think Hazek and I silently agreed to disagree.

I personally find the idea of running elements of basic infrastructure on cryptographic protocols quite ingenious; it removes both private power and government power and leaves us with a simple set of rules that anybody can play by to participate in the network.

You guys sound like I made clone/fake accounts...

I like the compass, I'm a "leftwing libertarian". Not sure that's possible, I call myself a positivist-technocrat which is likely a progressive in the US.