×
Grow Open Source Bounties Hackathons Grants Codefund Quests Kudos
Back to Grants

Crypto to Everyone in the World (UBI)


CLR MATCH ROUND 5

0 DAI

FINAL AMOUNT

ROUND 5

5 DAI
1 contributors

Your contribution goes a long way!

1 DAI contribution

+ 0 DAI match

10 DAI contribution

+ 0 DAI match

100 DAI contribution

+ 0 DAI match

1,000 DAI contribution

+ 0 DAI match

Next update : 1 month, 3 weeks ago | Last updated : 1 month, 3 weeks ago

Description

{"ops":[{"insert":"I want to give crypto to everybody in the world. (It's called UBI, universal basic income, but crypto UBI is better than to give everybody dollars and them cease to work, see below).\n\nThis project is to be implemented as a \"subproject\" of "},{"attributes":{"link":"https://github.com/vporton/courts/wiki"},"insert":"Crypto Reward Courts"},{"insert":". We need courts for UBI to \"judge\" who signs for the UBI. Advanced courts system is necessary to ensure we judge rightly that nobody can sign twice. If a court fails, thanks to Crypto Reward Courts the community can use another court.\n\nThe funding is necessary to develop software, setup the server, and to pay for an online identification service (to ensure a person can't sign for UBI twice).\n\n--\n\nLet every human receive 1 coin of crypto for example every 0:00 of the night every day.\n\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Why to do it?"},{"insert":"\nFirst, we don’t want people to die of hunger or cold. So everybody should have some money. It is free for us to give him crypto, but it may be the only source of life for him.\nHowever, monetary rent has deficiencies: Many people would stop work (or choose a hobby instead of a real job) if had free money. But we are not going to give them real money. We instead want to give them special money which people would use to buy "},{"attributes":{"link":"https://crypto4ngo.org/blog/2019/09/goods-vs-rights-and-business-vs-nonprofit/"},"insert":"rights rather than goods"},{"insert":". They yet are supposed to work to get real money to buy goods. This means we don’t suppose one would buy a car for our crypto (for this money exists). We suppose he would buy access to the Internet (= access to life), bread if deficit in this area, medical insurance for possible cancer, legal help of professional lawyers (does he have any rights otherwise?), connection to venture investors if he wants to start a business from zero, psychologist help against suicide, children in a school, maybe even higher education, to receive a credit card, … rights in short.\nI suppose so because I suppose these who will be willing to accept our crypto as a mean of payment will be at least a little socially responsive and sell rights for it if they can’t provide them completely for free. Yes, certainly it could be exchanged for regular money for which people buy goods, but I don’t expect this sum to be big. Maybe just not to die of hunger, what could be considered more a right than a good. This is a new kind of money, a money for buying human rights. Not everybody posses human rights now, it’s better to sell it to them than to leave them without rights as now.\n\nOrganizations get the opportunity to provide “human” services to the population, in addition to the existing options for free and paid services, services for a person based on the fact that he is a person and has human rights. Organizations will no longer have to choose from two extreme options: to work for free or to rip off money for exercising the rights and opportunities that every person should have, not just the rich. In particular, it will help develop various forms of charity, but also business.\nWe’d give crypto to every person in the world, but we’d at least give crypto to every citizen of your country.\n\nWe need some things to discuss (please comment below):\nGive money once per day or continually every second? Once per day would be somehow easier to calculate for humans."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Start giving money: from the point of signing up at our system? from the moment of birth retrospectively? or only from adulthood? or even vary the amount dependently on the age?"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"To implement it technically we miss one thing (I can do the rest, as "},{"attributes":{"link":"https://victorporton.com"},"insert":"I am a programmer"},{"insert":"): We need something to provide our system with a set of electronic identifiers of living person together with their dates of birth and also notify our system when a person dies to stop give him or her crypto. The system could calculate the current amount of coins per day and notify Ethereum smart contract than I could write.\n\nGoods vs Rights and Business vs Nonprofit"},{"attributes":{"header":1},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"To be able to analyze complex things of the real world, we need to split all resources of our civilization into two categories: goods and rights.\nCharacteristics of goods:\n\nGoods cost money to produce every item."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Goods can be owned by a business, usually in potentially unlimited quantities."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Goods can be moved between persons and/or organizations."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Characteristics of rights:\nRights should belong to everybody."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Rights are not a part of the industrial economy."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Rights are often tied to an individual human or an individual organization and are often not transferable."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"It is hard to impossible or impractical to sell rights."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"There is no exact border between goods and rights: Is bread a good or right? It costs money to produce, it can be owned by a business in unlimited quantities, it is a part of the industry (including agriculture), but it should belong to everybody.\n\nMy main claim: Rights should be free!\n"},{"attributes":{"link":"https://no-barrier.org/2019/05/03/the-cost-of-ngo-and-business-registration-should-be-set-to-zero/"},"insert":"In this article I profoundly prove that to open a business or nonprofit, defend a right in a court, receive an ID card, opening a bank account, etc. should be free (exactly $0)."},{"insert":"\nThese things are to be counted rights, not goods. It is a middle-age madness when a state takes money to open a business or to provide an ID card.\nGoods are usually produced and sold by a business. Business is relatively good in producing goods. We learned that market economy is the best known method to produce goods, because as we know socialism mostly failed.\nBut it is madness when rights are trusted to a business to be sold for money. It is even a greater madness if a state sells rights for money, as if it would not have income tax and value added tax. It is like a billionaire stealing a cent from a beggar (that writes a free software for his business) because he wants to make his business more effective.\nEven businesses understand they need to provide free services or free trials to be more effective. The state authorities need psychiatrists: they sell rights for money.\n\nWhy rights are so important? Because they are like 1000 times more effective than goods today. The number 1000 times is estimated from expenses and advantages of a particular project, the Linux project:\n"},{"attributes":{"link":"https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press-release/2008/10/linux-foundation-publishes-study-estimating-the-value-of-linux/"},"insert":"In 2008 the value of developing a Linux distribution was worth $10.8 billion."},{"insert":" But "},{"attributes":{"link":"https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-enterprise-linux-impact-10-trillion-global-business-revenues-2019"},"insert":"only Red Hat Enterprise Linux to Impact $10 Trillion of Global Business Revenues in 2019"},{"insert":". Obviously Linux impact is many tens trillions dollars.\nWe see about 1000 fold or much more impact of a nonprofit project. It is partly because Linux is more like a right than a good, and yes, because it is free.\nWe see here an example of a right partly developed by a nonprofit (Linux Foundation). Here we switch to the next topic: goods are associated with business, rights are associated with state and nonprofit.\nAs I said, business is relatively good (I mean better than socialism) in producing goods. Business sometimes produces rights (often bearing heavy burden of expenses to produce them with only a little or no benefit back for the company). But the natural order of things is when rights are produced by nonprofit (or by state, which is somehow like a big nonprofit concerning its citizens).\nIf the natural order breaks and rights are not produced or distributed for free, we have such problems as:\n\nPeople in poverty."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Economic recession or stagnation."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Unjust world."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Need to choose to produce a good/right or to distribute it. It is often not enough to money/time/resources to do both."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Failed important projects."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Other."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Scientists do not receive proper reward for the work they do. Journalists live mostly on ads, as if their work would be so unimportant to deliver them only a little share of their job benefits. Free software authors are sometimes poor and have no money to advertise their products. Etc. This is partly from not understanding by the establishment the difference between goods and rights, they tend to think that rights are also a part of market economy and to be sold for money or just ignored if they can’t be sold, what is very wrong.\nThe more world economy and technology develops, the more important rights become (for example, because software needs to be a free right rather than a good to be technically effective). Capitalism with its focus on goods is a too ancient system now. We need an economy that more and more focuses on rights. It is partly because now people have more goods than in the past and so goods loses their importance.\nAs rights become more important, nonprofits that exist to produce them (yes, the very purpose of nonprofits is to produce and distribute rights) become more important, too.\n\nThe next thing to discuss is human rights. Every human should really have rights. We all know that just to distribute everything for free does not work (especially because people are greedy). But to sell rights for money is a big no. Both variants don’t work. What to do? We should distribute some rights (e.g. the right to open a bank account or the right to install an operating system such as Linux for free), we should sell some rights for crypto rather than for money.\nThe idea is simple: Give every person 1 coin of some specifically created crypto every 0:00 every day. (Need to decide if from the moment of his or her signup in the system or from the moment of the setup of the system or from the moment of his or her birth, etc. I do not know the best way to set the moment this stream of crypto starts to flow.) Then such rights as to have some bread or to be heard in media could be sold for this free crypto rather than to be given for free or to be sold for money. It is a golden middle, better than both extremes to give everyone free money or free goods or to force everybody to pay for rights.\n\nThe most troublesome thing to set this system is to check that one human person does not signup more than once. To do this one needs to set a system to check his personal ID reliably. We need money to do this checking in some way.\n\nMedia coverage of a person’s ideas should be partly considered a right. It is very bad if a porn star has an advantage over a mathematician in media coverage. It is bad when somebody becomes a moral teacher because he stole more money than others to cover his media expenses. Everybody should have the right not only to say but to be heard. The human crypto could be a partial solution of this problem: We should sell media coverage or ads for this crypto as well, not only for money.\n"}]}

Activity Feed