diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | 2022/talks/maint.md | 13 |
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/2022/talks/maint.md b/2022/talks/maint.md index f7f4571d..ee826566 100644 --- a/2022/talks/maint.md +++ b/2022/talks/maint.md @@ -134,8 +134,11 @@ In response to this, some may say, well then we won't get credit for being "trul Q: URL of the project? A: + - The founding documents for the prototype economic system are at https://github.com/drym-org/foundation + - The accounting system which you can use in your projects (contains setup instructions) is at https://github.com/drym-org/old-abe + - The research on which this is based is at drym.org ### Extended Q&A @@ -147,7 +150,9 @@ The rest of these questions will be categorized under "ABE Now" -- relating to t Q: How is this different from splitting donations to my project with my partners? A: It's like that, but on a grand scale, formalized, and "automated" in the sense that creators are not required to participate in this process. Rather, it is a service provided to members of the community by members of the community. In addition, it also: + 1. Recognizes antecedents in both directions. It's not just sharing proceeds from your project with your buddies, but also sharing with creators whose works and ideas are reflected in yours. And likewise, it's others sharing proceeds from their projects with you. + 2. Encourages investment. It's easy enough to write a small project with your buddies, but when you have big dreams, you need big resources. If you are doing a startup in today's system, you divide "ownership" shares with your buddies and also with investors with deep pockets who can help you scale your project up to provide the maximum value. It's the same in ABE, except that anyone can be an investor simply by paying money to the project. This allows you to scale up your project by the support of ordinary mortals and not only "angels." It also means that every project will scale up to the right extent -- not too much and not too little -- because there are no incentives to wring value out of projects when there are more efficient ways to get the same amount value -- there are no barriers to becoming an investor, after all. If your particular horse isn't winning, there is no cost, and indeed an incentive, to pick another horse. Of course, in an ABE system, these horses aren't even competing, and there usually wouldn't even be a clear boundary between them! Q: How is this different from SourceCred and OpenQ? When there are technologies and services like these around, why do we need ABE? @@ -158,19 +163,19 @@ Q: What prevents bad actors from taking over? A: There are many possible kinds of bad actor. -1. Those who use your project and don't pay. +- Those who use your project and don't pay. For now, this is OK and expected. But as the system scales, becoming eligible to _receive_ attributive payments means consenting to participate in ABE wholesale. So the more valuable a project is, the greater is its incentive to participate. -2. Those who will make improvements and sell independently instead of contributing back. +- Those who will make improvements and sell independently instead of contributing back. This person is operating under the assumption that they will be able to generate more money on their own than through others via well-established channels of attribution and use. This assumption is generally unlikely to hold. -3. Those who attempt to set standards that benefit themselves. +- Those who attempt to set standards that benefit themselves. Because standards are set in an anonymized way, such self-serving standards are only likely to prevail on small scales where participants cannot be truly anonymous. At larger scales, this "Dialectical Mirror" ensures that these incentives cancel out ensuring that fair standards win over selfish ones. Additionally, since DIA is applied globally -- that is, the standards agreed upon in special cases are generalized to the maximum extent possible -- self-serving incentives in special cases would be negated by standards decided in the general case. To put this all in simple terms, "desires that benefit only oneself don't scale, desires that benefit all do." I call this the "Good vs Evil" principle. It is a very interesting mathematical property of an ABE system. -4. Those who do not report payments. +- Those who do not report payments. The ABE constitution requires that payments being reported is a collective responsibility -- both payers as well as payees can report it. Payers have an incentive to report it because it counts as an investment. Payees have an incentive to report it because being in non-conformance with the constitution can make the project ineligible to continue receiving attributive payments from the system. |