Topic: Nemesis - the open source intellectual property system - page 2. (Read 10662 times)

Some people have come to believe that owning bitcoins is the same as owning "a piece of the internet."  Don't fall victim to this propaganda.  Bitcoin is M1 pure currency.  The service provided by Bitcoin is a transaction system of credits, that is all.  There are a few neat features but it is fundamentally an unbacked currency.  Bitcoin is pure currency while Nemesis is a cipher-space hosting corporation.  

Nemesis is backed by information, and the demand for viewing that information.  While Bitcoin may not be traditionally fiat because the amount of coins in the original Bitcoin system is limited, there is nothing preventing people from printing as many Bitcoin systems as they want.  The only non fiat part of Bitcoin is the mining network.  Nemesis retains these non fiat aspects and adds non fiat information.  Yes, the information can be infinitely reproduced, but the generation of new, useful information is rooted in the logic and creativity of mankind.  If the logic and creativity of mankind were infinite we wouldn't be humans.  

I don't want to dog Bitcoin.  I respect the developers and the breakthroughs of Satoshi.  It has done a great job paving the way of the future.  They built a great infrastructure that Nemesis will utilize too (wallets, anonymity, demand, lots of people understanding the abstract concept, mining networks).  

I've made a solution to this problem using proof of storage.  It isn't perfect yet because the algorithm needs to be formalized and refined to remove redundant steps.  Basically, I split the mining networks into two networks: one to do proof of work and prevent double spending and another to do proof of storage and handle the large amounts of data and information.  

I will repost the proof of storage concept in a few days/weeks.  basically, when the time is right.  

The official Bitcoin tree is on github.com

The blockchain has been used before to store little amount of information (like some leaked data - wikileaks data). But of course storing data on the blockchain bloats it to an undesired extent (since we are talking about BIG amounts of data here ...) this will be your hardest problem to solve. Anonymity is another beast, but you can always relay on third party networks like TOR (The Onion Router).

The result of too much acid?

I've been considering what you are saying, I was being a little impulsive when I said I was going to the Valley.  I was drawn to Silicon because I think I could find people with the CS skills to help, people who have experience, and people with the desire to bring a new concept to life.  Also, it would be easier to explain to my parents why I'm putting my degree on hold.  I'm reconsidering.  I would prefer to get this project made over the net.  

The internet is also a good place to find people with CS skills.  I'm serious about making Nemesis.  Do you want to help?  We need programmers, miners for a launch network, people with experience streamlining algorithms, encryption experts, etc.  I foresee the languages used as C++, Ruby, and some Python.  Remaining anonymous will be your decision and responsibility.  I would recommend remaining anonymous.  Someone may write a virus to launch.  I have not retained my anonymity through this process, but would recommend staying anonymous.  

From my understanding, Bitcoin is limited to a M1 pure currency because adding information to the block chain increased the amount of memory required to perform the proof of work.  This assumption needs to be proved.  I have not read Bitcoin's source code yet, if someone can link it here that would be awesome.  One decision that will need to be made is whether or not Nemesis should actively mask its users IP addresses.  I think this has a current technological limit because anonymizing software typically slows down the rate of data transfer.  If one wants to upload trade secrets or copyrighted material anonymously, one could potentially use a public library.  

Helpful Skills

• C++
• Ruby
• Python
• Java
• Algorithms
• Encryption
• Mathematics
• Game Theory
• Experience establishing anonymizing networks and software
• Asic Miners
• Storage Miners
• Creativity and Logic
• Anonymity

Compensation

• everyone will be compensated for their submissions
• this is one of the basic premises of Nemesis
• when you submit information (programs) to Nemesis, you will receive coins specific to your submission
• these coins will be valued via supply and demand by the free market and an equilibrium of the proof of storage network the same way bitcoin prices are at equilibrium with its proof of work network (miners)
• supply of coins specific to your submission is limited, although someone can resubmit your submission, they cannot get the coins for the original submission
• the more valuable the market considers your work, the more your coins will be worth

Turning Your Submission into Nemesis' Source Code

• Source code will be elected by "votes"
• voting will not follow an election cycle, they will be static and constant votes
• the owner of the coins for a submission will receive one vote per coin
• the source code with the most outstanding votes is elected as the source code
• by having a vote in Nemesis, you are effectively a voting "Nemesis board member"

I can also imagine this future, but to be honest, Silicon Valley was a nice place at the eighties, when the most disruptive technologies (now obsolete) where being created there.
I don't know if you are looking for investment or what, but considering your views, SV is too mainstream IMHO, you will have to go more underground.
Anyway, I really like your idea.

thank you.

If you like change, free markets, and adequate compensation of the fittest then Nemesis is your friend.  Regulation of business will be performed by algorithms, math, and the people, rather than government.  Enforcement of Anti-trust law on Nemesis by the Feds will be *intractable*, but there should be ample competition stemming from the open source movement.  I see a future where most communities own a 3D printer.  Rather than going to Wal-Mart, people will access designs for chairs, tables, cutlery, plates, and guns through Nemesis and print their own.  Industry will be transformed, but not destroyed.  

Silicon Valley ?
Not a nice place for such a disruptive concept IMHO.

Good luck anyway

Thank you for the lead.  I believe in two types of inherent value: networked people and networked information.  The internet does both of these.  You are absolutely right.  I am looking into doing exactly what you suggested.  


Update: I looked into this and I don't think it will work well.  Bitcoin is too limited when it comes to storing information.  Bitcoin will not take the form of a unified information system.  At best it will have a few information submissions backed by a Mastercoin/altcoin.  Also, I am unhappy with how changes are made to bitcoin.  One reason why it won't work well is because anybody who submits an invention and gets to make their own rules, will probably give oneself all coins associated with the invention, rather than a set amount and allowing the market to make an equilibrium on the coins via POS

vintagetrex - I haven't been able to digest all that you're saying but I think you need to look at how to build this system on top of the existing blockchain, either with MasterCoin or something similar.

We had a vision for a crypto anarchist democratic republic very different from bitcoin.  The concept subverts the USPTO and the Federal Reserve in a new way.  There was lots of work needing to be done before this concept would come to life, including an implementable proof of storage crypto system.  We recently made great headway on this problem.  

The intellectual producing class increases the wealth of humanity by removing obstacles that once existed as an inefficiency in the economy.  Scientists, innovators, and content creators, produce new wealth for society by using their brains to produce new information that has value to people.  Unfortunately, monetary compensation does not mirror wealth creation.  

Monetary compensation for this type of wealth creation is regulated by the USPTO and the Federal Reserve.  Legislation for the USPTO and the Fed are created by a coalition of voters and corporate lobbyists.  These groups attempt to divert monetary compensation from producers to themselves for their own self interest.  There is a symbiotic relationship between corporations and the middle class: the middle class votes along with corporate lobbyists in exchange for higher paying jobs and more jobs, which corporations can afford by rerouting monetary compensation from wealth producers to themselves.  Both the middle class and corporate America are dependent on this system.  They have a parasitic relationship with the producing class.  

The needs of this coalition grow over time, becoming more dependent on money diverted from producers.  Intellectual Property laws are on a one way path, squeezing money from individual producers while inflating monetary compensation for production inside large organizations.  
...



I know you're out there. I can feel you now. I know that you're afraid. You're afraid of us. You're afraid of change. I don't know the future. I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how it's going to begin. I'm going to hang up this phone, and then I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see. I'm going to show them a world without you. A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries; a world where anything is possible. Where we go from there is a choice I leave to you.

I like the idea of needing a percentage of coins to open another secret file.  That would be awesome because the file could contain a key to decrypt a company wallet or something.  This can already be done using some type of encryption where the key is broken up into pieces and distributed.  A certain percentage of the keys is needed to decrypt the wallet.  (the name I can't remember)

example

A company's encrypted wallet file is broadcast;
the key to decrypt is in a hidden file in the ledger, which requires >x% ownership of the claim specific currency to see

I don't believe this should be the model for information, but it is a good model for how a company can use a submission as company stock, effectively taking their company public.  I would include many possibilities in Nemesis for how a submission can be made (private, public, and a mix of both which would require a certain percentage of outstanding shares/currency to see the file).  Of course the producer of information should be offered a number of options for disclosure.  

EV for a person who could innovate = (chance you innovate) * (monetary value of innovation) * (1 - chance your innovation is stolen)

One of the flaws in today's society that I want to attack is the privatization of information that belongs in the public domain.  Right now there are billions of dollars in trade secrets that are forcibly privatized and censored from the public.  This information needs to be public so that the public may be informed and able to use the information to innovate.  

WikiLeaks did a tremendous job of revealing what is behind this modern iron curtain.  Julian Assange's statement, "this is not the liberal democracy we were promised, this is an encroaching, privatized censorship regime" is accurate.  One thing that organization did well was create a hit list for the world's most wanted confidential government documents.  However, without a credit system, WikiLeak's hit list was little more than a list.  They could not credit a person with the disclosure, or provide financial incentive for that to take place.  Nemesis has the ability to do this.  If the public wants information, and individuals are willing to chip in tiny amounts for it, a real hit list with real bounties will occur on confidential corporate and government documents; while maintaing anonymity for the disclosing party.  

The USPTO allows corporations to file patents now without listing an inventor.  Who should be credited for some of these inventions?  An unpaid intern as in my case?  An underpaid employee?  An employee's family member?  If corporations can get away with anonymous inventors so can the public.  Let the public anonymously disclose whatever information they like and allow them to be compensated accordingly at the same time.  

This is one approach.  I think it is close to what I am proposing, but maybe not quite feasible with Bitcoin's block chain, because I've heard there are large fees for storing things in the blockchain.  

Technical note: storing stuff in bitcoin's block chain would likely add more burden to the system and I doubt the fact that there is data hidden in the block chain with no utility to anybody else because it is encrypted will increase the overall value of bitcoin's market cap.  

I like how you are thinking.  For example: store your credentials as a movie maker, store a trailer for your upcoming film, sell the code/data for your hit film to the highest bidder.  This is a fundamentally closed information system.  

If a person buys the invention, he/she will likely keep the information undisclosed to prevent competition from making his new product, which is completely within his/her rights.  Lets assume inventor1 and buyer1 have an agreement that inventor1 will not well sell or give away his invention.  This means another inventor cannot come along and improve on the design without inventing the initial invention or owning the invention.  Furthermore, there is incentive for a second inventor (inventor2) to invent THE SAME THING and sell the same invention through a completely different transaction to the same or a different buyer (a separate inventor spends his mental capacity reinventing the technology to sell it, after all the invention has never been publicly disclosed).  This is basically a complete waste of society's mental resources which are finite.  (two investments of brain power, one invention)  That second inventor could have used his/her brain power to invent something completely novel.  

I am striving for an open information system, like YouTube, but you get tradable credits for your submissions.  Think back on the arguments for why bitcoin was valuable before people recognized it as valuable (8 months ago or more).  One of the arguments was that it was more efficient/cheaper than other electronic payment systems, and as a result, the people who used bitcoin had more money to spend on things by saving from using bitcoin, so they naturally had more money to reinvest into BTC.  That's how I want this economy to get its value, through increased efficiency.  This increased efficiency was often pennies or even fractions of pennies per transaction.  Keep in mind it is over $8000 to file a utility patent with the USPTO once, patents are often filed multiple times before being awarded, and each patent defense lawsuit can cost both sides millions of dollars in attorney fees.  Nemesis will eliminate these inefficiencies.  

You cannot create monetary value out of thin air.  An argument for the value behind the USD is that it must be used to pay taxes.  It must also be used to pay fees to the USPTO, which is essentially a tax.  Citizens of the internet can take this value from government money for their own currency. 

The first message could be a very small fee, it would could be the proof, maybe a whitepaper, video, your own credentials, along with the addresses and price for the other sections of the invention.

As you get deeper into the invention the price goes up, until the final piece which at that point the whole thing can be created.

If you were doing this with bitcoin, the first message would be a video of a working QT, and the whitepaper, priced at a few pennies. The last message would be main.cpp, priced at thousands of dollars.  The other modules would be in there, each at a little bit higher price. Yes at some point someone could get btc to work with their own main.cpp.

Yes this can be done and isn't a bad idea although it isn't perfect.  My own philosophy is to oppose this format for a few reasons:  How can the buyer know the invention is valuable without seeing it? (short answer: it can't be done)  This would mean the seller would have to rely on a reputation system to sell his/her inventions at a decent price, with the price being only based on the quality of previous inventions sold.  In my opinion, invention is one of the most egalitarian processes of our society, so relying on a purely hierarchical method of valuation (the reputation system) isn't ideal. 

What you propose isn't far off from how many VC's operate today.  They look for people with a reputation and history of business success and innovative ideas.  This makes it almost impossible for people to have success with their first innovation no matter how good it is.  Also, if you only invented one thing ever, and it happened to be the greatest invention of all time, you certainly wouldn't be compensated accordingly.  Nobody is going to shell out 100 BTC to some "random" claiming to have reinvented the wheel. 

Agreed it may not work as you stated here. I was more or less thinking of putting plans for some invention out there as an encrypted message, imbedded into the blockchain.

You could target them to someone specific, or put them out there for general consumption. For instance, lets say I have a new invention for a fuel cell that runs a laptop for 1000 hours at a time.

I would break the plans out into 10 parts, and then put them into the block chain encrypted. Each part of the whole plan would be priced at higher ask, with the first message at 1 btc. Then the final one at 100, or whatever.  If someone wanted to pay me the full price for all parts and then make them freely available, so what? I already got my ask.

cool story bro