Fri 2 Feb 2018 6:38PM

Points of failure.

LK Louis Koseda Public Seen by 307

For a decentralized system to be secure it needs no single point of failure. However, there are some significant points of failure in the current system. It is likely the solutions will come by introducing an element of simple economic game theory.
Here I have outlined a few of the problems and have offered a potential solution. We will need to test all of these with a system of peer review within the community. And if possible model the scenarios in real life to see if the outcomes are as expected.

Problems with distribution:

1: People are actively incentivized to distribute more hours than they should are doing.

2: People are not incentivized to distribute the hours that are owed as they are not rewarded in any way for doing so. They might also grow to favor some and not others. For instance, if somebody they have grown over time to dislike is doing too many hours, they may be hesitant to reward them appropriately even if the requests are true and fair.

3: The distributors also have a large incentive to award themselves more than other people as they have a significant control.

Potential solution:

1: Other people stake their hours to allow the new distributor to coin hours, they must also stake their own hours which should be a significant amount. These are burnt if they are exploited.
There should also be an incentive for individuals who are doing voluntary work for the distributor to ensure that the issuer is distributing hours fairly.

2: People should be rewarded hours for actively being a distributor, logging hours properly and formatting the notes and extra data correctly.

3: Nobody should not be able to award themselves or others hours above a certain amount without confirmation from a community member. Hours found to be extraneously distributed lower the value of all hours distributed and burns some of the stakeholders hours.
This could be done by AI So community members are incentivized to check and ensure that the hours distributed are legitimate before the AI realizes through its understanding of its common patterns of exploitation. alternatively, there is an incentive to contribute a few hours a week for an assurance check. To make sure no errors have been filed on the part of the distributor

Problems with companies:
Companies and organizations have an incentive to use the system to benefit themselves, by paying people in hours rather than in wages although they may actually be making or taking a profit.

Potential solution:
Introduce a constitution which outlines the basis of any organizational distribution and use. Perhaps the definition of Social Economy as a starting point. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_economy

Begins to create some criteria we vote against rather than having a completely self-interested voting system. For Example, the Jury vote in favor or against prosecution by the principals set out by law, not on their own affiliation alone.

Decentralised systems are as secure as they are uncontrollable, so by adding too stringent control mechanisms or rules around use we open vulnerabilities and loopholes that may not be anticipated in the creation of them. Eg many people who are not


Louise Delmege Sat 3 Feb 2018 9:32AM

I think you should make a separate thread for each of these before the discussion becomes unfollowable


Louis Koseda Sat 3 Feb 2018 5:57PM

I hear ya. will do