CirclesUBI online 4 days to the global market to bring fanatical is obvious, fanatical will last? Is it an accident? Is there room in the back?
Gavin (my partner) himself has a list of 500 or so sources of information, New contracts on Github, personal blogs from Danox Tech and analysts, forums like ETH and YFI, Twitter, Medium’s thoughtful Kol… He would spend hours each day reading updates from these feeds, looking for new and interesting things and sifting through a few pieces of information worth noting. Since I was also always looking for the next opportunity waiting for blockchain, I was more opportunistic and directly translated from Gavin’s selection results to complete my self-learning.
That’s how we discovered CirclesUBI.
After Gavin saw CirclesUBI in his feed at around 11pm 4 days ago, we all had a moment of light and thought this would mean something, so we decided to join the social experiment immediately and form a domestic “Community zero” for CirclesUBI. Soon, in less than 24 hours, my community had grown like Circles’ server to 1,070 people — roughly the same number as CirclesUBI’s official telegraph group, It was also liked on Twitter by Martin Koppelmann, founder of CirclesUBI.
At present, ChinaDeFi’s CirclesUBI community has almost naturally grown to 1700 people. According to the results of our participation in this experiment, users in CirclesUBI community are “unusually” active compared to 99% of other blockchain project communities. The domestic and foreign media and KOL’s analysis of the pros and cons of CirclesUBI is also noisy.
Judging by market feedback and contract construction, CirclesUBI could really mean something!
Originally I asked Gavin if CirclesUBI was likely to be forked too quickly. After going through their history and their current project, Gavin told me that The project did exactly what Koppelmann said: CirclesUBI discussed, designed, cancelled, tuned, developed, and finally implemented, using The Graph, xDai Network, It is possible for three or four people to spend seven years. Of course, the fork of CirclesUBI will not take this long, but from another point of view, CirclesUBI is not born out of nothing, but has been brewing for a long time, plus a series of influential endorsements from abroad. Instead of choosing to replace it, it is better to think about what should be done based on Circles or as a base environment.
Gavin and I have been discussing the effects of CirclesUBI, UBI and Circles. What should ChinaDeFi do? In fact, “when can we start trading” is one of the most frequently asked questions, both at home and abroad. Our first idea was to provide a place for the owners of Circles to trade.
Existing exchanges cannot support Circles because of the unique nature of Circles, where each user has a separate contract and some contracts are exchanged 1:1. We have initially conceived a scheme of tradable Circles: a community governance contract is built on top of user contracts, exchanges between user contracts and community contracts are formed, and transactions between community tokens are realized through decentralized intermediary accounts.
When Gavin put together the CirclesUBI project, it was discovered that Koppelmann had actually proposed CirclesUBI five years ago, which was actually the same as our current idea, but Koppelmann did not use the original solution in the current version.
Mechanism design for CirclesUBI 5 years ago
On November 13, 2015, Martin Koppelmann posted a description of the earliest Ciricles and mechanics on Github (github.com/koeppelmann…
Circles
Circles will be a currency generated only through Basic Income. In the following description of the system, new currency will be continuously allocated to the accounts participating in the system. The currency in each individual account is separate and distinct, and can only be valued by linking to other accounts and joining other groups. This encourages each user to limit their links to other accounts.
The rules
- Everyone can create a new account.
- Each account consistently generates a certain amount of income each week.
- Revenue is growing at a rate of 2% a year.
- The new account will generate income within 3 months of its creation.
- One month’s income goes to the account holder, and two months ‘income goes to the person who trusts the account as a reward for trust.
- Accounts can trust each other, and after trust, the two accounts can trade tokens 1:1.
- Trust can be revoked on both sides.
- If one account trusts the other, half of the remaining trust reward will be deducted.
- You can create any group.
- Groups can verify accounts as members.
- The group can remove members.
- All team members can exchange their own currency 1:1 for team currency. This transformation is irreversible
Design principle
Circles’ main aim is to create a basic income worldwide.
1. In the decentralized world dimension, basic income is so powerful that no single organization can control it. In particular, there is no centralized institution that can decide who gets a basic income and who doesn’t.
2. Steady programs are needed to support steady growth. If only two equilibria are “nobody” or “everyone”, it is almost impossible to change to a “everyone” equilibrium, especially if there is no central entity involved. In the approach presented here, groups can grow locally, or even start with a family. However, there is no limit to subsystem growth. All subsystems can be merged into the global system at any time.
3. Flexible systems can support things like a world currency. Even if the currency were to fail at some point, it would not mean that the system would collapse, but that it would fall back into groups one level below it, such as country/region groups. Even if the group’s currency fails at some point (because they accept so many members that they simply consume their income without providing any goods or services for that income), it can still fall back to the level of personal value, where the value of currency is closely related to interpersonal relationships.
4. Trust rewards that encourage self-growth encourage new recruits to join the system. Adding new people to your circle is a risk to some extent. To balance incentives and achieve growth, we introduced trust rewards. It creates common incentives for newcomers and those already in the network: by establishing a relationship of trust, the newcomer gains online credibility, and the first person to trust the newcomer will also benefit financially. If the person who trusts the new person knows the new person, the inherent risks of trusting the new person are offset by the benefits. If the newcomer does not become a full member of the network, the trust placed in the newcomer is misguided and leads to financial losses.
5. Ubiquity Some people think bitcoin is disposable. A currency has to be scarce to some extent to work. A single digital currency can have features that ensure the scarcity of that currency, but if other digital currencies are successful, scarcity as a whole is questionable. This is especially true for basic income. We firmly believe that a basic income currency will only succeed if it is the only currency commonly used. That is why we want to make the proposal as general as possible. The only free parameter that matters to the system is the growth rate G, which needs to be discussed in detail. Rewards for trust are not strictly necessary, but it does not affect the long-term equilibrium of this approach.
A detailed discussion
1. Transitive transactions: If A and B trust each other, and B and C trust each other, A and C can pay each other as long as B is current. If A is A customer and C is A merchant, A can remit money to C, and the network will automatically send A’s currency from A to B and then B’s currency from B to C.
2. Growth rate g=2%. The growth rate, G, determines the ratio of total money supply to monthly income. This figure is open to debate. Its choices should maximize the value of its income. Note that high inflation undermines money’s ability to act as a store of value. Thus, the potential dollar market value is a function of the growth rate: market value = F (g). The market value of a currency is a function of G, and for larger g, say 5% or 10%, the value is likely to decline sharply, and the choice of G should maximize g*f (g). The growth rate can be thought of as a tax on assets to fund the basic income. People who receive the full average wealth of UBI will also pay the same amount of service fees from their income.
3. Groups are necessary to make the system more stable. There is always some risk in holding a particular person’s money. In a sense, the value of these coins has always been backed by people. If the person dies, or more broadly, trust in the person declines, the coins can become worthless. However, as long as a person is a member of a group, the money can be irreversibly converted into group money. It is the responsibility of the community itself to keep it tightly controlled so that it does not dilute value on the one hand and has positive network effects on the other. It would be interesting for businesses to accept such group purchase coins.
Q&A
1. Can I create 100 fake accounts, all trusting each other and abusing the system?
A: You can create them, but it doesn’t create value. As long as no one trusts these accounts, they can only exchange money with each other, making all the money worthless.
Q: Why do YOU want to add someone else to my trust network?
A: Your network of trust makes your personal currency worth more than you are willing to offer for that currency. Let’s say there are 100 people in your trusted network, which means 100 people are accepting your currency. Even people who don’t accept your currency directly may accept it indirectly because they know they can use it to get goods or services from 100 people. Taking money is a network effect. On the other hand, however, accepting a new person involves a certain amount of risk. If the man turns out to be a false account holder, you end up with his worthless money. However, fiduciary rewards were introduced to capture the first batch of new accounts. However, accepting a brand new account should be supported by the relationship between the two participants to ensure that the new user honestly participates in the system. If they don’t, the only people who will lose money are those who mistakenly trusted them.
Q: How much is the money in the account worth?
Max (value(group1), value(group2), value(group3)… , value(connection1), value(connection2)… . Note that only the connection to the floating population counts. As long as membership and relationships in the group are stable, there should be no incentive to convert funds to group funds. This leads to the assumption that there is no need to convert your money to group currency, or to exchange money with trusted associates. As long as you can afford to do so, your money is at least better value. This stabilizes the system and allows user A to connect to user B, even though user B has A lower currency value. This connection increases the value of user B’s coin without changing the value of User A’s coin. However, if B tries to abuse the connection, A can cancel the trust relationship. Sometimes, users can lose their connections by creating a panic. But the better the user is connected, the less likely it is. This strengthens your incentive to consolidate all your social connections/reputation into one account.
4. Q: How much of the group’s currency is yours?
Answer: The amount you exchange. The only difference is that it is no longer attached to you as an individual. This means that if you do something bad, the organization can’t do anything to recover your group funds. However, they may kick you out of the organization. In organizations, exchange is one-way with individuals. Only individuals => organizations, not organizations => individuals. However, the exchange between organizations works both ways. So Berlin<=>SF is ok. The easiest way to implement Circles is based on a contract implementation on Ethereum.
The current voice of the community
Reviewing the mechanism design idea of CirclesUBI five years ago, compared with the schemes that have been online today, except for some numerical values, there are two major changes:
1. The benefit feedback mechanism based on invitation management has been removed. 2. The agreement between the group and the individual is not online.
Did Koppelmann think the design was unreasonable, or did he want it to be implemented by a future developer on CirclesUBI? Personally, I think it’s probably the latter, which Gavin also discusses with the CirclesUBI team.
Through discussion with everyone in CirclesUBI of ChinaDeFi, two urgent requirements of CirclesUBI are obtained:
-
Prevent malicious account currency brushing. The proposal to add KYC mechanism like PI Network was the main one. We thought that if the decentralized scheme could not be proposed as soon as possible, we could replace it with a centralized scheme and update it into a decentralized mechanism later.
-
Circles personal token exchange. The wealth effect is essential, whether it is the current availability of Circles tokens for everyone to trade or the availability of other Circles tokens for speculation on the CirclesUBI system, which will stimulate and accelerate the development of the network.
My partner Gavin is currently accelerating the development of a tool for Circles, which will be released later next week. At the same time, we also welcome more sound and R&D teams to discuss together and explore whether we can find more value in CirclesUBI network.
about
Chinadefi-chinadefi.com is a research-driven DeFi innovation organization. Every day, from nearly 900 pieces of content from over 500 high-quality information sources around the world, chinadefi-Chinadefi.com seeks for more in-depth thinking and systematic sorting of content, and synchronously provides decision-making aid materials to the Chinese market at the fastest speed.
This article is published by OpenWrite!