Jeff has a good idea that finds frequent beneficial problem solving application applied to vast amounts of data points. Rather than applying complex algorithms to all trillions of data points with geo-spatial attributes group them into relationship boxes that somehow relate to the probability that within certain boxes there is more probability of finding a solution. Especially if computing power is constrained or there is a time constraint in using any available computing power. Jeff likes real time identification of the problem to do something about it.
Excellent idea!
The NSA searching for bad guys in Peoria or a company doing business consumer intelligence is a relatively unimportant geo-spatial box to look at with deep inspection algorithmic programs. If there is a problem to be found in Peoria it will likely be connected to Chicago. Good thinking by either the NSA or Free Private Enterprise.
These are the cities that AT&T could offer its Gigapower services since it depends on optical fiber.
This is where AT&T says it is at now, planned or being explored.
Order the probability of pay off by establishing broad categorical geo-spatial boxes then apply deep algorithm processing based on related entities.
Is that what scumbag AT&T is doing in my prior blog entry to apply there service model?
Of course they are. Simple business decision to utilize resources efficiently and target the most beneficial target market area. If they sell intelligence data to the NSA that would of course influence choice of cities to offer the plan.
"Some Ars readers think AT&T has gone too far. "Google watches you use Google services, AT&T watches everything and only matches Google's price. Scumbag AT&T," Ars forum member arkiel wrote."
The city choice may have been to undercut Google and eliminate competition in Austin and Kansas City but future choice might depend more on third party customers of AT&T big data rather than competitors.
AT&T business model: "Pay for your own enslavement" Sounds like my problem solution model: "Get the cat to skin itself by choosing to jump out of its own skin" Is that a variation of the model of giving enough rope?
Another commenter said:
"However, I swear this isn't the first time an ISP has offered a discount in exchange for less privacy. Maybe it was ATT in another part of the USA? I thought it *was* Google offering this, but I can't find anything about it. IIRC it was a $10 per month discount."
Offering a discount in exchange for less privacy is a common business model. Previously I blogged about Progressive Insurance doing this with a dongle fitted to the car's computer system and reporting information related to vehicle operation including location.
Another reader commented:
Also, there is no way users' browsing behavior is worth $29 per month to at&t, this is just simple price discrimination.
"1) I also cannot believe that the user's browsing data is worth $29 per month. Are there no diminishing returns for marketers? Can a single user browsing the web really be worth hundreds of dollars per month for everyone involved in the advertising chain? Where the hell does the actual money come from?"
Good question. Where might that money come from. To whom would it be worth that much as opposed to obtaining it themselves. Worth in terms of dollars as well as avoiding law or other constraints or connections that would otherwise add "costs" to their operations.
Ars Technica editors pick of comments;
"$348 a year "discount" to give up my privacy?
Sounds alot like 30 pieces of silver."
Privacy is for sale. We have sold it for security. We can sell it for money. Eventually we will have neither nor any privacy. Slaves are slaves because they work for nothing. We skin ourselves through what we sell.
Elegant method to induce our own end state by virtue of our own choice.
Cui Bono?
Maybe this comment reveals what is behind the push to dismantle the Post Office:
"The Post Office needs to offer email, search, broadband, ePhone and anything else having to do with digital communication. This service would be protected by the fourth amendment and it would require a search warrant to look at your emails. The idea that the phone company “owns” your telephone conversations is free market anarchy economics carried to the ultimate extreme, like the water company in Bolivia that claimed to own the rain. Profit is not holy."
The Post Office could also provide banking services.
A double target on the Post Office Back.
We do not value our privacy enough therefore we sell it cheap or give it away or in the worst case pay to have it taken away.
Saturday, March 28, 2015
Scumbag AT&T and its Gigapower
Shocking information at this ars technica link:
AT&T’s plan to watch your Web browsing—and what you can do about it
"If you have AT&T’s gigabit Internet service and wonder why it seems so affordable, here's the reason—AT&T is boosting profits by rerouting all your Web browsing to an in-house traffic scanning platform, analyzing your Internet habits, then using the results to deliver personalized ads to the websites you visit, e-mail to your inbox, and junk mail to your front door."
For an amazingly low price you can get this "service". AT&T records everything a subscriber does on the internet because the subscriber agrees to it as a term of service. Don't like that? Then don't buy the service. However it is not entirely clear up front what AT&T is doing (spying upon and using). I agree that it is everything and is in fact deep packet inspection perhaps using the very same systems funded and pioneered by the NSA.
Recently I wrote about the FBI getting intelligence information through a partnership with private enterprise to access its Big Data.
Wadda ya think? Might the FBI want to cozy up to AT&T to have access to its deep packet inspection big data base for data mining? Might the FBI just be following the business model of the NSA? Why duplicate the intelligence collection and storage of free private enterprise? Buy it from them and concentrate on the collection of Intelligence in domains that free private enterprise does not operate. That domain is becoming smaller every day.
AT&T says they never sell info to a third party. What about giving it in return for favors? Or putting something on the table in front of someone and walking out of the room for a cup of coffee? "back in 5 minutes, wink, wink. Where is their definition of terms and the term "sell. It's incredibly unlikely that the same government that granted AT&T's immunity will turn around and sign off on using AT&T's behavior to squash a merger. If the merger is blocked, it will be due to more practical considerations
What AT&T is doing is a new business model. Become the only or by far the cheapest provider of Internet service with the terms and condition that they can collect and use in any way all of your communications on the World Wide Web. All of your communications are routed exclusively through their services.
Don't like that?
Then either don't subscribe to our services or pay a higher price for privacy.
The unstated writing on the wall:
If you choose to pay a higher price for complete privacy where we do not collect and store everything and do deep packet inspection then we inform the NSA (for a price) of your choice and they do what we promise not to do.
Think that might be what really happens?
Hey, nothing personal, its just business.
AT&T’s plan to watch your Web browsing—and what you can do about it
"If you have AT&T’s gigabit Internet service and wonder why it seems so affordable, here's the reason—AT&T is boosting profits by rerouting all your Web browsing to an in-house traffic scanning platform, analyzing your Internet habits, then using the results to deliver personalized ads to the websites you visit, e-mail to your inbox, and junk mail to your front door."
For an amazingly low price you can get this "service". AT&T records everything a subscriber does on the internet because the subscriber agrees to it as a term of service. Don't like that? Then don't buy the service. However it is not entirely clear up front what AT&T is doing (spying upon and using). I agree that it is everything and is in fact deep packet inspection perhaps using the very same systems funded and pioneered by the NSA.
Recently I wrote about the FBI getting intelligence information through a partnership with private enterprise to access its Big Data.
Wadda ya think? Might the FBI want to cozy up to AT&T to have access to its deep packet inspection big data base for data mining? Might the FBI just be following the business model of the NSA? Why duplicate the intelligence collection and storage of free private enterprise? Buy it from them and concentrate on the collection of Intelligence in domains that free private enterprise does not operate. That domain is becoming smaller every day.
AT&T says they never sell info to a third party. What about giving it in return for favors? Or putting something on the table in front of someone and walking out of the room for a cup of coffee? "back in 5 minutes, wink, wink. Where is their definition of terms and the term "sell. It's incredibly unlikely that the same government that granted AT&T's immunity will turn around and sign off on using AT&T's behavior to squash a merger. If the merger is blocked, it will be due to more practical considerations
What AT&T is doing is a new business model. Become the only or by far the cheapest provider of Internet service with the terms and condition that they can collect and use in any way all of your communications on the World Wide Web. All of your communications are routed exclusively through their services.
Don't like that?
Then either don't subscribe to our services or pay a higher price for privacy.
The unstated writing on the wall:
If you choose to pay a higher price for complete privacy where we do not collect and store everything and do deep packet inspection then we inform the NSA (for a price) of your choice and they do what we promise not to do.
Think that might be what really happens?
Hey, nothing personal, its just business.
China Leadership and Anti-Corruption
From the Economist: The Devil, or Mr. Wang
This is how anti-corruption is practiced at high levels in China.
Fear!
What a wonderful thing fear is when applied as a controlling tool applied to those that have very good reason to fear discovery and justice because they are crooks.
On the other hand fear can be used to destroy the strongest structures when there is nothing to fear but the fear itself whipped up out of nothing really there to fear except whatever is manufactured to serve self interest of those that profit from it.
A government should fear its people. People should not fear their government.....unless they are crooks.
China gets it.
We could do the same if we put Bill Black in charge of anti-corruption and support the whistle blowers like Sherry Hunt. Elect Elizabeth Warren and she just might do that.
If the Monetary system is to be restructured to serve the people it is the People's Republic that will do it. The People's Republic is not the USA. If I were to rate the significance of a all countries names I think that I would choose "People's Republic of China" to be the best. Only to be exceeded by the USA if we called ourselves "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave" but only if it was true.
The total control monetary system I propose could happen in China. Never in the USA. It would expose too much corruption, instill too much fear in crooks when they see that they cannot get away with using and abusing the current monetary, economic and political system for illegitimate private gain on a macro level grand scale. It would no longer be the norm nor an accepted business model but a crime to be investigated with a great amount of convincing evidence and punished accordingly.
Appropriate punishment?
Condemn the big financial crooks to living on a medium average national wage anywhere they want. Better yet, minimum wage! No other income from any source allowed. The amount to be given to them annually by the government and ever expenditure to be under the strict monitoring of the government as well as a matter of public record on the World Wide Web for anyone to view the time, place and amount of spending.
Would that be overly generous to big time swindlers?
The government would not even have to pay the annual minimum wage to the convicted
Not on a cost/benefit analysis to we the people. Look at what we get in return. Elimination of sucking illegitimate millions out of our economy.
Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
"Do you now or have you ever supported the goals and intentions of the "Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank"? A foreign entity that seeks to destroy the monetary dominance of the US Dollar.
Yes, I do. Is that an Un-American activity? If it fights the world wide corrupting influence of US Dollar domination and control of world affairs then it is a higher level moral structure than the "American Way" if it uses money as a decision making tool of resource allocation for a greater good of the people.
Afterthought: Any country that simply called itself "We the People" would win the best name contest. "People's Republic" would be runner up.
The Arapahoe simple called themselves: "Our People"
This is how anti-corruption is practiced at high levels in China.
Fear!
What a wonderful thing fear is when applied as a controlling tool applied to those that have very good reason to fear discovery and justice because they are crooks.
On the other hand fear can be used to destroy the strongest structures when there is nothing to fear but the fear itself whipped up out of nothing really there to fear except whatever is manufactured to serve self interest of those that profit from it.
A government should fear its people. People should not fear their government.....unless they are crooks.
China gets it.
We could do the same if we put Bill Black in charge of anti-corruption and support the whistle blowers like Sherry Hunt. Elect Elizabeth Warren and she just might do that.
If the Monetary system is to be restructured to serve the people it is the People's Republic that will do it. The People's Republic is not the USA. If I were to rate the significance of a all countries names I think that I would choose "People's Republic of China" to be the best. Only to be exceeded by the USA if we called ourselves "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave" but only if it was true.
The total control monetary system I propose could happen in China. Never in the USA. It would expose too much corruption, instill too much fear in crooks when they see that they cannot get away with using and abusing the current monetary, economic and political system for illegitimate private gain on a macro level grand scale. It would no longer be the norm nor an accepted business model but a crime to be investigated with a great amount of convincing evidence and punished accordingly.
Appropriate punishment?
Condemn the big financial crooks to living on a medium average national wage anywhere they want. Better yet, minimum wage! No other income from any source allowed. The amount to be given to them annually by the government and ever expenditure to be under the strict monitoring of the government as well as a matter of public record on the World Wide Web for anyone to view the time, place and amount of spending.
Would that be overly generous to big time swindlers?
The government would not even have to pay the annual minimum wage to the convicted
Not on a cost/benefit analysis to we the people. Look at what we get in return. Elimination of sucking illegitimate millions out of our economy.
Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
"Do you now or have you ever supported the goals and intentions of the "Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank"? A foreign entity that seeks to destroy the monetary dominance of the US Dollar.
Yes, I do. Is that an Un-American activity? If it fights the world wide corrupting influence of US Dollar domination and control of world affairs then it is a higher level moral structure than the "American Way" if it uses money as a decision making tool of resource allocation for a greater good of the people.
Afterthought: Any country that simply called itself "We the People" would win the best name contest. "People's Republic" would be runner up.
The Arapahoe simple called themselves: "Our People"
Thursday, March 26, 2015
Jeff Jonas Entity Relationship Puzzle - Entityman!
Jeff Jonas presents a brilliant analogy explanation of Entity Relationship conceptual structure at this YouTube link. Absolutely brilliant in explaining the concept. Its brilliance is only equaled by its elegance. I can't give it much more praise than that!
IBM Chief Scientist Explains how Puzzles Inspire to Create Innovative Context Computing Solutions
This is my house? You are also a minimalist like me, Jeff!
Jeff Jonas: You Are An EntityMan! If my friend Whit Raymond is announcing your next Ironman I will ask him to say that as you cross the finish line.
Good job Jeff!
In order to understand what this blog entry is all about (and it is a key entry to my puzzle) view the YouTube link. Otherwise the this blog entry stand a much less likely chance of being understood and a much more likely chance of remaining a puzzle with no significant meaning. That being the definition of failure?
Before I get diverted again I want to make this blog entry a place holder to be extended with more to follow as the substance of the subject line relating to my conceptual monetary system.
Heck, look at all the Jeff Jonas YouTubes at this link!
Jeff's puzzle, (he calls it metaphor, I called it analogy. I'll go with his metaphor but if we talked about it he might go with my analogy) let's just call it an example, is a brilliant way to explain how entity relationships build bigger pictures. The granular level is a puzzle piece with some unique attributes. The challenge is to fit the piece into a puzzle solution domain. Fun stuff. To Jeff it is very much fun stuff and he excels at having fun.
I have been following Jeff from time to time over the years ever since he first wrote about throwing everything in the back of a car and going to Las Vegas to solve a problem puzzle there by entity relationship analysis. If I search back in this blog I could link to prior entries relating to Jeff. Then I discovered that we have more in common than what I feel is a similar way of thinking or approaching a problem domain. We are both triathletes. While I have only done 8 Ironman races he has now done about 25! The intuitive connection I have with Jeff is maybe not so mysterious. He expresses/explains stuff in a simple comprehensible manner. The ability to make simplicity out of complexity. He, however, can make complex systems designed to implement simple fundamental conceptual relationships among high level entities.
I, after a whole lot of thought, can see a big high level abstract conceptual picture. In other words I can finally see the full moon at the right conjunction of time and space and read the writing on the face of the moon. Having done that and read the writing the best I can do to go to the moon is to climb a tree. Progress toward a moon landing stops abruptly at the top of the tree. Jeff has, relatively speaking walked but he might modestly say he has only seen it closer from an orbiting time space position.
I will use Jeff's puzzle vehicle to apply it to my thoughts on a conceptual monetary system.
The pieces of my big picture monetary system puzzle picture are all out on the table of this blog. I have been laying them out and actually joining a few of them since February 2011. Other pieces to other puzzles were created along the way but they were puzzles that related in even a higher level picture.
The recent breakthrough in assembling the pieces of the puzzle that I have created results in a picture consisting of the puzzle pieces taking form and substance. Finally! It had to do that because I was at the top of the tree! The paradigm shift in view was that I do not have to change the monetary system from debt based to debt free base, leave it unchanged as far as user view goes but add something for an overlay control on the the Monetary System that does not change the user view and usage but adds to the Accounting structure for better control. Better control to identify the crooks as well as correct the environment (draining the swamp) in which they operate. Not something that would draw support of the crooks of course but on the other hand something they could not escape.
Jeff's YouTube relationship puzzle uses one picture to be assembled but alludes to pieces that do not fit in that puzzle. When more pieces are created or identified (maybe more identified than created, they were always there like gold nuggets in the stream to be mined) that may relate to them other related pictures emerge. It's relational dude!
I see, more or less the picture and its puzzle pieces that present the two big entities of our current monetary system: Accounts containing associated money value totals and Loan Contracts that is the sole source agent entity that creates the Money that populates those Accounts. Two primary subsets of Loan Contracts are those that create Public and Private debt. Public and Private Debt creation have equal and balancing Asset creation for each category in the Balance Sheet accounting system.
Jeff stresses how important it is to understand accounting in order to understand entity relationships. That's for sure!
Something Jeff said in another of his YouTube videos is that in a certain domain (Google) going down to the pixel level is not the most productive level to go to. Maybe it is in some graphics domain but not the information domain. My idea too but I expressed it as choosing the appropriate granular level foundation upon which the conceptual structure of any problem domain is built on.
The two granular level (unique instance of the entity) in the current monetary system is a singular unique Account and singular unique Loan Contract that gives birth to amounts total amounts in the Account which might be better described as the Account Bag or Purse on the asset side.
Just to refresh the comprehension of the existing system: All money in existence was initially created out of thin air (fiat) by a bank loan that established debt amount as well as equal asset amount. As debts are paid to reduce loan principal money is extinguished until debt is zero (money is extinguished back to the nothing it came from on both asset and liability sides of the balance sheet.
What we've got he-ya is a fail-ya to com-mun-cate with a vital third entity at an appropriate granular level. That vital third entity is Money. Money? But it is all about Money! No, it is about Contracts and Accounting for debt that Contracts create. Incidentally, during the period of time that the rolling total aggregate amount of all money created by all Loan Contracts (public and private debt) exists in the system we use as a medium of exchange between accounts. The only entity identity that "Money" has is a numerical on hand balance number as a data element in an Account representing ownership of a stated number of unit values.
Following this line of thought, convoluted maybe, it might be said that we have a Monetary system with no "Real Money" in it. We have a shadow on the wall (called account) representation of money as a total number in an account but nothing that casts that shadow on the wall (Account). Or, if you want to look at it this way: If a shadow was not cast on that wall then where would the money be, what would be its nature of being independent of its shadow if it did not cast a shadow on the wall?
The answer is of course as non existent as the shadow on the wall. The answer defines the problem. the object Money must be attributed the same entity level existence and identity attributes at the Class as well as the granular instance of its class as Contract and Account. The problem is that Money has been so tightly logically bound to Loan Contract that it goes out of existence at the granular level of a number as the contract is paid off.
Follow?
Solution: Unbind Money dependency as a functional product of Contract Loan to create it and Account to manage magnitude/transactions for its existence and related identity. Manage money as a third Entity Class and at its appropriate instance of an entity granular level.
Why do what I propose as a Solution? At this point I wish I had Jeff's clarity in reducing the complex to the simple but I don't. I can however relate (this is about entity relationship!) to his puzzle metaphor.
This is why: In our current monetary system Account and Loan Contract (public and private debt) are its foundation but what money does is called Economics. We have a difficult time managing Economics. We need more information data points to manage economic matters. On the one hand that would be good for some that are not benefiting from current state of the Economy on the other there are some (far more, like 90%, 60% but at least most) that are not benefiting from the current state of the Economy and even less in the future from where it is going.
Unique identification of each and every single unit digital dollar with unit value of one and a unique IPv6 number or other unique identifier establishes the entity existence and conceptual substance of the entity Class: Money. Just like an Account identifier or a Loan Contract Identifier.
I think, because it is logical (but I am not Vulcan) that the best and strongest conceptual logical structure is best built principally on (like a cornerstone) the most persistent Entity among all other entities in the structure and certainly foremost on the entity objects in the structure which by their nature are more persistent objects than the actions that they do. Reprogram the entity structure every time an action changes, and they change all the time, is not a good way to design a system.
The big addition to the Monetary System: Money as a persistent entity Class and its instances. Recognition that Money is the most persistent thing among the three Classes of entities in the total monetary system.
Money
Account
Loan Contract
Money should not the least persistent thing (as it is now) at the numerical level with its existence tied to granular level loans in the Loan Contract Class. When the loan is paid off then it is history, so is the money in circulation as a medium of exchange associated with the loan as long as it existed.
If money, once it has been created, has persistence to live forever as a uniquely identified object building block (unique puzzle piece) it is what the monetary system becomes structured on. It defines what money is. Account and Contract Loan are entity application programs in which Money does things. In which uniquely identified puzzle objects assemble in an unlimited number of ways through Contract Loans and Accounts to create Pictures out of the pieces.
The general picture that emerges using puzzle pieces of uniquely identified money (among other valuable information through data mining) is Economics. Economics on a real time basis, not a batch process look back to see what happened. Economic data that presents in real time who has current ownership of money in an account, what account it came from in a transaction that increased balance and in the history blockchain ledger what account it went to in a transaction.
In addition, each unit dollar with a value of one is linked to its parent granular dollar in the Money Entity Class. That link identifies on a single dollar basis who previously owned that specific IPv6 dollar in the Money Entity Class blockchain history as well as all previous owners of that dollar back to the date of the original owner upon its creation.
Knowing what account money came from or went to in the current system is called following the money. It is not really following the money it is following account paths transfers of money amounts from one account to another. Laundering defeats following because it is laundering through accounts not actually laundering money because, as I previously suggested we have a digital money system but it does not really have uniquely identified granular money entities in it.
I have gone off track from applying Jeff's puzzle model to my monetary system proposal.
Getting back on track: All the puzzle pieces called uniquely identified digital dollars with a unit value of one are in a big unrelated pile like the puzzle pieces at the beginning of Jeff's video. Their only differentiating characteristic is their unique IPv6 number. They are instances of the Class Money but in the beginning are in the sub-class pre-money. Digitally minted in an amount required to support Monetary System operation and ready for circulation to become money by virtue of entering the Monetary System through Contract Loan.
1. Each unit becomes Money once it is loaned into an Account through Loan Contract.
2. Contract Loan Entity informs Money Entity of the Account Entity unique account number that the loan was made to and the associated unit dollar IPv6 identity of each unit dollar loaned. This also generates the beginning of the Contract Loan blockchain that will maintain a record of payments as well as compliance with the terms of the contract (Smart Contract).
3. Account Entity confirms to Money Entity posting of the loan to a unique account holder account including confirmation of related unit dollar identifiers. This begins the Accounting transaction block chain in an extended universal ledger.
4 Money Entity associates current owner to each uniquely identified unit dollar owned in response to input from Accounting entity.
5. Account Entity reports all account transfers among accounts to Money Entity as they occur on a unit dollar basis.
6 Money Entity makes current ownership information changes including date/time and any location information associated with the accounting transaction, prior owner information locks into the blockchain history of the unit dollar.
Due to the fact that all of this is happening in the conceptual abstract domain, logical properties of an entity thing can be separated from physical properties. The digital dollar piece of the puzzle can continue to exist as present in the Money Entity as well as being a puzzle piece of a specific owning account in the Account Entity where single transaction total amount is the granular level of interest and management. Money at the unit level dollar with a value of one is a shared entity.
Command and Control of the Monetary System.
The intent is to have minimum change to current monetary bank operations. Establishment of a Money Entity requires reporting bank transactions by the Account Authority (Banking system) to the Money Authority. Total value of the transactions might be sufficient. Banks would have no requirement to maintain record information or report down to the granular unique unit dollar level. That could be applied in a random or algorithmic manner to to the pool of unite dollars identified to be currently owned by the associated account.
It is important at this point to restate what I have said so often in this blog that a fundamental concept of the conceptual monetary system is that money does not move. Money is the static fundamental record of the system that records who owns what specifically identified units of digital money each with a value of one. Only the relationship of a fixed static unit dollar changes it does not travel from account to account or owner to owner. It is the power of money that flows, not the money itself. It is in one place, always in one place existing as a unique thing instance of its Class: Money forever or as long as money is needed. Its state may change from active in circulation (owned by an financial account) or inactive (held in reserve and not circulating under the Account of the Money Authority) for regulatory purposes.
If I have a thousand dollars in my bank account it is all debt money by definition. That is the way the current monetary system works. Go back far enough in the block chain of every single dollar in the Money Class and its connection to a Loan Contract can be established. To conclusively identify it as part of the unpaid balance of the loan is either difficult or impossible. When an Account Holder makes a payment on the Loan Contract it is composed unit dollars managed by the Money Authority unrelated to the original unit dollars received as the loan. The original unit dollars related to the loan would be associated to any possible owning account managed by the Account Authority.
There is a way around that difficult or impossible situation that is relatively easy. So easy I have to think about it for awhile to continue this.
Does this all sound unnecessarily complex? Our current system is far more unnecessarily complex and provides only a fraction of the information necessary to manage the public and private economy and protect it as much as we value and protect the security of this country. The internal and external security of this country depends more on the monetary system than the defense system.
IBM Chief Scientist Explains how Puzzles Inspire to Create Innovative Context Computing Solutions
This is my house? You are also a minimalist like me, Jeff!
Jeff Jonas: You Are An EntityMan! If my friend Whit Raymond is announcing your next Ironman I will ask him to say that as you cross the finish line.
Good job Jeff!
In order to understand what this blog entry is all about (and it is a key entry to my puzzle) view the YouTube link. Otherwise the this blog entry stand a much less likely chance of being understood and a much more likely chance of remaining a puzzle with no significant meaning. That being the definition of failure?
Before I get diverted again I want to make this blog entry a place holder to be extended with more to follow as the substance of the subject line relating to my conceptual monetary system.
Heck, look at all the Jeff Jonas YouTubes at this link!
Jeff's puzzle, (he calls it metaphor, I called it analogy. I'll go with his metaphor but if we talked about it he might go with my analogy) let's just call it an example, is a brilliant way to explain how entity relationships build bigger pictures. The granular level is a puzzle piece with some unique attributes. The challenge is to fit the piece into a puzzle solution domain. Fun stuff. To Jeff it is very much fun stuff and he excels at having fun.
I have been following Jeff from time to time over the years ever since he first wrote about throwing everything in the back of a car and going to Las Vegas to solve a problem puzzle there by entity relationship analysis. If I search back in this blog I could link to prior entries relating to Jeff. Then I discovered that we have more in common than what I feel is a similar way of thinking or approaching a problem domain. We are both triathletes. While I have only done 8 Ironman races he has now done about 25! The intuitive connection I have with Jeff is maybe not so mysterious. He expresses/explains stuff in a simple comprehensible manner. The ability to make simplicity out of complexity. He, however, can make complex systems designed to implement simple fundamental conceptual relationships among high level entities.
I, after a whole lot of thought, can see a big high level abstract conceptual picture. In other words I can finally see the full moon at the right conjunction of time and space and read the writing on the face of the moon. Having done that and read the writing the best I can do to go to the moon is to climb a tree. Progress toward a moon landing stops abruptly at the top of the tree. Jeff has, relatively speaking walked but he might modestly say he has only seen it closer from an orbiting time space position.
I will use Jeff's puzzle vehicle to apply it to my thoughts on a conceptual monetary system.
The pieces of my big picture monetary system puzzle picture are all out on the table of this blog. I have been laying them out and actually joining a few of them since February 2011. Other pieces to other puzzles were created along the way but they were puzzles that related in even a higher level picture.
The recent breakthrough in assembling the pieces of the puzzle that I have created results in a picture consisting of the puzzle pieces taking form and substance. Finally! It had to do that because I was at the top of the tree! The paradigm shift in view was that I do not have to change the monetary system from debt based to debt free base, leave it unchanged as far as user view goes but add something for an overlay control on the the Monetary System that does not change the user view and usage but adds to the Accounting structure for better control. Better control to identify the crooks as well as correct the environment (draining the swamp) in which they operate. Not something that would draw support of the crooks of course but on the other hand something they could not escape.
Jeff's YouTube relationship puzzle uses one picture to be assembled but alludes to pieces that do not fit in that puzzle. When more pieces are created or identified (maybe more identified than created, they were always there like gold nuggets in the stream to be mined) that may relate to them other related pictures emerge. It's relational dude!
I see, more or less the picture and its puzzle pieces that present the two big entities of our current monetary system: Accounts containing associated money value totals and Loan Contracts that is the sole source agent entity that creates the Money that populates those Accounts. Two primary subsets of Loan Contracts are those that create Public and Private debt. Public and Private Debt creation have equal and balancing Asset creation for each category in the Balance Sheet accounting system.
Jeff stresses how important it is to understand accounting in order to understand entity relationships. That's for sure!
Something Jeff said in another of his YouTube videos is that in a certain domain (Google) going down to the pixel level is not the most productive level to go to. Maybe it is in some graphics domain but not the information domain. My idea too but I expressed it as choosing the appropriate granular level foundation upon which the conceptual structure of any problem domain is built on.
The two granular level (unique instance of the entity) in the current monetary system is a singular unique Account and singular unique Loan Contract that gives birth to amounts total amounts in the Account which might be better described as the Account Bag or Purse on the asset side.
Just to refresh the comprehension of the existing system: All money in existence was initially created out of thin air (fiat) by a bank loan that established debt amount as well as equal asset amount. As debts are paid to reduce loan principal money is extinguished until debt is zero (money is extinguished back to the nothing it came from on both asset and liability sides of the balance sheet.
What we've got he-ya is a fail-ya to com-mun-cate with a vital third entity at an appropriate granular level. That vital third entity is Money. Money? But it is all about Money! No, it is about Contracts and Accounting for debt that Contracts create. Incidentally, during the period of time that the rolling total aggregate amount of all money created by all Loan Contracts (public and private debt) exists in the system we use as a medium of exchange between accounts. The only entity identity that "Money" has is a numerical on hand balance number as a data element in an Account representing ownership of a stated number of unit values.
Following this line of thought, convoluted maybe, it might be said that we have a Monetary system with no "Real Money" in it. We have a shadow on the wall (called account) representation of money as a total number in an account but nothing that casts that shadow on the wall (Account). Or, if you want to look at it this way: If a shadow was not cast on that wall then where would the money be, what would be its nature of being independent of its shadow if it did not cast a shadow on the wall?
The answer is of course as non existent as the shadow on the wall. The answer defines the problem. the object Money must be attributed the same entity level existence and identity attributes at the Class as well as the granular instance of its class as Contract and Account. The problem is that Money has been so tightly logically bound to Loan Contract that it goes out of existence at the granular level of a number as the contract is paid off.
Follow?
Solution: Unbind Money dependency as a functional product of Contract Loan to create it and Account to manage magnitude/transactions for its existence and related identity. Manage money as a third Entity Class and at its appropriate instance of an entity granular level.
Why do what I propose as a Solution? At this point I wish I had Jeff's clarity in reducing the complex to the simple but I don't. I can however relate (this is about entity relationship!) to his puzzle metaphor.
This is why: In our current monetary system Account and Loan Contract (public and private debt) are its foundation but what money does is called Economics. We have a difficult time managing Economics. We need more information data points to manage economic matters. On the one hand that would be good for some that are not benefiting from current state of the Economy on the other there are some (far more, like 90%, 60% but at least most) that are not benefiting from the current state of the Economy and even less in the future from where it is going.
Unique identification of each and every single unit digital dollar with unit value of one and a unique IPv6 number or other unique identifier establishes the entity existence and conceptual substance of the entity Class: Money. Just like an Account identifier or a Loan Contract Identifier.
I think, because it is logical (but I am not Vulcan) that the best and strongest conceptual logical structure is best built principally on (like a cornerstone) the most persistent Entity among all other entities in the structure and certainly foremost on the entity objects in the structure which by their nature are more persistent objects than the actions that they do. Reprogram the entity structure every time an action changes, and they change all the time, is not a good way to design a system.
The big addition to the Monetary System: Money as a persistent entity Class and its instances. Recognition that Money is the most persistent thing among the three Classes of entities in the total monetary system.
Money
Account
Loan Contract
Money should not the least persistent thing (as it is now) at the numerical level with its existence tied to granular level loans in the Loan Contract Class. When the loan is paid off then it is history, so is the money in circulation as a medium of exchange associated with the loan as long as it existed.
If money, once it has been created, has persistence to live forever as a uniquely identified object building block (unique puzzle piece) it is what the monetary system becomes structured on. It defines what money is. Account and Contract Loan are entity application programs in which Money does things. In which uniquely identified puzzle objects assemble in an unlimited number of ways through Contract Loans and Accounts to create Pictures out of the pieces.
The general picture that emerges using puzzle pieces of uniquely identified money (among other valuable information through data mining) is Economics. Economics on a real time basis, not a batch process look back to see what happened. Economic data that presents in real time who has current ownership of money in an account, what account it came from in a transaction that increased balance and in the history blockchain ledger what account it went to in a transaction.
In addition, each unit dollar with a value of one is linked to its parent granular dollar in the Money Entity Class. That link identifies on a single dollar basis who previously owned that specific IPv6 dollar in the Money Entity Class blockchain history as well as all previous owners of that dollar back to the date of the original owner upon its creation.
Knowing what account money came from or went to in the current system is called following the money. It is not really following the money it is following account paths transfers of money amounts from one account to another. Laundering defeats following because it is laundering through accounts not actually laundering money because, as I previously suggested we have a digital money system but it does not really have uniquely identified granular money entities in it.
I have gone off track from applying Jeff's puzzle model to my monetary system proposal.
Getting back on track: All the puzzle pieces called uniquely identified digital dollars with a unit value of one are in a big unrelated pile like the puzzle pieces at the beginning of Jeff's video. Their only differentiating characteristic is their unique IPv6 number. They are instances of the Class Money but in the beginning are in the sub-class pre-money. Digitally minted in an amount required to support Monetary System operation and ready for circulation to become money by virtue of entering the Monetary System through Contract Loan.
1. Each unit becomes Money once it is loaned into an Account through Loan Contract.
2. Contract Loan Entity informs Money Entity of the Account Entity unique account number that the loan was made to and the associated unit dollar IPv6 identity of each unit dollar loaned. This also generates the beginning of the Contract Loan blockchain that will maintain a record of payments as well as compliance with the terms of the contract (Smart Contract).
3. Account Entity confirms to Money Entity posting of the loan to a unique account holder account including confirmation of related unit dollar identifiers. This begins the Accounting transaction block chain in an extended universal ledger.
4 Money Entity associates current owner to each uniquely identified unit dollar owned in response to input from Accounting entity.
5. Account Entity reports all account transfers among accounts to Money Entity as they occur on a unit dollar basis.
6 Money Entity makes current ownership information changes including date/time and any location information associated with the accounting transaction, prior owner information locks into the blockchain history of the unit dollar.
Due to the fact that all of this is happening in the conceptual abstract domain, logical properties of an entity thing can be separated from physical properties. The digital dollar piece of the puzzle can continue to exist as present in the Money Entity as well as being a puzzle piece of a specific owning account in the Account Entity where single transaction total amount is the granular level of interest and management. Money at the unit level dollar with a value of one is a shared entity.
Command and Control of the Monetary System.
The intent is to have minimum change to current monetary bank operations. Establishment of a Money Entity requires reporting bank transactions by the Account Authority (Banking system) to the Money Authority. Total value of the transactions might be sufficient. Banks would have no requirement to maintain record information or report down to the granular unique unit dollar level. That could be applied in a random or algorithmic manner to to the pool of unite dollars identified to be currently owned by the associated account.
It is important at this point to restate what I have said so often in this blog that a fundamental concept of the conceptual monetary system is that money does not move. Money is the static fundamental record of the system that records who owns what specifically identified units of digital money each with a value of one. Only the relationship of a fixed static unit dollar changes it does not travel from account to account or owner to owner. It is the power of money that flows, not the money itself. It is in one place, always in one place existing as a unique thing instance of its Class: Money forever or as long as money is needed. Its state may change from active in circulation (owned by an financial account) or inactive (held in reserve and not circulating under the Account of the Money Authority) for regulatory purposes.
If I have a thousand dollars in my bank account it is all debt money by definition. That is the way the current monetary system works. Go back far enough in the block chain of every single dollar in the Money Class and its connection to a Loan Contract can be established. To conclusively identify it as part of the unpaid balance of the loan is either difficult or impossible. When an Account Holder makes a payment on the Loan Contract it is composed unit dollars managed by the Money Authority unrelated to the original unit dollars received as the loan. The original unit dollars related to the loan would be associated to any possible owning account managed by the Account Authority.
There is a way around that difficult or impossible situation that is relatively easy. So easy I have to think about it for awhile to continue this.
Does this all sound unnecessarily complex? Our current system is far more unnecessarily complex and provides only a fraction of the information necessary to manage the public and private economy and protect it as much as we value and protect the security of this country. The internal and external security of this country depends more on the monetary system than the defense system.
Where Are We and What Are We Doing? Static or dynamic mode?
Total information about a person all the time requires knowing in real time where they are in time and space and what they are doing in terms of communication with the entities around them or in communication with them through any communication channel.
The real time time/space information is important. Either a person is in a static location of moving from one relatively static place to another relatively static position. Some move more than others. Brief static positions may or may not be as important a repetitive fixed positions in the same place for extended periods like where they sleep every night, or don't as the case may apply.
In our mobile world time in transit and mode are important pieces of information about a specific person. Flight on an airplane or other commercial carrier is well defined once a person is confirmed to be on board. Travel is a private vehicle is not monitored as exactly but is being monitored more by various methods like license plate readers and electronic devices that record and report location and vehicle operation information.
The answer to the subject line question is that we are either in one place geographically or moving from one place to another. Almost all the time? Well, I guess so. Even if we are in our own home we are either sitting in a fixed easy chair or moving within the house. There are ways and means to detect that if desired.
Most of our movements covering longer distances and time are in an automobile. The Great American Car. Once at a destination the proximity of the destination is a function of availability of parking and the average distance a person is willing to walk to a destination once parked is 1,000 feet. On the way to the destination there are many sensors, like cameras, our cell phone, a time clock at work or entry to a retail store that establish points of travel and duration spent at points as well as self evident purpose.
Time spent traveling in a car is one of the less documented time frames that is a significant amount of time that relates to a significant number of data points about us. It is comparable to "Vacuum Time" a time where space/time information is not generally known.
Here I will coin a phrase and then see by means of Google search if I win the prize of being the first to enter the phrase into the WWW in the context in which I use it.
Total Information All The Time Abhors "Vacuum Time". Total Information wants to fill that vacuum in accordance with its law of nature that dictates it must fill a vacuum.
It looks like I win the prize but there are too many coincidental search results that do not relate to the context in which I have used the term. Darn! I like to be a cut and dried "no result on search term" winner!
Surveillance must know where we are in space and time all the time. One of the places it does not conclusively cover is when we are traveling in a personal vehicle, or any vehicle for that matter. The latest technology in airborne tracking is an amazing spin off from battle field management but it is a mode of identifying the object first (target acquisition) as opposed to the target being self identifying all the time in real time. The later is the best way to acquire a target. Have it reveal its own time space status as well as all possible relationship information that may be associated with it. Speed, direction, number of occupants, time to next oil change, radio station tuned in, type of music playing, etc. hundreds of data elements since any one of them has the potential to be an important piece of any given puzzle.
Travel in a vehicle is becoming less of an information vacuum every day.
I intended to write about Jeff Jonas' brilliant puzzle analogy that he used to explain Entity Analysis. As you can see I side tracked that journey by the last couple blog entries. I am easily side tracked. The side track however is segue to time and spatial Entity Analysis.
More sidetrack here subsequent to the preceding paragraph:
This link: "Governments and corporations gather, store, and analyze the tremendous amount of data we chuff out as we move through our digitized lives."
Actually, in the digital domain world we are on the move all the time, even when in the real domain world we are sitting in a chair (at a computer) or washing our hands with the fact of running water somewhere in the house being recorded and reported in real time water usage monitoring. It is done in my town. Flush a toilet and the device using water is known by virtue of flush duration.
Meta data tells so much about us. Meta data is what is collected and transmitted when we drive a car. The more meta data the better the surveillance.
Australia has mandated two year retention of communication data. That is how long it must be retained. How long it may be retained for commercial data mining extraction might be much longer? Is there a law or does the law direct mandatory deletion at the two year mark? Probably not????
The real time time/space information is important. Either a person is in a static location of moving from one relatively static place to another relatively static position. Some move more than others. Brief static positions may or may not be as important a repetitive fixed positions in the same place for extended periods like where they sleep every night, or don't as the case may apply.
In our mobile world time in transit and mode are important pieces of information about a specific person. Flight on an airplane or other commercial carrier is well defined once a person is confirmed to be on board. Travel is a private vehicle is not monitored as exactly but is being monitored more by various methods like license plate readers and electronic devices that record and report location and vehicle operation information.
The answer to the subject line question is that we are either in one place geographically or moving from one place to another. Almost all the time? Well, I guess so. Even if we are in our own home we are either sitting in a fixed easy chair or moving within the house. There are ways and means to detect that if desired.
Most of our movements covering longer distances and time are in an automobile. The Great American Car. Once at a destination the proximity of the destination is a function of availability of parking and the average distance a person is willing to walk to a destination once parked is 1,000 feet. On the way to the destination there are many sensors, like cameras, our cell phone, a time clock at work or entry to a retail store that establish points of travel and duration spent at points as well as self evident purpose.
Time spent traveling in a car is one of the less documented time frames that is a significant amount of time that relates to a significant number of data points about us. It is comparable to "Vacuum Time" a time where space/time information is not generally known.
Here I will coin a phrase and then see by means of Google search if I win the prize of being the first to enter the phrase into the WWW in the context in which I use it.
Total Information All The Time Abhors "Vacuum Time". Total Information wants to fill that vacuum in accordance with its law of nature that dictates it must fill a vacuum.
It looks like I win the prize but there are too many coincidental search results that do not relate to the context in which I have used the term. Darn! I like to be a cut and dried "no result on search term" winner!
Surveillance must know where we are in space and time all the time. One of the places it does not conclusively cover is when we are traveling in a personal vehicle, or any vehicle for that matter. The latest technology in airborne tracking is an amazing spin off from battle field management but it is a mode of identifying the object first (target acquisition) as opposed to the target being self identifying all the time in real time. The later is the best way to acquire a target. Have it reveal its own time space status as well as all possible relationship information that may be associated with it. Speed, direction, number of occupants, time to next oil change, radio station tuned in, type of music playing, etc. hundreds of data elements since any one of them has the potential to be an important piece of any given puzzle.
Travel in a vehicle is becoming less of an information vacuum every day.
I intended to write about Jeff Jonas' brilliant puzzle analogy that he used to explain Entity Analysis. As you can see I side tracked that journey by the last couple blog entries. I am easily side tracked. The side track however is segue to time and spatial Entity Analysis.
More sidetrack here subsequent to the preceding paragraph:
This link: "Governments and corporations gather, store, and analyze the tremendous amount of data we chuff out as we move through our digitized lives."
Actually, in the digital domain world we are on the move all the time, even when in the real domain world we are sitting in a chair (at a computer) or washing our hands with the fact of running water somewhere in the house being recorded and reported in real time water usage monitoring. It is done in my town. Flush a toilet and the device using water is known by virtue of flush duration.
Meta data tells so much about us. Meta data is what is collected and transmitted when we drive a car. The more meta data the better the surveillance.
Australia has mandated two year retention of communication data. That is how long it must be retained. How long it may be retained for commercial data mining extraction might be much longer? Is there a law or does the law direct mandatory deletion at the two year mark? Probably not????
Cars That Drive Themselves - Why???????
The sole intent is to control the driver. Report on the drivers
action in real time for black box recording and/or real time
transmission of all data regarding the operation of a vehicle.
Ford cars slow when they see speed-limit signs
The initial title of this blog entry was Driver less Cars - Why? What is the point? I picture a driver less car where the drivers devotes full time to the browsing the Internet while the car takes them to the destination.
The most stupid idea I can imagine!!! However, nothing can be this stupid and have so much money invested in it without a purpose.
What is the purpose?
The cars will not be driver less. The driver will sit behind the wheel, eyes on the road always ready to take command and control to over-ride the autonomous self-driving operation. In the event of an accident caused by the driver failing to take control of the situation to exercise good judgment? What will the driver say regarding their ultimate responsibility for safe operation?
The car made me do it?
Maybe it did. Maybe the exact cause can be found in the failure of hard-ware and software systems designed to control the car and the failure could not be corrected by the driver within human response time of wet-ware and judgment application response time.
On the other hand, hardware and software systems designed to drive a car without constant human control (like speed control on steroids) will probably be less error prone than the average human driver. For example: Aviation accidents are investigated thoroughly. Automated command and control systems operate the aircraft but most often the conclusion is that the accident was caused by pilot error like putting the wheels down on an amphibian aircraft when intending to land on water. I am on the waiting list for delivery of an Icon A-5. Land or water landing an the associated aircraft configuration is an important judgment decision.
I am becoming convinced here that the true purpose is not to create a driver less car and demonstrate is feasibility by controlling the car from coast to coast or anywhere else without a human in the car but to ultimately place hardware and software systems control over the human driver of the car as well as recording for information generation purposes all actions the driver takes and the time and spatial environment in which they were taken.
This link is an excellent example of what I mean. The Progressive Insurance dongle is another example that I have blogged about. So is the Oregon plan to charge for road usage by mileage driven rather than a gasoline tax. A plan that I have also blogged about. So are the patents that Google holds on drawing and recording extensive information from automobile computer systems.
The sole intent is to control the driver. Report on the drivers action in real time for black box recording and/or real time transmission of all data regarding the operation of a vehicle.
There will never be a car that drives around without an occupant. Not even to drive itself up to a house to beep a horn or play the copyrighted tune that says your pizza is here.
The sole intent is to control the driver. It is not to control the car.
That is such a good bottom line that I am going to leave it at the bottom but copy it and put it on the top as well. It is the start and end of the most important answer to the subject question. The follow on question is: Why don't we see readily what the real purpose is when the simple term used to describe to idea is "Driver less car".
My spell checker tells me that "driverless" is not a word. Therefore I use "driver less" which is a good term. It means that the human driver will drive less and be monitored more. Someday I expect that "driverless" will creep into the lexicon and be accepted as a legitimate word. However, "monitored more" will never become "monitoredmore" as applicable to a human driver. It is a clever framing of the issue that disguises the fact that the temperature of personal monitoring is approaching the boiling point without our recognition that we are being boiled.
Perhaps live lobsters would feel less pain if the same was applied to them rather than immediate immersion in the boiling water. In either case they have no control over the process that leads to a conclusion.
An interesting comment I read at a later date:
"We are all beta testers for robots."
Ford cars slow when they see speed-limit signs
The initial title of this blog entry was Driver less Cars - Why? What is the point? I picture a driver less car where the drivers devotes full time to the browsing the Internet while the car takes them to the destination.
The most stupid idea I can imagine!!! However, nothing can be this stupid and have so much money invested in it without a purpose.
What is the purpose?
The cars will not be driver less. The driver will sit behind the wheel, eyes on the road always ready to take command and control to over-ride the autonomous self-driving operation. In the event of an accident caused by the driver failing to take control of the situation to exercise good judgment? What will the driver say regarding their ultimate responsibility for safe operation?
The car made me do it?
Maybe it did. Maybe the exact cause can be found in the failure of hard-ware and software systems designed to control the car and the failure could not be corrected by the driver within human response time of wet-ware and judgment application response time.
On the other hand, hardware and software systems designed to drive a car without constant human control (like speed control on steroids) will probably be less error prone than the average human driver. For example: Aviation accidents are investigated thoroughly. Automated command and control systems operate the aircraft but most often the conclusion is that the accident was caused by pilot error like putting the wheels down on an amphibian aircraft when intending to land on water. I am on the waiting list for delivery of an Icon A-5. Land or water landing an the associated aircraft configuration is an important judgment decision.
I am becoming convinced here that the true purpose is not to create a driver less car and demonstrate is feasibility by controlling the car from coast to coast or anywhere else without a human in the car but to ultimately place hardware and software systems control over the human driver of the car as well as recording for information generation purposes all actions the driver takes and the time and spatial environment in which they were taken.
This link is an excellent example of what I mean. The Progressive Insurance dongle is another example that I have blogged about. So is the Oregon plan to charge for road usage by mileage driven rather than a gasoline tax. A plan that I have also blogged about. So are the patents that Google holds on drawing and recording extensive information from automobile computer systems.
The sole intent is to control the driver. Report on the drivers action in real time for black box recording and/or real time transmission of all data regarding the operation of a vehicle.
There will never be a car that drives around without an occupant. Not even to drive itself up to a house to beep a horn or play the copyrighted tune that says your pizza is here.
The sole intent is to control the driver. It is not to control the car.
That is such a good bottom line that I am going to leave it at the bottom but copy it and put it on the top as well. It is the start and end of the most important answer to the subject question. The follow on question is: Why don't we see readily what the real purpose is when the simple term used to describe to idea is "Driver less car".
My spell checker tells me that "driverless" is not a word. Therefore I use "driver less" which is a good term. It means that the human driver will drive less and be monitored more. Someday I expect that "driverless" will creep into the lexicon and be accepted as a legitimate word. However, "monitored more" will never become "monitoredmore" as applicable to a human driver. It is a clever framing of the issue that disguises the fact that the temperature of personal monitoring is approaching the boiling point without our recognition that we are being boiled.
Perhaps live lobsters would feel less pain if the same was applied to them rather than immediate immersion in the boiling water. In either case they have no control over the process that leads to a conclusion.
An interesting comment I read at a later date:
"We are all beta testers for robots."
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
Balance Sheet Meets Blockchain Money
Blockchain at this link: Crypto currency fit for Wall Street
The banking system is a balance sheet system of debit and credit accounting.
Assets equal Liabilities in the situation where money is loaned into existence by a loan contract to pay it back the total amount loaned at some time in the future. That is at least the essence of the situation to be confused by a lot of other related factors, twists and turns, smoke and mirrors.
All of what we call money was therefore created by contractual loans and the total of all loans, public and private combined equals the total of all money in existence at any given time. Loans are made by the Federal Reserve banking system to the private sector and the public sector. More accurately, the Fed is a middle man agent that processes loans to the government and either holds the loan or sells it to a buyer in the private sector. Government bonds provide money for government spending.
A block chain of money transactions in all accounts relating to equal but opposite adjustments on both sides of the ledger verifies the truth of the current asset/liability balance as well as the accuracy of all prior money transactions related to that balance up to that time.
A new third way to check the asset/liability monetary balance and verify its accuracy requires a third entity, the money itself, independent of the account that it may be in. That of course requires the establishment of an object entity with identifying attributes that did not previously exist is the digital domain of accounting for assets and liabilities as a balance of each account and of the aggregate of all accounts at the macro level.
Enter Blockchain Money. A third entity in the Asset/Liability system. The total value of all Blockchain money with a unit value of one unique dollar each equals the total of all Monetary Assets which is equal to all Monetary Liabilities which is equal to Monetary Liabilities which is equal to the current amount due under all Contract Loans that created the Asset/Liability equal balance relationship in the first place. This applies to all money regardless of a sub-classification of money in the Contract Loan domain to public and private loans. Money created by a loan may enter the system as either the product of a public or private loan but once introduced to the system it all spends the same and any single dollar loses its birth identity in the current system.
The moment of birth of a dollar bill establishes its unique (IPv6 or serial number) identity at the beginning of its life when it is introduced by association to two balance sheet accounts (asset/liability) before it is ever even spent the first time in its asset state of being in a transaction that carries through in blockchain hash methodology for its entire existence as a unique entity object called money in the monetary system.
The same unit dollar of money that was introduced to the Monetary System by a loan contract, public or private is not the same unit of money that is ultimately paid back to satisfy the terms and conditions of the loan contract. Any single uniquely identified unit money is legal tender to settle the loan debt, regardless if the loan was originated as a public sector or private sector loan.
If the unit dollar was given a unique identifier from a block range of identifiers reserved to denote either a public sector or private sector loan at its birth and introduction by a private or public contract loan....
and...
If the loan public or private sector is repaid (satisfied) with unrelated unique unit dollars that are identified as either public or private sector loan in origin then their nature of origin is unrelated to the category of debt they are used to satisfy. Dollars are dollars.
Then....
There is a conundrum. A complex one if the system conceptual structure says that those dollars go back into a suspended pool of dollars that are eligible for introduction to the system again by the creation of a loan contract. True for the banking system making private sector loans into the economy. But for the public sector (government) paying off the loans made to it (National Debt) then what is the situation if citizens paid their taxes in a variable arbitrary combination of public/private origin dollars as a function of the law of averages related to their occurrence?
Gotta think about this. The conceptual system rule is that money never dies. Once created it lives forever although it may be in a state of circulation or reserved suspension as a reserve from which to draw for it to re-enter circulation state.
The banking system is a balance sheet system of debit and credit accounting.
Assets equal Liabilities in the situation where money is loaned into existence by a loan contract to pay it back the total amount loaned at some time in the future. That is at least the essence of the situation to be confused by a lot of other related factors, twists and turns, smoke and mirrors.
All of what we call money was therefore created by contractual loans and the total of all loans, public and private combined equals the total of all money in existence at any given time. Loans are made by the Federal Reserve banking system to the private sector and the public sector. More accurately, the Fed is a middle man agent that processes loans to the government and either holds the loan or sells it to a buyer in the private sector. Government bonds provide money for government spending.
A block chain of money transactions in all accounts relating to equal but opposite adjustments on both sides of the ledger verifies the truth of the current asset/liability balance as well as the accuracy of all prior money transactions related to that balance up to that time.
A new third way to check the asset/liability monetary balance and verify its accuracy requires a third entity, the money itself, independent of the account that it may be in. That of course requires the establishment of an object entity with identifying attributes that did not previously exist is the digital domain of accounting for assets and liabilities as a balance of each account and of the aggregate of all accounts at the macro level.
Enter Blockchain Money. A third entity in the Asset/Liability system. The total value of all Blockchain money with a unit value of one unique dollar each equals the total of all Monetary Assets which is equal to all Monetary Liabilities which is equal to Monetary Liabilities which is equal to the current amount due under all Contract Loans that created the Asset/Liability equal balance relationship in the first place. This applies to all money regardless of a sub-classification of money in the Contract Loan domain to public and private loans. Money created by a loan may enter the system as either the product of a public or private loan but once introduced to the system it all spends the same and any single dollar loses its birth identity in the current system.
The moment of birth of a dollar bill establishes its unique (IPv6 or serial number) identity at the beginning of its life when it is introduced by association to two balance sheet accounts (asset/liability) before it is ever even spent the first time in its asset state of being in a transaction that carries through in blockchain hash methodology for its entire existence as a unique entity object called money in the monetary system.
The same unit dollar of money that was introduced to the Monetary System by a loan contract, public or private is not the same unit of money that is ultimately paid back to satisfy the terms and conditions of the loan contract. Any single uniquely identified unit money is legal tender to settle the loan debt, regardless if the loan was originated as a public sector or private sector loan.
If the unit dollar was given a unique identifier from a block range of identifiers reserved to denote either a public sector or private sector loan at its birth and introduction by a private or public contract loan....
and...
If the loan public or private sector is repaid (satisfied) with unrelated unique unit dollars that are identified as either public or private sector loan in origin then their nature of origin is unrelated to the category of debt they are used to satisfy. Dollars are dollars.
Then....
There is a conundrum. A complex one if the system conceptual structure says that those dollars go back into a suspended pool of dollars that are eligible for introduction to the system again by the creation of a loan contract. True for the banking system making private sector loans into the economy. But for the public sector (government) paying off the loans made to it (National Debt) then what is the situation if citizens paid their taxes in a variable arbitrary combination of public/private origin dollars as a function of the law of averages related to their occurrence?
Gotta think about this. The conceptual system rule is that money never dies. Once created it lives forever although it may be in a state of circulation or reserved suspension as a reserve from which to draw for it to re-enter circulation state.
The New Monetary System Balance Sheet
At this point of my blog's continuing evolution I have come to the view that my conceptual Monetary System is composed of Three Entity Super Classes presented in the recent posts in the past two weeks. Won't link them here. Super Classes that do not depend on a prior conversion to a positive debt free monetary system but simply overlay the debt based current system with a higher level of object oriented controlling Entities.
MONETARY SYSTEM COMPONENTS:
Money System
Accounting System
Contract Loan System
Each of these entities has a block chain component focused on its appropriate granular level as follows:
Money System: A single unique digital dollar with a value of one identified by a unique numbering system. Could be serial, could be IPv6. I like IPv6. Used to like serial number because that is how our dollar bills are numbered but it is old school. The history of who previously owned each dollar is a block chain record of each dollar. While this is on a granular dollar level it relates to the account in which a total amount of dollars transferred from one account to another. Each dollar always knows its current owner as well as a block chain of previous owners
Accounting System: Granular level is the account. Every citizen has one. Every other entity is a registered business entity and they have one or more than one. If more than one primary account it is a subsidiary account under the ownership of the primary account to identify which big fish own which littler fish, if any. Each account knows its owner, its current total on hand balance as well as its Account Block Chain history of transactions with other accounts. All this is on an extended ledger in the Swift system. IBM is working on that. (Adept).
Contract Loan System: Granular level is a two party contract. Each party identified by its account. All contracts in an extended contract ledger are identified by a unique number. IPv6 numbers reserved in a block for this application perhaps? Contract transactions involving loan and payback under contract terms and agreement feed to the Accounting System on a total dollar value of the Loan Payback during the life of the loan. The Accounting System passes the total value of the transaction to the Money system for application to each granular single dollar in the total amount of the Accounting System Transaction. Current Loan amount due on loan has a block chain history back to loan origination of all loan transactions including not only money related Transactions but changes in terms and conditions related to money transactions. After IBM straightens out the Accounting system it should then focus on the Contract Loan System. In addition to what I propose for my Monetary System, IBM should apply it to all non-monetary related contracts all the way into, as far as possible the grey area of stakeholder contracts to formalize their interests and associated rights.
This conceptual structure is an overlay of the current debt based monetary system. It therefore requires some understanding of that system, which is not so easy. However there are some truths about it that apply (more true than false all the way to absolutely true or should be).
Truths:
In a debt based system money is created out of thin air by the establishment of a contract agreement to loan money by the lender to be paid back in accordance with the terms of the contract by the receiver of the money. This applies for loans in both the public and private sector.
All money in circulation is debt money.
All money in circulation is at the aggregate total dollar value is held in an account by an account manager at.....well, let me just say by an account manager without saying exactly who....just some account manager somewhere that keeps track of who owns the money at any given time as well as a required historical history of transactions.
All money in all accounts is owned by some financial entity and that entity can be known.
The prior truths cover existing Monetary Account and Loan Contract categories.
The third category, my conceptual Money System does not currently exist. While I propose some monetary overlays to the current system, the Money System is a new entity that did not exist before at the digital money level. While the monetary banking system continues to create money as a function of debt created by a loan contract, that money created does not come from nowhere, it comes from somewhere. Where it comes from is a pool of uniquely identified dollars with a value of one that were in suspended circulation, a sort of limbo where it was not owned by anyone but may have been previously owned while it was in circulation in a prior life time called "Circulation".
"Circulation" in the prior paragraph requires some definition because the big change in the overlay of the existing system is a new entity of "Money" that is more than a number that represents the total on hand balance of all dollars in an account and the transactions identified to total dollar amounts that change that balance. Money in the proposed system does not move. The single unit digital dollar with a value of one dollar is a static record that goes nowhere. It does not move from account to account. It is a fixed record that relates to total transaction amounts (which are not "real money"itself but transactions of total money value per transaction in the Accounting System to be applied to changes of ownership of each unique dollar in the Money System.
Therefore there are some more truths related to the Money System that emerge:
The total of all unit digital dollars with a value of one expressed a total value of all money in the Money System......
Equals....
The total of all on hand balance value in all accounts in the extended ledger in the Accounting System expressed as a total money value.....
Equals the total value of all payments due under contract loans in the Contract loan system.
Big theoretical Truth here: All three component entities of the Monetary System must be equal to each other in their total money value.
MONETARY SYSTEM COMPONENTS:
Money System
Accounting System
Contract Loan System
Each of these entities has a block chain component focused on its appropriate granular level as follows:
Money System: A single unique digital dollar with a value of one identified by a unique numbering system. Could be serial, could be IPv6. I like IPv6. Used to like serial number because that is how our dollar bills are numbered but it is old school. The history of who previously owned each dollar is a block chain record of each dollar. While this is on a granular dollar level it relates to the account in which a total amount of dollars transferred from one account to another. Each dollar always knows its current owner as well as a block chain of previous owners
Accounting System: Granular level is the account. Every citizen has one. Every other entity is a registered business entity and they have one or more than one. If more than one primary account it is a subsidiary account under the ownership of the primary account to identify which big fish own which littler fish, if any. Each account knows its owner, its current total on hand balance as well as its Account Block Chain history of transactions with other accounts. All this is on an extended ledger in the Swift system. IBM is working on that. (Adept).
Contract Loan System: Granular level is a two party contract. Each party identified by its account. All contracts in an extended contract ledger are identified by a unique number. IPv6 numbers reserved in a block for this application perhaps? Contract transactions involving loan and payback under contract terms and agreement feed to the Accounting System on a total dollar value of the Loan Payback during the life of the loan. The Accounting System passes the total value of the transaction to the Money system for application to each granular single dollar in the total amount of the Accounting System Transaction. Current Loan amount due on loan has a block chain history back to loan origination of all loan transactions including not only money related Transactions but changes in terms and conditions related to money transactions. After IBM straightens out the Accounting system it should then focus on the Contract Loan System. In addition to what I propose for my Monetary System, IBM should apply it to all non-monetary related contracts all the way into, as far as possible the grey area of stakeholder contracts to formalize their interests and associated rights.
This conceptual structure is an overlay of the current debt based monetary system. It therefore requires some understanding of that system, which is not so easy. However there are some truths about it that apply (more true than false all the way to absolutely true or should be).
Truths:
In a debt based system money is created out of thin air by the establishment of a contract agreement to loan money by the lender to be paid back in accordance with the terms of the contract by the receiver of the money. This applies for loans in both the public and private sector.
All money in circulation is debt money.
All money in circulation is at the aggregate total dollar value is held in an account by an account manager at.....well, let me just say by an account manager without saying exactly who....just some account manager somewhere that keeps track of who owns the money at any given time as well as a required historical history of transactions.
All money in all accounts is owned by some financial entity and that entity can be known.
The prior truths cover existing Monetary Account and Loan Contract categories.
The third category, my conceptual Money System does not currently exist. While I propose some monetary overlays to the current system, the Money System is a new entity that did not exist before at the digital money level. While the monetary banking system continues to create money as a function of debt created by a loan contract, that money created does not come from nowhere, it comes from somewhere. Where it comes from is a pool of uniquely identified dollars with a value of one that were in suspended circulation, a sort of limbo where it was not owned by anyone but may have been previously owned while it was in circulation in a prior life time called "Circulation".
"Circulation" in the prior paragraph requires some definition because the big change in the overlay of the existing system is a new entity of "Money" that is more than a number that represents the total on hand balance of all dollars in an account and the transactions identified to total dollar amounts that change that balance. Money in the proposed system does not move. The single unit digital dollar with a value of one dollar is a static record that goes nowhere. It does not move from account to account. It is a fixed record that relates to total transaction amounts (which are not "real money"itself but transactions of total money value per transaction in the Accounting System to be applied to changes of ownership of each unique dollar in the Money System.
Therefore there are some more truths related to the Money System that emerge:
The total of all unit digital dollars with a value of one expressed a total value of all money in the Money System......
Equals....
The total of all on hand balance value in all accounts in the extended ledger in the Accounting System expressed as a total money value.....
Equals the total value of all payments due under contract loans in the Contract loan system.
Big theoretical Truth here: All three component entities of the Monetary System must be equal to each other in their total money value.
FBI Must Evolve to Fight Terrorism
What is scary at this link that looks at the subject of this blog entry is the path of evolving.
It suggests that the FBI take or is taking a path of public private partnership to access intelligence about domestic terrorism. Probably using public sector big data on everything to identify entity relationships the indicate a high degree of probability that terrorism may be involved. Public big data on everyone that the FBI nor any other domestic agency could undertake. It is much better and with less regulation to let private enterprise big data develop their big data silos, each proprietary to the company that produces it and have a private enterprise aggregator sift through all the data on every citizen to identify the bad guys. That is something the NSA is already doing globally and using private enterprise big data as well as their own proprietary data to accomplish. It is all just data points on everyone.
If the FBI pays private enterprise data miners for domestic information mining and product it can be a front end for the FBI to look at for leads and act on them as well as pass them on to NSA/CIA for refinement, possible feedback info sharing. I am sure that NSA is already getting it through direct feed from private enterprise big data. This "need" to shift it to the FBI is just "laundering" it by its first point of entry to the government domain to be an Agency well recognized for its domestic law enforcement role.
Getting legislation to smooth the way for all of this is equally scary. Legislation that might be easier to get because it is in the FBI frame law enforcement as opposed to the NSA frame of spying. Two different things, two different frames of public opinion. In the end FBI just passes on all the meaty stuff to the NSA either proactively at the direct request by the NSA to produce it for any target.
The PR problem is to keep public opinion in the domain of what the FBI does as law enforcement and not let the FBI be seen as a spy agency, which they would actually become.
What we have here is not a problem is the "Fight Terrorism" domain. It is propaganda problem in the PR department of the FBI to keep the FBI distanced from domestic spying when this is really another step toward increased public spying on a Total Information, All the Time basis.
How dumb do they think some of us are.
You can fool most of the people most of the time. Does that say something about our general level of public perception or technological advances in the formation of and manipulation of public perception of what is really going on and for the benefit of whom and who is paying the cost and in what terms is cost measured.
Can't fool all the people all the time!!!!
It suggests that the FBI take or is taking a path of public private partnership to access intelligence about domestic terrorism. Probably using public sector big data on everything to identify entity relationships the indicate a high degree of probability that terrorism may be involved. Public big data on everyone that the FBI nor any other domestic agency could undertake. It is much better and with less regulation to let private enterprise big data develop their big data silos, each proprietary to the company that produces it and have a private enterprise aggregator sift through all the data on every citizen to identify the bad guys. That is something the NSA is already doing globally and using private enterprise big data as well as their own proprietary data to accomplish. It is all just data points on everyone.
If the FBI pays private enterprise data miners for domestic information mining and product it can be a front end for the FBI to look at for leads and act on them as well as pass them on to NSA/CIA for refinement, possible feedback info sharing. I am sure that NSA is already getting it through direct feed from private enterprise big data. This "need" to shift it to the FBI is just "laundering" it by its first point of entry to the government domain to be an Agency well recognized for its domestic law enforcement role.
Getting legislation to smooth the way for all of this is equally scary. Legislation that might be easier to get because it is in the FBI frame law enforcement as opposed to the NSA frame of spying. Two different things, two different frames of public opinion. In the end FBI just passes on all the meaty stuff to the NSA either proactively at the direct request by the NSA to produce it for any target.
The PR problem is to keep public opinion in the domain of what the FBI does as law enforcement and not let the FBI be seen as a spy agency, which they would actually become.
What we have here is not a problem is the "Fight Terrorism" domain. It is propaganda problem in the PR department of the FBI to keep the FBI distanced from domestic spying when this is really another step toward increased public spying on a Total Information, All the Time basis.
How dumb do they think some of us are.
You can fool most of the people most of the time. Does that say something about our general level of public perception or technological advances in the formation of and manipulation of public perception of what is really going on and for the benefit of whom and who is paying the cost and in what terms is cost measured.
Can't fool all the people all the time!!!!
Monday, March 16, 2015
A Revelation an Analysis of Where Banks Get Profit
From the Finance Economy vs the Real Economy,
http://m.ibtimes.com/how-does-wall-street-work-only-one-quarter-investment-bank-revenue-comes-activities-1845162
25% from the real economy investment.
75%. from the financial investment economy.
The analysis questions if this is a good thing or a bad thing. It concluded it is hard to measure.
Not hard if my conceptual monetary system is applied to it.
Getting To The Heart of the Matter
Here:
http://tech.thaivisa.com/halifax-is-testing-heartbeat-id-as-a-new-banking-tool/6989/
Absolute, beyond a shadow of a doubt real time personal identity is the key to entry of secure systems. This is just another biometric marker.
The granular level of our society is the individual. To recognize that individual's heart as the prime identifier is poetic. To recognize the soul as unique identifier is sublime. That however operates at a higher level we did not create. It does however serve as a good model. Maybe a perfect one?
The concept of heaven is indeed a secure system.
"Halifax feels that this new Heartbeat ID technology is superior to fingerprint scanning. After all, fingerprints can be faked, but you can’t fake a heartbeat."
Except if your last name is Cheney.
Blockchain Of Things. (BoT)
There is much talk about the Internet of Things (IoT). Much of it relates to security fears. This link is an example:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/security/how-to-build-a-safer-internet-of-things
"What we have he-ya is a fail-ya to com-mun-cate."
Yes, indeed!
A stealth insertion of communication that subverts legitimate communication. Theft in other words, actually. If thieves self identify themselves as they commit the crime the their security becomes compromised and it is they that fear. Shoe on the other foot! As it should be.
BoT is a way to put the shoe on the other foot. The model for this is:
"Citizens should not fear the government. Government should fear its citizens."
What's fear? Fear is forward looking and its degree of probability that an adverse action will be taken against a person that has cause to fear. Freedom from fear is an ideal and fundamental human right.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_from_fear
Crime and Punishment is backward looking justice. War is forward looking justice that retores the norm of peace. Fear operates in either case. Who fears whom and why and the causal factors are a fascinating thing to analyze.
While the IoT offers opportunity for the bad guys to do evil, the BoT is the control device that assures both the absolute probability that crime will be detected and perpetrators identified for punishment. When you can't get away with it what is the motivation to try?
BoT establishes the truth of things and actions over time in a conceptual system of things and actions between them are a exact model of things and actions in the real world.
This is where physical security systems that I have previously blogged often about in this blog that is basically money oriented takes on the analogy of control that I seek in the monetary system. In that domain, the NSA really does present a fundamentally broad block chain model in the physical real world domain. Same as money or any other conceptual object in the abstracted structure of the conceptual domain.
The NSA Blockchain in the physical domain is the locking of real thing identity into a space and time blockchain record history. A history that is both backward looking fact and forward looking probability as well as real time status.
BoT application to the IoT where every "Thing" in the system is unique identified in real time and space as well as its interaction transactions with all other things in the system. The real time truth of anything passes into the block chain of history.
The granular unit of of interest to the NSA is a unique person.
The granular unit of interest in the broader conceptual world is the unit of value in the monetary system,
Much of what we have to fear in this world is related to money, not to what ISIS terrorists are going to do to us but what those that control the monetary system are doing to us.
Be afraid. Apply BoT to every thing and it's interaction in time and be at peace.
BoT is the truth and the truth will set us free from fear of criminal abuse of the conceptual system we have created to serve us.
"God made man but Samuel Colt made them equal."
The new Colt of the Information Age is the BoT. It protects us defensively from abuse and is the weapon of offense to be used against abuse. It is as quick on the draw as real time and is absolute in its accuracy. It is the truth of a thing. Each of us must be armed with it. That essentially what Sir Tim Berners-Lee intends to establish by giving all of us an IP IPv6 identity on the WWW to control how we are used via information about us and how we use our identity to control
the honesty and promotion of the general welfare through the systems we have created.
Sunday, March 15, 2015
Paul Brody IBM Adept
Paul is no longer at IBM
http://johncohn.org/base/2015/01/13/tuesday-night-mr-brody-has-left-the-building/
He was until recently related to the IBM application of Blockchain system structure to a monetary system.
http://presschain.com/the-guy-behind-ethereums-washing-machine-quits-ibm/
I would like to find Paul or whoever the current mover and shaker of this project is at IBM.
Entry: 25 March 2015
It appears that Richard Gendal Brown is the person of interest here.
Entry: 25 March 2015
It appears that Richard Gendal Brown is the person of interest here.
Genius!
I wonder if this is related to an old friend at IBM working on Watson that I have followed since his Las Vegas days and just how deep into the monetary system their plan goes.
As deep as mine? Knowing that IBM has some real structured thinkers they do not come up with producing features. They build systems.
As deep as my thinking?
If mine is systemically logical at the highest and lowest levels then how many best systems can be constructed? Maybe the answer is that it depends on who it serves.
The current one serves the Banksters well. A logical one for them.
What or whom is this being built to serve? It would make heaps of money for IBM. For whom to create it for and monetizing that stream of payback determines the answer.
Will it be the Banksters or We the People??
Astounding!!
http://3dprint.com/50777/molecular-3d-printer/
There seems to be an analogy here to my approach to a monetary system.
Go to the lowest granular level of a thing. Uniquely identify it as a singular object identity of all things and any higher level thing and it's function is enabled to be created.
Sounds simple to me but structuring the object properties, it's knowledge of methods to do it and giving it messages to pass to other objects to invoke what they know how to do....it is complex.
Reducing complexity to simplicity is a feature of the Information Age.
Saturday, March 14, 2015
It's Sunday -- Therefore I Digress
I digress because that is what Sunday was made for!
I have worked this week to create the principal objects, I call them the Super Class Objects to overlay on the existing money system. I did this because the existing money system was primarily designed on a function framework approach giving system control to functional processes instead of the objects used in the functional processes.
Call it an overlay of the supremacy of objects to determine functions (that is a top down view) or call it a foundation upon which to build (the bottom up construction viewpoint). I simply prefer top down because it is a more formalized planning division of specialed ability process like the classic architect and builder model. On the other hand, I really prefer to do everything myself.
Having stated the attributes of the 3 objects: Currency, Account and Loan Contract and at the point of running various test transactions through or among them I pause to digress and reflect as I rest. Not really a digression when I think about it but part of (an object in itself) of the design process. John Boyd would have called it an object driven feedback loop?
Which came first??
The chicken or the egg?
This is a digression so an off the wall comment is acceptable. Besides its Sunday. Because Sunday.
It will however go somewhere. It is a loop.
So riddle me this: Which came first?
It is a loaded question designed to tie to poor person who is expected to answer it up in knots to the amusement of the person who asked the question. It is analogue to my elegant cat skinning strategy: Set up the situation by manipulation of the objects involved so that the cat winds up skinning itself by jumping out of its skin. Set the objects up well enough and any event (like sneaking up on it and shouting Gotcha! Will make it jump out of its skin. Principal object manipulated is Fear.
A real life example?
How do you get the American Public to jump out of its Freedom?
Duh!
1. Be afraid.
2. Be very afraid!
Terrorists!
Vote for me, I will protect you! (For a price). New meaning to Paying the Price for our Freedom or:
"Freedom isn't Free". (Hand me you skin now please). That is called winning without making a bloody mess out of it in the process. Maybe I should call it shearing the sheep or milking the cow or grabbing the golden egg.
Does that sound like a business model? Politics? Banking?
Which came first is intended to confuse then take advantage of the confusion. The power to confuse, to hide the truth is power. There is a simple explanation of how the confusion is caused.
From the issue in terms of the action.
Which came first?
That is the loaded set up question. It frames the matter of two objects in terms of Time. Time itself, it's essence of being is verb. The ultimate purity of action vs object noun thing being. The only attribute of time is passage of time (the eternal now?)
Perhaps a mystical conclusion of this digression but time really is mystical concept.
Time is the ultimate enabler action that makes possible a purely recursive relationship of a thing to itself. Time is action over span joining two things made different as a function of span. We fantasize about time travel but we travel over time.
Time is a higher absolute truth in a metaphysical realm that ultimately controls all. In our lesser physical realm objects are our ultimate truth. Real objects or our conceptual constructed things we believe to be the truth.
Time is money. Control time monetized as money in the temporal physical world by making the natural supremacy of objects to dictate functions (to the extent of organizing their functions over time) and somehow a natural order of things can be subverted for a sub optimized agenda.
The banksters trick depends on time as the as the architectural model structure of the money system.
My overlay of design dictate of structured objects from which their design attributed relate over time restores what I conceive to be the proper order of things in the natural world.
Only one concept can control time. To the extent of making it absolute eternity.
Banksters trying to control time.
Get behind me you devil!
We control Banksters with objects.
That is why I have created this object model to control their functional model.
I have a dream.........
Enough digression. I feel that I have looped back to analyzing how the objects control monetary transaction the currency system.
Time is a tool of the Banksters to monetize currency.
Objectify time, put that objectified tool in our hands and we control the Banksters.
That is why I am doing this.
In the broader scheme of things technology has provided us, we have provided ourselves better tools to design and build with. Not only physical objects but abstract conceptual objects of the Information Age.
The method of choice for designing and building conceptual systems is Object Orientation. Conceptual objects can be invested with knowledge of functions that it can perform as a part of the object itself. The object can communicate with other objects to invoke their known methods.
I have worked this week to create the principal objects, I call them the Super Class Objects to overlay on the existing money system. I did this because the existing money system was primarily designed on a function framework approach giving system control to functional processes instead of the objects used in the functional processes.
Call it an overlay of the supremacy of objects to determine functions (that is a top down view) or call it a foundation upon which to build (the bottom up construction viewpoint). I simply prefer top down because it is a more formalized planning division of specialed ability process like the classic architect and builder model. On the other hand, I really prefer to do everything myself.
Having stated the attributes of the 3 objects: Currency, Account and Loan Contract and at the point of running various test transactions through or among them I pause to digress and reflect as I rest. Not really a digression when I think about it but part of (an object in itself) of the design process. John Boyd would have called it an object driven feedback loop?
Which came first??
The chicken or the egg?
This is a digression so an off the wall comment is acceptable. Besides its Sunday. Because Sunday.
It will however go somewhere. It is a loop.
So riddle me this: Which came first?
It is a loaded question designed to tie to poor person who is expected to answer it up in knots to the amusement of the person who asked the question. It is analogue to my elegant cat skinning strategy: Set up the situation by manipulation of the objects involved so that the cat winds up skinning itself by jumping out of its skin. Set the objects up well enough and any event (like sneaking up on it and shouting Gotcha! Will make it jump out of its skin. Principal object manipulated is Fear.
A real life example?
How do you get the American Public to jump out of its Freedom?
Duh!
1. Be afraid.
2. Be very afraid!
Terrorists!
Vote for me, I will protect you! (For a price). New meaning to Paying the Price for our Freedom or:
"Freedom isn't Free". (Hand me you skin now please). That is called winning without making a bloody mess out of it in the process. Maybe I should call it shearing the sheep or milking the cow or grabbing the golden egg.
Does that sound like a business model? Politics? Banking?
Which came first is intended to confuse then take advantage of the confusion. The power to confuse, to hide the truth is power. There is a simple explanation of how the confusion is caused.
From the issue in terms of the action.
Which came first?
That is the loaded set up question. It frames the matter of two objects in terms of Time. Time itself, it's essence of being is verb. The ultimate purity of action vs object noun thing being. The only attribute of time is passage of time (the eternal now?)
Perhaps a mystical conclusion of this digression but time really is mystical concept.
Time is the ultimate enabler action that makes possible a purely recursive relationship of a thing to itself. Time is action over span joining two things made different as a function of span. We fantasize about time travel but we travel over time.
Time is a higher absolute truth in a metaphysical realm that ultimately controls all. In our lesser physical realm objects are our ultimate truth. Real objects or our conceptual constructed things we believe to be the truth.
Time is money. Control time monetized as money in the temporal physical world by making the natural supremacy of objects to dictate functions (to the extent of organizing their functions over time) and somehow a natural order of things can be subverted for a sub optimized agenda.
The banksters trick depends on time as the as the architectural model structure of the money system.
My overlay of design dictate of structured objects from which their design attributed relate over time restores what I conceive to be the proper order of things in the natural world.
Only one concept can control time. To the extent of making it absolute eternity.
Banksters trying to control time.
Get behind me you devil!
We control Banksters with objects.
That is why I have created this object model to control their functional model.
I have a dream.........
Enough digression. I feel that I have looped back to analyzing how the objects control monetary transaction the currency system.
Time is a tool of the Banksters to monetize currency.
Objectify time, put that objectified tool in our hands and we control the Banksters.
That is why I am doing this.
In the broader scheme of things technology has provided us, we have provided ourselves better tools to design and build with. Not only physical objects but abstract conceptual objects of the Information Age.
The method of choice for designing and building conceptual systems is Object Orientation. Conceptual objects can be invested with knowledge of functions that it can perform as a part of the object itself. The object can communicate with other objects to invoke their known methods.
Money and accounting systems were developed long ago based primarily on serving/managing/controlling what money did by functional rules applied to a dumb object called money. That is now a legacy system that needs to be redesigned as an object driven and dominated system. An object schematic above but integrating with the functional money system that continues to function as it always has (except for dysfunction eliminated by the Object Oriented controlling overlay that surface problems like a sore thumb and puts the writing on the wall for their solution.
Object driven design in the Information Age is superior to the dominant functional driven design of a previous age like everything BC was overtaken by AC. At that time new and better methods were incorporated into body of what intelligent objects knew how to do and pass messages to other intelligent objects to call their performance of methods they knew how to do.
The simple command to invoke the methods?
You guess. It is one step better than the elegance of getting a cat to skin itself and it was not based on fear.
Our Constitution is an Object Based Conceptual Social System design plan. It is unfortunate that money was exempted from the design. Even more unfortunate that the old functional based and oriented design became entrenched and institutionally established in the Fed.
While the Constitution is an object model it is unfortunate that the object ontology has not been extended down to meet the functional oriented implementation.
Like the monetary system, it's time will come but it will be a difficult time because like its tightly bound and associated monetary system there are too many benefitting greatly from the dysfunction of the functional oriented design that would be corrected by an Object Oriented analysis and controlling design implementation.
I will not see it in my life time and if I don't there will inevitably increasing stress until .....well, that is anyone's guess but the longer it takes the greater the cost of what???!
Freedom I suppose.
Testing Some Currency Transactions
Testing some currency transactions in the monetary system overlayed by object classes if Cirrency, Account and Currency Loan Contracts will serve to describe these object class components and how they interact.
Keep in mind that currency does not circular. It does not move. It is a permanent record on the Fort Knox Currency Server identified at the unit dollar level by a unique IPv6 code and related to a variable IPv6 account owner code.
From the virtual viewpoint currency can be said to be in circulation when it is owned by a variable identified account. In reality currency does not move, only account ownership changes.
All currency in circulation is a representation of debt in two categories:
Goveremt Debt (Vertical Currency)
Private Debt (Horizontal Currency)
The aggregate all currency in circulation is equal to the sum total of all money in all accounts and the sum total of all currency loan contracts. The totals of all three are equal.
A currency transaction is actually the changing of account ownership of a fixed unit of currency. Buying and selling things using currency as a medium of exchange. Spending money does not "move" it anywhere in the object class of Currency. It does however increase/decrease the sum total of funds in each party's account.
If the transaction involves paying off a loan or receiving a loan then the transaction must relate to the Loan Contract object class.
Keep in mind that currency does not circular. It does not move. It is a permanent record on the Fort Knox Currency Server identified at the unit dollar level by a unique IPv6 code and related to a variable IPv6 account owner code.
From the virtual viewpoint currency can be said to be in circulation when it is owned by a variable identified account. In reality currency does not move, only account ownership changes.
All currency in circulation is a representation of debt in two categories:
Goveremt Debt (Vertical Currency)
Private Debt (Horizontal Currency)
The aggregate all currency in circulation is equal to the sum total of all money in all accounts and the sum total of all currency loan contracts. The totals of all three are equal.
A currency transaction is actually the changing of account ownership of a fixed unit of currency. Buying and selling things using currency as a medium of exchange. Spending money does not "move" it anywhere in the object class of Currency. It does however increase/decrease the sum total of funds in each party's account.
If the transaction involves paying off a loan or receiving a loan then the transaction must relate to the Loan Contract object class.
Friday, March 13, 2015
Finally -- The Last Big Component of the Money System: Loan Contracts
The First Shall Be Last.
Bank loan contracts are what creates money in the current money system. Debt creation continues in the overlay of Currency and Account but instead of loan contracts being the upfront creator of money from thin air it is a downstream financial entity that draws currency established by the Currency Component for loan into the Account Component.
Loan Contracts not only create contractual debt agreements but keeps track of who owes what to whom, contract administration and receipt of payment on loans. Each loan contract is identified to a unique identifying ID.
While loans financing are the big business of banks and at a lower level that becomes overlaid by my monetary system scheme it is no longer the top level dominating entity of the monetary structure. That explains the first sentence in this blog entry.
Banksters will think they rain the top dogs of money until this proposed monetary structure teaches them their place in the scheme of things. What that scheme does is take the power to create money from nothing away from Banksters and requires them to use pre-existing dollars from the currency system and return them to the Currency system revolving fund pool as debts are paid.
System mission accomplished!
Bank loan contracts are what creates money in the current money system. Debt creation continues in the overlay of Currency and Account but instead of loan contracts being the upfront creator of money from thin air it is a downstream financial entity that draws currency established by the Currency Component for loan into the Account Component.
Loan Contracts not only create contractual debt agreements but keeps track of who owes what to whom, contract administration and receipt of payment on loans. Each loan contract is identified to a unique identifying ID.
While loans financing are the big business of banks and at a lower level that becomes overlaid by my monetary system scheme it is no longer the top level dominating entity of the monetary structure. That explains the first sentence in this blog entry.
Banksters will think they rain the top dogs of money until this proposed monetary structure teaches them their place in the scheme of things. What that scheme does is take the power to create money from nothing away from Banksters and requires them to use pre-existing dollars from the currency system and return them to the Currency system revolving fund pool as debts are paid.
System mission accomplished!
Then There Was Account
Currency exists first. Account is defined in terms of currency ownership. A unique account is an object that describes exactly how many aggregate unit dollars of currency in the money system (none or more than 1) are owned by the financial entity identified by a unique IPv6 identifier.
All citizens may have an account, have a right to an account, and must have an account to conduct financial transactions of Currency.
All other financial entities that are not human being citizens must have a financial identity established on record in order to conduct transactions in the Monetary System.
The Account System is administered by the Account Authority.
All citizens may have an account, have a right to an account, and must have an account to conduct financial transactions of Currency.
All other financial entities that are not human being citizens must have a financial identity established on record in order to conduct transactions in the Monetary System.
The Account System is administered by the Account Authority.
In The Beginning There Is Money
Some philosophy first.
Form precedes function. Create the form and the function follows because a thing has inherent knowledge and knows it's methods (or another thing that does know a necessary or related method) to express it when it receives an external message from another object to do something it knows how to do. Even if it is only message passing.
Things are not created by actions. That is the nature of things. They come first then action of a thing among things is possible. If a thing is the only singular instance, no other things except that thing then it can only relate to itself which has no meaning, "No Thing".
Money is a thing created as the function of a process of a self extinguishing thing called debt. Debt is a state of being of an object thing not the thing itself. Our current money system is structured so that function of debt state of being between asset/liability debit/credit create money from nothing.
Consistent with the philosohical rule that form comes first before function, the form of money must exist as an subject thing before it can relate to any other thing or state of being. Kind of like a fundamental thing always was and always will be. That is our human way of conceptualizing things. If we perceive that the ultimate beginning birth of anything is the product of a function that did not derive from a form then we simply remain one step away from the true first thing of anything and everything.
Conceptually, therefore, Money is before money does. The banking system is structured on what money does. One step prior to that and enabling what money does is....,,,: what money is as a conceptual object of the human mind.
That is what the overlay of Money as an object above the functional application to the banking system is all about. Because that is the way it is or because inspite of any philosophical film flam to support the concept it is just simply the best way to do something or anythimg. It's
It's dogma. The self evident truth. Form first then function. Simply overlay a form of money as currency object that precedes is application as in a loan process.
In the beginning there is Money. Banksters were not the ones that create it. It was created by a higher power called We The People. Not as a function of our power but as a statements of self evident truth that it simply exists as a conceptual object resource. All that is necessary to enable it to relate to other things is to endow each unit with a unique identity (IPv6 identifier) in an object oriented information system.
When a unique identity is give to each unit then properties and methods as well as messages to send to other objects in the system to implement their methods. Call this object Currency and each of its instances (children of its class) a digital dollar having a unique IPv6 number and a value of one.
The Currency System is administered by the Currency Administrator.
The other primary objects in the monetary system are
Account
Contract
Account will be presented next.
Form precedes function. Create the form and the function follows because a thing has inherent knowledge and knows it's methods (or another thing that does know a necessary or related method) to express it when it receives an external message from another object to do something it knows how to do. Even if it is only message passing.
Things are not created by actions. That is the nature of things. They come first then action of a thing among things is possible. If a thing is the only singular instance, no other things except that thing then it can only relate to itself which has no meaning, "No Thing".
Money is a thing created as the function of a process of a self extinguishing thing called debt. Debt is a state of being of an object thing not the thing itself. Our current money system is structured so that function of debt state of being between asset/liability debit/credit create money from nothing.
Consistent with the philosohical rule that form comes first before function, the form of money must exist as an subject thing before it can relate to any other thing or state of being. Kind of like a fundamental thing always was and always will be. That is our human way of conceptualizing things. If we perceive that the ultimate beginning birth of anything is the product of a function that did not derive from a form then we simply remain one step away from the true first thing of anything and everything.
Conceptually, therefore, Money is before money does. The banking system is structured on what money does. One step prior to that and enabling what money does is....,,,: what money is as a conceptual object of the human mind.
That is what the overlay of Money as an object above the functional application to the banking system is all about. Because that is the way it is or because inspite of any philosophical film flam to support the concept it is just simply the best way to do something or anythimg. It's
It's dogma. The self evident truth. Form first then function. Simply overlay a form of money as currency object that precedes is application as in a loan process.
In the beginning there is Money. Banksters were not the ones that create it. It was created by a higher power called We The People. Not as a function of our power but as a statements of self evident truth that it simply exists as a conceptual object resource. All that is necessary to enable it to relate to other things is to endow each unit with a unique identity (IPv6 identifier) in an object oriented information system.
When a unique identity is give to each unit then properties and methods as well as messages to send to other objects in the system to implement their methods. Call this object Currency and each of its instances (children of its class) a digital dollar having a unique IPv6 number and a value of one.
The Currency System is administered by the Currency Administrator.
The other primary objects in the monetary system are
Account
Contract
Account will be presented next.
Don't Fight The Debt Based Monetary System--Use it to Win!
I like this idea of letting go of the objective of changing the debt money system to a debt free monetary system. That change would have little or no visible change to the end user but would be a significant change for the banks. A better way to sneak up on changing the system is to design it so that it has little apparent change on the banking system debt based operating system.
So: The object is to make a substantial fundamental change in what the monetary system is but that change is apparently no change in what it does. When the change in what it is becomes established it does all of what it did, except the bad stuff plus more of the good stuff.
Bad for the crooks, good for the good guys.
Does that sound like a business model. Better than do no evil? Do no harm? Not as good as do unto others but a step better than the current system.
It is all about system structure control and purpose.
My revised monetary system thinking is built on three basic conceptual entities with existence and relationships in an integrated digital object oriented information system.
The the object class components:
1. Money
2. Account
3. Contractual Debt
Each component is simply a higher level conceptual abstraction above the cuurent system segments an functions. A natural evolution of a growing information system made possible by technology. An overlay at a high level that brings integration to lower level information silos. Classic evolution of information systems.
Therefore, if this overlay results in little change to what the current monetary system does but substantial change to what it is because it becomes more integrated and structural system with little change of what it does (other than eliminate fraud, waste and abuse) then a good test is to run some test transactions through it and see how it goes at the established system level and what additional things happen at the new higher level and the objects that interface with things at that higher level.
First the higher level object overlay of Money, Accounting and Contract have to be roughed out in order to apply the higher level process interactions to them.
For the sake of organization each object class in the Money System will be presented separately in the following three blog entries.
So: The object is to make a substantial fundamental change in what the monetary system is but that change is apparently no change in what it does. When the change in what it is becomes established it does all of what it did, except the bad stuff plus more of the good stuff.
Bad for the crooks, good for the good guys.
Does that sound like a business model. Better than do no evil? Do no harm? Not as good as do unto others but a step better than the current system.
It is all about system structure control and purpose.
My revised monetary system thinking is built on three basic conceptual entities with existence and relationships in an integrated digital object oriented information system.
The the object class components:
1. Money
2. Account
3. Contractual Debt
Each component is simply a higher level conceptual abstraction above the cuurent system segments an functions. A natural evolution of a growing information system made possible by technology. An overlay at a high level that brings integration to lower level information silos. Classic evolution of information systems.
Therefore, if this overlay results in little change to what the current monetary system does but substantial change to what it is because it becomes more integrated and structural system with little change of what it does (other than eliminate fraud, waste and abuse) then a good test is to run some test transactions through it and see how it goes at the established system level and what additional things happen at the new higher level and the objects that interface with things at that higher level.
First the higher level object overlay of Money, Accounting and Contract have to be roughed out in order to apply the higher level process interactions to them.
For the sake of organization each object class in the Money System will be presented separately in the following three blog entries.
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Who Cares About Money?
Who doesn't?
Who wants to know where every dollar a person or institution has ever received or spent came from or went to. What was the nature of the transactional relationship in the audit trail.
Investigators and regulators would like to know.
The NSA would like to know. Maybe it does but the system was not conveniently set up for it to gathering all this info.
The IRS would like to know.
Bill Black would like to know to bring banksters to justice.
Business enterprises that would profit from knowing this information.
Who does not want this known?
Bad guys. Entities doing things with money that they do not want to be discovered.
Privacy advocates. They are shoveling sand against the tide or sticking they heads in the sand. Privacy is eroding. The best we can do is attempt to make the erosion of privacy work for the common good by invading the privacy of institutions and individuals that deserve to be exposed and go to great lengths to hide their dysfunctional and/or
Illegitimate activities.
I should be pitching my ideas to the NSA or Google.
Block Chain Audit Trail
The proposed overlay of an existing monetary system establishes money as a uniquely identified granular level object at the unit dollar level as well as a macro level money object Class associated with an owner account. This gives substance, life and being to money that only previously existed in an aggregate variable number of dollars as a data element in an account managed under a double entry book keeping system.
Uniquely identified granular level monetary units make possible a block chain managemt history. A block chain is among other things, an audit trail. In Bitcoin the granular level of the block chain is a uniquely identified transaction that has an associated variable "total dollar" amount. This is an interesting way of looking at how that works: It is the creation of virtual money units each with a variable denomination amount per money unit depending on the money value associated with a sufficient number transactions in someone's purse given in payment to another that either equal or exceed the amount of payment due. In the case of exceeding, change is returned as a transaction thereby creating a new variable denomination amount.
Block chain in the Monetary Authority system is unique unit dollar based. Transferring a payment from one account to another by the Accounting Authority is done in the total aggregate amount of the transaction.
For example: A payment of 10 dollars is made from one financial entity to another and the transfer between accounts is made by the accounting authority through a clearing house function as necessary. Transaction reporting by the accounting Authority to the Monetary Authority results in registering the change of 10 uniquely identified unit dollars from the current owner to a new owner. Each of those dollars may have related to current ownership is also related to every previous owner in the block chain of Thur unit dollar ownership history and date of change. That is an audit trail. Dollars chosen to which change of ownership is applied are selected at random or by some applicable algorithm.
That is a very telling audit trail revealing from whom dollars were received and to whom they were paid.
How Does The Setup In The Prior Entry Get Created?
Answer: Over time. Using ISO standards or other standard setting entity protocols for information management and communication interface.
There are two types money in the current monetary system. That system will continue its current structure and function unchanged. However, additional requirements will be overlaid upon it. These additional requirements will however be transparent to clients of the financial system.
The two types of money are vertical and horizontal money. Vertical money created by governmental deficit spending. Horizontal money created by banks loaning money into existence. These two types of money might be viewed as the back office of the money domain opaque to monetary system users. (Virtually everyone. Don't pay any attention to that man behind the curtain.)
The crux of the setup is that once created money never goes out of existence by settlement of debt. (To be magically reborn again as new debt). Once created and branded with a unique ID it lives forever. It has a history and current status of either active ownership or circulation suspension.
All "new" money at some designated system start time spent into the economy by the government or loaned into existence by a bank must come out of the Monetary Authority and all transactions using money of that origin must be interfaced by the Accounting Authority (Aggregate Financial System) with the Monetary Authority. Interface data elements are unit dollar IPv6 code and associated previous owner and new owner account IPv6 code.
Over a period of time all monetary units will enter the domain of the Monetary Authority.
Setting Up The Sting
Setting up the monetary system only requires that every single digital dollar in the system be identified by a unique IPv6 identifier (even numbered?) The scope of the system includes unit digital dollars that are not circulating as well as those that are in circulation. That means that a sufficient pool of unique IPv6 identified digital dollars with a value of one dollar each exists in either circulation or suspension for purposes of monetary system control and regulation.
Money in the form of a uniquely identified digital entity at the unit value level of one is therefore the micro level unit of the monetary system.
The key to understanding this concept is that once a unit dollar is created it exists as a unique digital object identity forever either in circulation of suspension status.
Management of all units of money is the macro level responsibility of a Monetary Authority.
All money that is in circulation is defined as all dollars managed by the Monetary Authority that have an associated uniquely IPv6 (odd numbered?) identified owner/user financial entity account.
Managemt of all user financial entity accounts is the macro level responsibility of the Accounting Authority. There are two types of financial entities that may have financial system user accounts:
1. All citizens. (If they want to use the monetary system which by law is the only monetary system that may settle all debts public and private.). De facto a mandatory requirement for all citizens to have a financial account identified by a unique IPv6 identifier (with an identifying alpha character?)
2. All non citizen financial entities. Entities registered to conduct monetary transactions. Uniquely identified by an IPv6 identifier and associated detailed financial operation information.
The third macro level authority is the Contracting Authority. It is this authority that maintains the master debt record of which financial entities have contractual debt relationship with any other financial entity an how much is owed to whom with reference to the contractual document identified by a unique identifier (maybe not IPv6 in this case because contracts expire in one way or the other.)
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
What Does the Prior Monetary Concept Accomplish?
Good question considering how long it was and the variety of ideas that seemed to fit together...at least in my head.
The purpose of this entry is to think about the the simple benefit of what I propose.
With the intent to get to the point, the real nitty gritty of it all I launched out into an obtuse verbose direction then gave it up after the first paragraph. This morning I erased that paragraph.
All my thinking about a new conceptual monetary system to better serve us has been based on a shift from a debt based to a debt free base moving debt to an application of debt free money not the creator of it.
The prior blog entry was a dramatic shift in viewing the problem domain. No paradigm shift. Sneak up on it and let the problem skin itself! That goes back to elegantly skinning the cat. Induce it to skin itself by causing it to jump out of its own skin. It avoids a bloody mess.
What I want is control of the monetary system. I want it to be self controlling but with powerful tools to monitor and correct its function in process or it form in structure if necessary.
I want accountability built into the monetary system, investigative powerand the means to enforce control over system structural form and function. I want a level playing field open equally to everyone to obtain and use the points we call money in the best way possible to make resource allocation decisions at the micro and macro level in accordance with our proclaimed intent of self governance.
Truth! Justice! The American Way.
And a damn good cop on the beat to assure what belongs to us continues to remain ours. It is our money, it belongs to us. It is the basic tool, besides the vote, to express our freedom of choice.
Our monetary system has been stolen by the banksters. My prior blog entry claws it back with a simple system changed based on the simplest of all money rules:
Follow the Money!
If a crook was to design the system what would their guiding strategy be?
Launder the money!
My monetary system objective is not to create and apply a new one but to have the old one jump out of its skin and create an elegant structure and function design that enables that to happen.
It only requies two things: Fucus on the most critical point upon which the current monetary system is structured that is the cause of its dysfunction then put a good cop on the beat.
The most critical point of the current monetary system is:
The basic unit of monetary value does not have a unique identifier that distinguishes it from all other units of monetary value.
Solution: Assign a unique identifier to every single dollar in the monetary system. Then money can be followed to assure the right thing is done with it.
Their is no honest good cop to follow follow the money. A feature for the crooks, a failure for us. So we get robbed.
Solution: Make Bill Black the Chief of Monetary Police. Follow the money with a watchful eye and apprend and punish all those that are guilty of fraud. Good old school crime fighting and punishment stuff! Bill wrote the book "The Best Way To Rob A Bank Is To Own One". Doesn't that sound like a guy who knows exactly where the crook's hideout is????
Bill Black is a hero!
Give the crooks the old style "One Two". Set up the trap then slam the door. That is the elegant skin a cat way to get 'em. Rather than the bloody method of knocking down the door, going in with guns blazing and taking out the bad guys with collateral good guy casualties. Otherwise known as hostages. We are all hostages to the banks. That is why To Big To Fail is their winning strategy.
My strategy is to create a key critical point in the present monetary system, without significantly changing it in any Revolutional way like going debt free and then applying the smallest amount of force at that point to dynamically shift the entire system and free it from its captors and return what is ours to us.
Debt Free Money--Unbundled from Debt
Everything I have written in this blog about my conceptual monetary system has been based on its foundation as a debt free positive money system. A system where debt is a contractual entity, simply one of the things that positive debt free money can buy. Debt is not a creator of money but an application of money.
Examining that idea a fresh look at the relationship of money to debt gives an alternative monetary architecture that might be an easier horse pill for the established banking system to swallow.
This alternative retains the fundamental structure of my proposed digital dollar system.
Here is a brief summary about the system I have proposed and explained in various entries to this blog:
Every single digital dollar is serialized (IPv6 code) with a unique serial number and is denominated with the value of one dollar. It exists in a cloud. Server at Fort Knox , just for fun. The monetary system is administered by a Monetary Authority.
Each single unique digital dollar always knows it's current owner as well as every previous owner in a block chain since its creation. Once created it lives forever. It knows it's owner by each unique owner account number (another block of IPv6 identifiers) Owner accounts are administered by an Account Authority. It does accounting. It assigns and maintains a Financial Entity ID sytem. Every citizen is a de facto financial entity. All other entities are registered by the Account Authority to use the monetary system.
Money is static. It does not move. The account owning an instance of money (one serialized dollar) is variable.
The Account Authority processes monetary transactions among user accounts in aggregate value of each unique transaction. Each transaction has a block chain history. The Account Authority passes user account transaction information to the Monetary Authority which applies total transaction amounts to changes in ownership of each unique single digital dollar.
The total dollar value of money in the Monetary System always equals, to the dollar, the total value of all money owned in the Account Authority system.
Whew! Always re-explaining the system then getting on to saying something about it. So this is what is different this time.
The crux of the matter is to take away the power of the banking system to create money out of nothing by loaning it into existence then extinguishing it to nothing as the loan is repaid. (But gimme the interest and fees, thank you very much.)
A system that does this does not have to be a debt free system. Debt is a creature of the finance world and that in my system is in the domain of the Accounting Authority. It exists there because the Account Authority not only accounts for real time current ownership of dollars in the Monetary System of each and every account entity in the Account Authority system but it also has this responsibility: To maintain a Contractual Debt accounting system defining who owes what to whom and what contractor relates to. Maybe a sub-function of the Accointing Authority. Maybe the domain of an independent Contractual Debt Authority.
Here is the hybrid system that provides for debt accounting but unbundles money creation from debt and makes debt a function of what money does like everything else that money does, not the creator of money from nothing. It is the sugar that makes the medicine necessary to cure the debt based banking system bring it to account by strictly limiting it to the Accounting domain.
The Banking System becomes reborn as the Accounting Authority System. In its reincarnation it continues in its prior fo and function except it no longer creates money from nothing to live for the period of a contractual loan and be extinguished to nothing as it is repaid.
This is the new conceptual hybrid:
The money a bank loans, currently called
Horizontal money in MMT is drawn from money held by the Monetary Authority (digital serialized unit dollars each with a value of one from an IPv6 block reserved for that purpose). It is placed into circulation by a contractual loan.
How the payback of the loan to return the same uniquely identified unit dollar to the block of dollars reserved for loan creation in the Monetary Authority system is handled is nothing less than brilliant! (Probably has a something for nothing fatal flaw in it but I like it). All I have to do is have a stroke of genius to make that magic trick happen.
By default, all dollars in the Monetary Authority system that are not horizontal dollars from the block reserved for Accountimg Authority loans are vertical dollars spent into the Accounting Authority system by the government. They exist forever in circulation unless the government chooses to withdraw them from circulation and hold them in suspension to control the money supply.
Vertical or horizontal money in the accounts of financial entities all spends the same as far as the account entity is concerned. When that account entity makes a payment on a loan however, this is what happens transparent to the payer:
The total on hand balance in an financial entity account will relate to unit dollars in the Monetary Authority system that will happen to be both vertical and horizontal dollars. When contractual debt repayment is flagged then horizontal dollars identified by their IPv6 block number are chosen first from the payer's account to return to the loan purpose block. (The equivalent of placing in suspension for future use as done in the situation of taxes applied to vertical money. (Yes, I will get to the analogous problem of choosing dollars in the situation of tax payment. Figuring this one will help figure that one!)
The remainder of dollars in a financial entity account to complete repayment on a loan are vertical dollars that do not go out of circulation (unless by tax). Pay attention to the trick here.
All unit dollars in the Monetary Authority system (vertical and horizontal) have a block chain history that makes them independent of time line circulation interruption caused by suspension as a function of debt repayment or taxation.
There is no constraint on the limit of dollars held in suspension either vertical or horizontal for reintroduction for use. Therefore debts paid back with vertical dollars (after all horizontal dollars in a user financial entity account have been applied or vertical dollars in the case of taxes) can be swapped between suspension status tax/debt categories at the monetary authority level to create the necessary exchange buffer.
This is all transparent to the account holder. So is the existence of dollars and how they are processed beyond the account level. Visible and probably more understandable at the micro and macro level to anyone who wants to know how it works.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)