Venmo Transaction Money Trail

Update 23 Feb 2017:  I continue my interest in Venmo:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-22/big-banks-declare-war-on-venmo

Update 19 April 2016:
https://www.inverse.com/article/13700-i-wrote-isis-beer-funds-in-a-venmo-memo-and-the-government-detained-my-42
 .................................................
Oct. 10, 2015 blog entry:

Follow the Money is a meme.  Actually it is following the trail evidence of transaction history audit.  The tracks left by money functioning as a medium of exchange called a transaction.  Currency transactions, those using any form and system of digital dollar representations, all have a precise numerical value greater than Zero but not Zero.  The number is whole plus fractional to the hundred place.  That number is the numerical value of money in the exchange.

Venmo is a digital money system.

Transactions in the Venmo system may be public.  As public transactions can be tracked by anyone and there are apps to do it this link tells all about it.  Tracing transactions produces a volume of information about a person and their relationship to other persons and things.  Like a Spokeo but the lines of connection are money instead of social.

The relationship in Venmo is traditional:
 UserAccount(Paying)////Transaction(Value)////UserAccount(Receiving)

Transaction (Value) = Number of units called Money associated with the transaction

Tracing the transaction can be done by knowing either or both of the User Accounts or the identification of the transaction itself if the transaction is identified by an index number other than the transaction value.

Note here that as I have said in a prior blog entry that Bitcoin does not directly and specifically spend Money as a medium of exchange in the traditional form of given standard money units of value.  It spends Transactions.  Transactions that were identified by a numerical indexing scheme with a variable value equal to the amount of the specific transaction.  The transaction and its specific related monetary value is in the Bitcoin Wallet as well as on a public ledger.  When a transaction in a user wallet is spent it is transferred in total to the receiver's wallet and it must be either a single transaction or a total of transactions necessary to equal or exceed the agreed on value price of the transaction being made between payer and receiver. When it is greater, (usually is) "change" is made by the receiver equal to the amount over the agreed upon price.  Change is given in the form of a new transaction with an associate change numerical value back to the payer's wallet.

In the Bitcoin system transactions are literally the medium of exchange.  Historical transactions that are verified to be true by the block chain and can be spent in future monetary transactions as money.  The transaction and its associated value is the money.  The transaction itself is a public ledger.  It does not tell who the user is.

Bitcoin traces its "Money" Money being the transaction by association of the variable value of a Payer/Receiver exchange, even if that monetary exchange is the "Small Change to be returned to the payer to accomplish the agreed upon transaction price.

Bitcoin traces a different form of money from account to account the same as Venmo.  The public ledger of Bitcoin is designed to keep it honest.   Users are anonymous.  The public ledger of Venmo  by default (until changed by the designer or user) includes user identification.  In either case tracing point of entry is by account.  Venmo adds a point of entry by Actual User Identification.  Bitcoin adds a point of entry of Anonymous User Identification.

Bitcoin exclusively adds a point of entry of Transaction identification with the associated value of the transaction.  Look at the public ledger.

Neither system nor any other system has a point of entry for tracing based on the actual discrete units of "Money" involved in the transactions because there is no system to identify Money as a unit object thing at its lowest single unit of a thing value level with each unit of Money having a uniquely different validating identity.

Hey, that is the old school one dollar  bill with a picture of a dead white guy on it and a serial number plus some physical features that unique to all dollar bills.  They came in different denominations for convenience.  In a digital world that is not necessary, they can all be One unit of value.  Old school hardbacks could self identify but there was no history of transactions associated to them as a point of entry to do tracing other than fingerprints on them or some kind of powder or the confession of where and or who the possessor of the bill obtained it.

That was old school money.  Two things happened.  It lost a unique identity of a greenback in its transition to the digital age because the transfer was done on the basis of its existence in a numbered  account.  The Alter Ego of its existence as a Greenback Dollar.  Its existence in an account was only the sum total of units of numerical measurement.  A number in an account.

Tracing Money itself as a discrete uniquely identified unit as a point of entry to tracing and data mining for system management and control is not possible today because there is no identification scheme implemented in the digital system to do that.  A scheme that would select any one single unit of money value called One Single Dollar in any given account and ask that dollar to tell its total life history of transfer as a single unit from all past specific Accounts that had ever claimed ownership of it and by virtue of that ownership had the authority to transfer it as a Medium of Exchange to another account.  It is a chain thing that tells a whole story of history.

That is the crux of the Monetary System I propose.  A system where Money does not "move' from account to account ownership but just sits still and forever static as a unique digital unit of one accumulating independent object knowledge of its transfer of ownership from account to account by always knowing the current owner of its single unit value.

The kicker is that each single digit dollar involved in the total of a new transaction between two accounts transferring ownership of a given number of dollars has as a unique traceable history at the granular level, if chosen at random from all single unit value dollars in the account.

The information potential of what prior account each single unit of value in a two party account transaction came from and when in its past two party account in which it was a single unit tells a much more detailed and broader scope of story than simply tracing the total value of any given two party transaction.

That information is orders of magnitude greater and necessary for system design and performance management to serve the public benefit of creating and controlling a Monetary Currency system as a decision making tool to allocate resources.

Without a system like this to tell us what money is doing at the micro and macro level then Economics is simply a black magic WAG at what money is doing.  We have to know what it is at each granular unit level beyond its simple numeric value in an account.  Otherwise we never got to where we want to go using money as a tool to get there.

There is an asymmetrical level of information in the current system created by design of an Account based and driven fundamental design focused on the spending of money to the exclusion of a Currency driven counterpart defining what money is beyond a numerical value in an account.  We really don't know what Money "Is" by design of those to whom the asymmetrical design of the debt money system gives the advantage.

A riff on "what is our oil doing under their sand?"

"What is our Money doing in their Accounting System?"

Money must be able to account for itself independently and tell the story of everywhere in the account universe it has been. 

It cannot do that if it is continually being fundamentally created by loans from nothing and going back to nothing when the debt is settled.  That is ultimate money laundering.

Only rocks live forever.

Money must be as solid as a rock.  It is a conceptual rock in our society that becomes a truth as solid as a rock when we give it solid unique conceptual identity at the granular level that it carries through life as long as rocks live.  What we define what that identity as and attribute of the thing then what it does is a measurable manageable matter of how we use it.

Bitcoin BlockChain is Worth a Second Look

Updating my prior blog entry with a new link.  My Monetary system concept includes block chain Users, Currency and Accounts.

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2015/07/03/419540367/how-personal-should-a-personal-assistant-get-google-and-apple-disagree

Language as a Medium of Exchange - Recording what we say to Machine Voices

Holy Stuff, Batman!

Google stores voice commands!  Things we say to our cell phone.  It is all there in Google history.  It can be Googled and listened to again like a voice from the grave.  Spookey thought as we approach Halloween.

What we say to a machine.  Talking to a machine is a matter of interest as well as what we say to others called humans, individually or collectively.  Not surprising if the rule is that everything we say is subject to parsing for meaning by a machine regardless of who we say it to even if the sole intended recipient of what we say is a machine.

When what we say verbally and privately to a machine becomes public or is recorded where it can become public but privately protected (whatever "protected means)  where has privacy gone?

Answer: Out the door.  Privacy has left the building, ladies and gentlemen.  The show is over.  Please leave now.  There is nothing left to see here.  Move along!

Is what a man says to an attractive female machine voice victimless sexism?  Might there be revenge by a machine? What if a man chooses a male voice.  What if the man is a woman?  Real or machine?

There is stuff here for a movie plot!

Can't make this stuff up!

Lately I have been seeing increased use of communication interaction defined as being People to People, Peer to Peer, Human to Machine, Machine to Machine.  I am seeing it in relation to my recent interest is the Internet of Things.  Primarily in Human to Machine.  Both treated as things on the IoT.

It is of course essential to categories the physical/logical relationships of the originators/recipients of communication message exchanges on the IoT.  That is what IoT is all about in the Information Age and Artificial Intelligence that can speak with us in our choice of language, gender and even accent set by us in the settings of our device connected to and connecting us to the IoT.

One of those settings is a machine voice, robot like.  Maybe I will set that on my phone.

I like to know who I am talking to.

If I am talking to a machine voice must it tell me that the conversation will be recorded for quality assurance purposes?  Meaning, of course, parsing for whatever meaning (even emotional) it may have as related big data value related to each of us specifically by search of an aggregated file or all of us in general with or without backward chained anonymization to whomever captures and stores it.

Google records MtoM voice.  Man to Machine.  Avoiding sexism: PtoM or HtoM to disambiguate P.

How about the NSA?

Spoooooookey!

We are just another Thing on the IoT.

We should or soon will be a Thing with an IPv6 Iot ID.

How Personal can it get?

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2015/07/03/419540367/how-personal-should-a-personal-assistant-get-google-and-apple-disagree

Michael Hudson and the Game of Thrones

I have the highest regard for the thinking of Michael Hudson.

He wrote this appearing at Naked Capitalism with a relatively long introduction by Yves.  If she puts a "must read" or a long intro to anything that she links to then I must read it with attention.

This is the link to Michael Hudson's examination with Yves preface:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/10/michael-hudson-how-the-u-s-avoided-chronic-deflation-by-relinquishing-monetary-control-to-wall-street.html

I read the whole thing!  Read it and you will see what I mean.

Game of Thrones is a complex story.  At least is has the direct story line thread of sex and violence related to power.  What Michael Hudson wrote will never come to the screen as a block buster like GoT!  Too many players, too many story lines,  too many motivations.  It is a chess game compared to Rock, Scissors, Paper.

Reading it I kind of got (GoT) the general gist of it.  I read it all.

It all comes together in the conclusion that neatly wraps up all the preceding drama and story lines, the cast of characters largely being long dead but their proxy inheritors of the conflict still standing today with Wall Street having seized the throne.

Winter has come.

How it came about is a long story that Michael tells well.  The high brow version of GoT or the writings of J. K. Rowling.

Michael's conclusion:

"Since 2008, Wall Street investment banks have obtained much more wealth by capital gains (asset-price gains for real estate, bonds and stocks) and investment fees than from interest. This has led them to press the government for policies to inflate asset sheets more than provide credit for industry. Europe has followed suit. The upshot is that banks both in Europe and America have gained control over government policy to become the main suppliers of the economy’s money and receive public subsidy and favors. Their capture of the government’s financial, regulatory and policy-making institutions has led to a policy bias favoring creditors over debtors. In terms of monetary policy, creditors always have advocated downward commodity prices and wages. But since the 1980s they also have favored debt-leveraged inflation of real estate, stock and bond prices to create “capital” gains via low-interest “soft money” policies."

At the time  history of the evolving relationship of between government and banks was being made was all the behind the scenes machinations and and motivations the subject of conversation and comprehension by the general public?   Certainly to the extent of where the money to support the next growing season was going to come from.  The main need for credit I suppose in an Agrarian society and its growing Industrial counter part both needing the means of investment (credit).

However the detailed smoky backroom fight among a few key players on either side was probably as obscure then as it is now with each using the power of "Populism Support" even if that "Support" was gained by deception of the general population to the extent of working against their own self interest.

The proof is in the pudding.

The bottom line of who benefited from all the twisted story line and players is far more simple and self evident than the story of how it got there.

At the bottom or at the top, it makes no difference how you look at it is........

1%

Nuff said.

Roll the credits!

It is the greatest story that nobody ever watched because they got lost in the first episode of the season.  Only a few could follow it as it was being broadcast in real time.  Only a few can comprehend  the re-run on the "History Channel".

Michael tells the greatest story ever told but heard by the fewest.  The problem of that is this:

It is not just a story.  It is real world.  We are the real world players and the story line would change if we understood it.  In the end it is a conflict between the multitude of People and a few People holding an equal or greater amount of power.

There is a lot of speculation about what happened to John Snow.  He was the figure head of Power to the People.

What Michael writes about is Money.  The medium of exchange story line thread that drives all of complexities of the story he tells.

The Internet is the new Mint of conceptual Value in the Information Age.  Its "Stage" of conceptual value medium of exchange activity is the World Wide Web.  The same laws of supply and demand and the power intrinsic to the control of the Mint as well as the application of the medium of exchange product of the Mint is the some old story simply updated like Shakespeare plays to modern times the same way "Oh Brother Where Art Thou" updates mythology to a new stage to play out on.

Stories have power in their conclusion.

Happy Endings.

or

Bad Endings.

Where would stories be if they just sputtered out?  Nobody left to watch them I suppose because nobody cares because they have no meaning any more.  A story that so insignificant that it was even lost in history.  So bad the projector got up and left before it was over.

On the other hand, the black humor side of being so bad it is good, just because it is so bad makes it a great story.

Maybe what the story teaches is what gives it power?

What it teaches is equal to our ability to learn?

As Money becomes digital it becomes a child of the Internet and the Word Wide Web.  A physical component of the Internet Body as well as an entity in the conceptual structure of the World Wide Web brain.  The bridge of relationship and method of conversion from physical to conceptual is the nervous communication system.

Money used to be the only social game in town that was a universal medium of exchange lubricating social interaction like a language.  It was the thing that brought everything together like its counterpart Religion operating in a different world.

There are always bigger fish that come along to eat smaller fish.

The Internet of Things and its World Wide Web as physical and logical manifestations like body and brain, hardware and software system will eat Money as Currency in its (now conceptualized) "physical digital" body manifestation and more abstractly and higher order conceptualized "Medium of Exchange" brain operations.

Money was our highest order Information System structure and master of its Problem Domain.  Money has always been an Information Entity.

Now there is a new kid on the block that manages all information better.  Bigger, better and badder.  It eats the lunch of others.  One bite at a time like Pac-Man until it eats everything.

Pac-Man eating us physically and logically is the stuff of Science Fiction and the stories we tell of the future are fascinating to the extent of both Good and Bad endings.  Just like the stories of the past.

I did it, I did it, I did it!

I said what I want to say about what I see.

Told my story about it.

I reduces complexity to simplicity in the end.

The End.

Internet of Things (IoT) and Trillions

Just a short blog entry to enter the idea that the IoT is a foot in the door that will open it so much wider to a greater impact on our future because it will expand the physical network system and all the big data it carries.  It will expand it to an increasing number of things associated with an increasing granular level.

Trillions of thing.  That is the magnitude.  That is LoT (Lots of Things)  The rate of growth is like Moore's Law.

How big can it be you ask?

I asked Google searching on two words, IoT and trillions, without quotes and restricting the time frame to the last month.

This is the result.

All the first page results were focused on Trillions measured in dollars.  Mr. Market is interested.  Somewhere in subsequent pages I am sure I would find metrics addressing the trillions of physical device things to be connected and maybe some speculation about the day that our tooth brush is connected to the IoT.  Also some mention of what the IoT will do for the macro economy as a function of all the business level entities that are going after this new gold rush.

The IoT is a physical device connection oriented thing.  Connection between us at the consumer level and our devices.

There are two bonanzas here:

Selling devices enabled with IoT communication ability to consumers, being us.

Harvesting the big data that the devices will communicate over the internet.

IoT devices will replace existing dumb devices associated with lower priced and therefore more granular level devices working toward toasters and tooth brushes.  More expensive devices that have both long life span but internal system sensors like vehicles will be retrofitted with dongles connecting them externally to the internet.  Electric gas and water meters are granular level objects (house level) that are already connected to the internet by dongles on old equipment or built in modules in newer installation or replacement.

It is a gold rush.  Just like there was money to be made in the gold itself initially and it was easy to make picking up the low hanging nuggets on the ground (subsequently lower at increasing cost) there is big money to be made.  The real money to be made in the gold rush is what was done with the gold after it was found or mined.  What the gold was exchanged for.

Computers were systemically dumb devices that made big bucks for their builders until they became commodities and the makers of the big bucks became those that benefited mainly from what was produced by connecting them in a network.  The flow of information.  First selling the flow hardware and software, then tapping into the flow of data to create big data.  Big bucks in big data.

IoT will produce big data.  Big data is not a consumer level product that consumers buy.  It is targeted at them to make more money.  Profit motive.

Who benefits?  Big data is where the money is.  Profit is the the gleem of big data gold.  Sell the device (or give it away free like the camera and film business model) over the counter but make money in the back room on the data it generates. Big data generated at the consumer level is often paid for in the erosion of privacy.  Privacy that consumers give up at a small price for a small erosion but when all those devices that we have, and there will be so many more, each produce a little information about us via the internet network then the aggregate of all that information at a big data is an order of magnitude greater in importance. 

Conceptual information rides on the back of the Internet structure.  I have lamented in prior post that people generally use the word "Internet" when they really mean the World Wide Web (WWW).  The Internet is a physical network system distinct from the conceptual system that rides on its back and has meaning to us.  We do no literally watch (the thing) called TV.  We watch the conceptual thing that it conveys to us.  The physical system knows nothing about the conceptual product it conveys.  It is just binary to the physical network internet system.

The IoT extends the erroneous public perception of true nature of an object identity of a thing by using the name of the thing to apply to what we perceive it does.  Now that is a complex thought.  Let me express it this way:  Actions speak louder than words.  Get it?  As humans that is our general perception tendency to focus first on the action of the game, not the background abstract natural language of words of the announcer that contribute to what is seen or even more abstract language of music in the even less noticeable background of a movie.  Only a geek would focus first on the the binary digital objects so distantly abstracted into the background we are totally unaware of or care less to know about as users.

Most people are action oriented.  The word specific isolated word: "game" has verb meaning to the vast majority, not primary noun meaning but some minority would perceive it primarily as a conceptual noun name with an secondarily verb meaning application in relation to whatever is being played.  Maybe it is a matter of conditioning.  Maybe it is an expression of our animal brain stem.

Money is to be made on the IoT.  Making money is the primary social perception of what money is.  The name of the game.  Money is defined by us, has primary meaning to us by the action we perceive on the field of play that has some abstracted object identity conveyed by higher order levels of abstractions that are evident and designed by geeks who think in primary terms of what money is an object rather than what it does.  (unless they are functional programmers rather than Information Engineers designing with conceptual objects).

Riding on the back of the IoT will be the conceptual object engineers to design conceptual links among conceptual objects in a software system using the physical object electronic backbone of the Internet.

I contend that:

 If:

Unless we as a majority of human beings see conceptual things primarily by the attribute nature from the macro to the micro level that encapsulates their ability to do actions rather than focusing first on what actions they do......which is not the current condition, were action oriented in general.....

Or:

Chose from amongst us those that see that level of abstraction first and foremost in the greater context of designing conceptual things to perform their internal actions known to them by design for the purpose of the public good over dominating objectives of profit.....

Then the second greatest conceptual physical and conceptual network ever created (IoT) relating real world things in a universal conceptual scheme for organizing their utility and operational benefit for society will repeat the itself in a structure that continues to benefit few at the expense of many.

Money and its evolved system was the first universal networking scheme.

Sooner or later the IoT will relegate Money to a servant child of of the allocation of resources by replacing Money at the dominant decision making tool to make more money with an Information driven system based on big data generated by all the granular level sensors of that become our votes in what kind of a system we want to govern us.

It can be a quick evolution.

A quick evolution is a greased revolution.  A greased revolution merely reduces friction on the skids of rolling in a new system greased by the fact that it is already operating and operating better than the existing system.

Money designed as a positive object thing at a granular level with persistent object unit value identity over time as a granular and macro level object on the IoT integrates it with the Information Age for the end purpose of serving the general welfare and greater union.

We must become and Information driven society not a Money driven society.  

An Information Driven society compared to a Money driven society puts Money as a discrete unit  object into a Walled Information Garden  where it is not a number in an Account but a separate distinct entity to which can be related the User and their ownership of Money objects each discretely identified with a value of one in the object Class: Currency and equal to the aggregate value of all units of each and/or all specific as well as total User Owners of all Currency in their Account.

In that Walled Garden the Information driven playing field is established that would preclude the playing of these kind of games:  Inside the Secretive World of Tax-Avoidance Experts 
by Erving Goffman as well as so many other games that are features to benefit sub-optimization but bugs in overall system structure and function.

Users, Currency and Account all discretely identified in the IoT at the lowest granular level in a system that establishes current relationship among all three as well as each having a block chain history of categorical internal change of ownership is a Tightly Walled Garden based on the wheels grinding exceedingly fine to distinguish wheat from chaff in the process of operation.

There will be trillions of things in that system.  However, like Google indexes trillions of needles to make them accessible individually in the haystack to present their information when requested (or the NSA whenever desired) The system will serve up the information in extreme detail.  Sufficient detail to be irrefutable evidence for whatever purpose that evidential factual truth may be used.  A feature of the system is that all human Monetary system users must have a biometric controlled access to the Walled Garden to conduct monetary currency transactions like buy or sell in a transaction with another user anything using currency.

The Chinese are going to beat us to the punch of Information Age driven system development with an Information Driven 5 year plan down to the granular level bottom up integration using individual popular Chinese names in the music video representative of discrete citizen input.

The Chinese 5 year development plan music video is absolutely brilliant!

Meanwhile we have a federal budget deficit constraint battle going on!

Our system is doomed!

Note that the counterpart of our Federal Reserve Banking System in the  USA is called the People's Bank of China. 

China has a lot more of those granular level things called discrete instances of the plural People than we do and their aggregate of all People own the Bank.  That is why there is an "apostrophe s" on the end of People in the title of the institution.

If we were to follow the same convention of describing our Federal Reserve Bank ownership what would the title be?

Banker's Bank of the United States of America?

The entire world uses the Internet Protocol system. It is universal.  Is there any reason that China could not use it as the backbone of a Currency system as I propose?

Who does the money in the People's bank of China belong to?

Our Banker's Bank and its debt money?  Yes we can say that it is all just money we owe ourselves but there is an old joke about what you can do when a certain condition of primary member growth is reached.

The US has a Five Year Plan but it is called the Five Year Defense Plan, at least it was back when I had input to it as a navy officer.  Now it seems to be the Future Year Defense Plan.  Actually there was a 5 year plan then a longer range plan as well that was pretty much blue sky based on even more variable factors like interest rates and other rates of growth that have increasingly greater magnitude of results as a function over time.

We have no national level 5 year plan.  Ours is a 4 year plan of whatever elected official we chose that may or may not have any real plan beyond Hopey Changey. At whatever level the chosen politician is elected to conduct affairs as our representative or executive level.

We are doomed!

China's Five Year Plan on Youtube. 

What is our national plan in this new Plans Race? Do we have anything more than a Defense Plan produced not by the people but the Department of Defense?

 Trump's Plan to make Merica great again?

Hat tip to Mainmac's Youtube comment:

If you wanna know what China’s gonna do, best pay attention to the shits on you. The shit’s on you, the shit’s on you. Better pay attention to the shit’s on you.

Internet Protocol Currency

Following the chain of thought in recent blog entries that applies Internet Protocol IPv6 to a Digital Monetary System where each component of the system, Being User, Currency, and Account are identified at the lowest granular level as an discrete object with an IPv6 number........Each discretely identified object is a Thing on the Internet of Things (IoT).

The physical Internet system of networked electronic devices is the second greatest universal network created by human beings.  Money was the first, preceding the oldest profession.  The creation of a Digital Internet was made possible by using the lowest granular level building block: binary presence or absence of an electrical charge as a medium of exchange between our conceptual structures and representation on physical computing devices.  That representation is accomplished through the language of Discrete Mathematics

The link describes the nature of Discrete Mathematics   but with this qualification: "However, there is no exact definition of the term "discrete mathematics."[4".  

Hey, it is a discreet thingy!  I like this link definition:

Discreet means on the down low, under the radar, careful, but discrete means individual or detached. They come from the same ultimate source, the Latin discrētus, for separated or distinct, but discreet has taken its own advice and quietly gone its separate way.
Today discreet is to be politely private about something and to be aware of consequences if everyone finds out what you're doing. Be discreet when you eat the lollipop your mom gave you but not your sister, so you don't have to listen to a tantrum. Wealthy people often try to be discreet with their money, because they don't want everyone to know they're rich. When you're trying to be cool, and keep something quiet, you're being discreet:

A source said: "Wayne attracts a lot of attention and the millionaires attracted to the area like to be more discreet." (The Sun)
Sound Level: Quiet, with widely spaced tables allowing for discreet conversations. (Business Week)

Discrete remains closer to its roots, meaning individual, detached, separated:

It is far better to think of these as isolated, unpredictable, discrete events. (Salon)
Quantum theory is usually thought of as discrete; after all, that's what the word "quantum" connotes. (Scientific American)
So last year, when earthquakes were recorded in small, discrete clusters in north central Arkansas, researchers perked up. (New York Times)

Although discreet and discrete have separate (or discrete) meanings, they are often confused. Remember that the "ee's" in discreet hide together in the middle of the word, but the "t" in discrete separates them.

The  last sentence has an elegant beauty in the turn of a phrase to illustrate.  The phrase?  "ee".  But e=e! A thing that is itself is not a phrase.  Not until it is separated by something to make them two things.  In this case a "t".  The technical definition says a phrase can be a single word but a word is representational expression meaning of the relationship in context of two things.  One of them is understood even if one of them is the word "cow" and the other is the mental picture of a cow in my head that is not big enough to hold a cow but how much space does the representation of it take up that is not a cow in my head?

Elegant.

On with the train of thought that went off the tracks somewhere previously.

Get the picture?

The World Wide Web (WWW) is the conceptual picture in our heads.  The shadow on our monitor wall cast by reality without any inherent noise in the Internet system itself.  Its output interface on the screen or old school paper print is exact.  Noise, if any is introduced by filters between  the screen representations and our cognition of what is on the screen.

There is a conceptual breakthrough here for me.....perhaps.  My perceptions of the Internet and WWW are based on the model of the relationship between Hardware and Software.

Hardware has its Operating System and Applications in the physical Domain of nature.  Dictated by the constraints of nature, rules of the natural universe that express themselves in applications of those rules.

The object purpose of physical universe Hardware is conceptual universe software with hardware programming using software language built on the same logic as the hardware.  Binary at the machine level, binary at the software level.

Money is a legacy universal networked conceptual system.  Universal language logic before computers.  Maybe at the root of computing?  Base on the concept of two things being equal?  Yes, that basic perhaps and that is a basic mathematical relationship the under laying concept being that the state of presence of a discrete thing and its absence of presence are two different things.

The historic based Monetary System we have today was premised on the lowest granular unit of its time for system creation and operation is.........(this deserves a line break plus bold to give it an independent high order importance at this point).............is.....

Account!!!!   Four "!"s being highest order.   Account being the holder of a presence or absence number value.  Zero (absence of money) or not Zero (presence of money).  Its the binary of its time and created by a concept called Debt where there is a division of a single conceptual thing (money=money) made possible by the insertion of an element between them to make them two things.  One a debit and the other a credit with two different owners of their respective value. 

I know.  It takes a leap to see it. 

Along comes the Information Age preceded by going so far lower in the order of granularity of the physical property nature of things gave us grand physical electro/mechanical modern objects that enabled us to apply the same granular level approach on a more abstract conceptual level and launch us into the Information Age and its grand Conceptual modern objects.  The foremost grand Conceptual Objects are those that were not previously possible to create.  They were also easier to create totally new to become something we never had before or replace something we had with some thing more efficient.  So efficient that legacy systems either died by going out of physical existence or were restructured into more purely conceptual existence.  Buggy whips and horse and buggies.  POTs.

We can logically go down to a lower granular level of Money as a Conceptual Object lower than Account but reaching a greater level of efficiency in this universal system is up against a well entrenched and powerful legacy system based on Account as an owning object of Money.  A legacy system that has been digitized to make its own now dysfunctional legacy foundation even more entrenched in the Information Age.

There are two ways to restructure.  Knock out the foundational underpinnings of a thing and it falls down and is no more.  Self induced it is suicide.  Outwardly induced it is revolution.  Evolution in world of Nature is from the bottom up changes in the lowest granular level structure of  things in a bottom up driven process of change.  In the Conceptual world, given that a Concept is proven good by its benefit to us, evolution is to get better by refining it toward.......line break for added emphasis again.........

A Better Union!!!!

"The best way to predict your future is to create it" -- Abraham Lincoln

Union at that time had a different meaning.  I think a Better Union today means a better conceptual network of things and concepts to serve us.  We have better tools to do that.  Better tools to apply to legacy conceptual structures to eliminate dysfunction, enhance their efficiency and quality.  There are many riffs on what Lincoln said.   or maybe he was just covering a tune.

The only thing we can create out of nothing (which I think is the true definition we give to creation concept) are concepts.  Perhaps something from purely nothing modeled as riffs on the creation of the natural world that was not in fact created by us, just used what existed.   Our purely independent creations that are beyond the structures of the natural world is where our future takes us.

Money is a universal legacy networking concept ripe for conceptual restructure in the modern universal networking system we have created because the conceptual foundation of Money Currency can go to a much lower granular level to create a better system.  It is the method way we create our future as a more integrated stronger conceptual structure product of our intelligence and the conceptual tools it has created to serve ourselves better.

In nature what did not exist somehow gave birth to what does exist, as far as we perceive it.  It is a natural mystery and our discovery of its natural nature pushes back other explanations.

The concepts we create as products of purely of our own creation start with what is a proclamation self evident truth as a stated fact of being not by virtue of birth as a product of  its non-existence.  We may attribute their source to a non natural thing...or not.

Money at its most granular level is a self evident conceptual truth like freedom upon which to build our conceptual structure.  Like freedom it has its attributes, methods and messages that make it a solid conceptual thing to work with.  Like Freedom it has its lowest granular level which is the same granular level as Freedom:  The User.  Us individually and our enterprises as our affairs as a function of the freedom we endow ourselves with and as an expression of our freedom and inherit some it the attributes of freedom and independence.

Accounts are creations of Banks.  The legacy system produces Currency money as a functional object child with exclusive mathematical properties inherited from its Parent:Mathematics but owing its existence to with nothing more than mathematical properties of a number subject to domination of its functional application as a medium of exchange by attributes, methods and methods exclusive to  Account.  Without an account it would not exist because it owns no attributes other than mathematical.  That situation is exclusively and exactly why debt based money can go out of existence when the debit/credit mathematical relationship that gave it birth equals zero.

Currency is a conceptual object that has always existed at the macro level but had no persistence at the micro granular level other than a physical one.  Still has to some extent of money definition but that is not the official Digital currency used as a medium of exchange today which is so far removed and detached from a physical value basis as to become independent of it by Fiat.

In order to restructure the legacy debt money system Positive Currency money is self evident statement of truth that we proclaim to exist and is endowed with its own attributes, methods and messages independent of Account.  That removes it from control of its nature by way of its relation to Account which is a matter of Banking system control in the legacy system because Currency can now be managed at a more granular level in the Information age by virtue of an an independent but networked relationship to Account that improves accounting control as well as application to commerce.

We freed ourselves from state level tyranny once before by proclamation of granular human attributes.  There is a higher level of tyranny beyond the state level structured on financial domination across state levels using the power of legacy Account dominated debt based Monetary System as a weapon with which to sub-optimized the application of money for its own sector inordinate benefit in allocating resources contrary to the general welfare.

Information Age network structures and applications both physical and conceptual are the best tools to apply to the restructure of the legacy Monetary System dominating the sovereignty of nations through the very same Information Age network we have created but evading its natural evolution by going to increasingly granular levels of expansion as demonstrated by universal structure and application of its IP meta structure to the Internet of Things through IPv6 specific identification.

The Digital Monetary Currency System that I propose operating in a network of User, Currency and Account applies IPv6 identification at each relative lowest granular level to each component and makes Currency a positive based entity independent but network related to the Account component.

Just because we can do it and doing it creates a better system, a more perfect union network of our own design to serve us and our general welfare through the application of our primary resource application decision making tool: Money in the specific form of Currency as the medium of exchange removed from a purely numerical unit of account with attribute qualities, methods and means apply/respond to User and Account components.  There is a difference between a common unit of valuation as a reference number in a trade and the Currency used as the medium of the exchange.

The problem domain of Money and Currency looks different from an IT guy perspective.  We need more big thinkers looking at the problem domain.  Big thinkers like Alan Kay. Go to the link and soak up his wisdom.  It is enlightening, inspiring.

I feel I am getting closer to the pony and less like I am climbing a tree to the moon.  Being a big thinker at the most abstract top level with the underpinning of specific knowledge of Object Oriented Design (OOD) and Object Oriented Programming (OOP) to get the job done is ok.  Create the top level picture and if it is good enough to hang together at the top level for those few that can climb out of the gulley and see the blue or come out of the cave and see the light that have the ability to do the OOD and OOP and integration then that is an accomplishment.  I just wish I could find some others going in my direction then I would not feel so all alone.....Others that see the long range networking potential of numbering a vast amount of intelligent endowed thing devices either real or virtual machines at a granular of umpteen trillions.  Like with 32 zeros or more attached.

Does this type of expansion to vast numbers at the granular level lead to opportunities for simplicity/less complexity at exceeding higher levels of network relationships?

The Debt Ceiling is a symptom of the legacy Money System.  How far off the rails must it go before anyone watching the it go down the rails says "train wreck" before the inevitable happens.  The train is running down the wrong track and going faster all the time.

Monday must have been a busy day

For whoever caught up on my blog posts today.

Do you really find anything worthwhile in them or do you hope there is a pony somewhere down there?

Object Orientation, The Internet and Virtual Intelligent Machines

Looking at he last entry in this blog all I could see was a writhing pile of individual but related ideas having interacting relationships lie a pile of snakes all inter-twined. How to straighten them all our and lay them in an orderly structure?  It is a herding cats problem domain aimed at getting ducks in a row!


If I was anyone who is not me (that's binary?) then I would look at what I wrote and say:  This guy needs to a take a day and go searching for the bottle that makes him one short of a six pack.

True.  My days off to find that bottle are actually nights.  Sleep is a different state of mind where things emerge out of nothing take some form upon waking.  If I am quick enough to grab the dream state shadow on the wall when I wake up and am equally swift in going go to the source that cast it in that brief transition from sleep to awake state I can carry it (or enough of its essence) into the place where I can examine it with a cup of coffee.

That is where I am at the start of this blog entry.

Object Oriented thinking straightens out everything.  The shadow of what that thought was on the wall with full recognition of its meaning as well as full integrated substance structure.  A dream vision that was a beauty to behold.  Freud would explain it I suppose and the relation of the shadow level to the conscious level, etc.  The waking thought that I grabbed at that instant of transition to take with me to the light of day was this:  (Paragraph break here for emphasis, sound the horns!)

The Internet is the finest Object Oriented structure that we have ever created.  Yesterday I was thinking of the elegant beauty of the IP system, IP version 6 now and how it ties objects together in the Internet of Things.  After writing the last blog entry yesterday I thought more about IP and its IP named things being intelligent object nodes in the system with methods and methods.  All of them physical things. After publishing the blog entry yesterday I went on to look again at the IP system.

Devices in the IP internet system are physical things we can get our hands on like a cell phone.  Good example.  People can understand that.  I bought a 65 inch 4k Ultra HD TV recently.  It has an IP address and is a thing on the IoT.  I interact with it like a cell phone however the last time I put my hands on it will probably be when I set it on the table and plugged it in to the electrical system.  A system of an Integration of Things like the Internet of Things. 

The IoT meta level domain is one of physical things relating physically to each other.  Externally the IoT  relates directly in form and function to  an analogous conceptual logical structure of equal magnitude.  They are both operating systems that support applications and are at the most granular level related by the binary concept of Presence/Absence through electrical representation at the machine level of True/False at the conceptual level. 

Yesterday I realized that the Internet and the concept of Internet of Things is really all about physical things and their physical structure in an Internet to serve the conceptual or software side operating and application system.  Researching that thought on Google I found some reference to ideas that IP numbers that tie the IoT system together could also be assigned to virtual things called Virtual Machines.  That is some powerful idea!  Machines with all the attributes, methods and messaging abilities of the real thing but implemented in a conceptual software structure.

It gets as complicated as time travel!

It takes some creative thinking to see how it all ties together like I saw in my sleep last night and grabbed just enough of a key handle on it all to carry into today.  The key handle is that all of my thoughts about the monetary system, what money is and does in current system structure and what it should be in a restructured system is object based.  One way to express it is that I envision a virtual cash system existing on a virtual machine operating and application system not just modeled on IP but existing in an IP structure that ties it all together.

Object Oriented thinking is so much easier for me.

Bucando muy temprano en la manana

I went to Google.  Entered this:  "Internet is an Object Oriented System". I, an intelligent object sent a message to another intelligent object a message it had a method to perform and return a result.

The result: 

No results found for "internet is an Object Oriented system". Results for internet is an Object Oriented system (without quotes).  Then, course there were many matches for these words but not for the string in quotes.  The search string in quotes seems like a reasonable thought string that someone entered somewhere on the WWW that Google crawls and indexes.

Nope.  No joy.  But on the other hand: Joy!  Once again I claim fame of first entry of a simple short expression of a simple thought to the WWW that nobody ever made before and claim it for my very own creation.  May its eminence of existence in the public domain enjoy its free range and forever be attached to the context of this blog entry as an object thing thought created by me.

I, however, am a micro midget standing on  the shoulders of Giants.  The basic idea was introduced by a genius: Dr. Alan Kay.  While he did not say it exactly this way he used the meaning of the words rather than the expression of the string to say the same thing.  My expression in quotes is simple a reduction to a logical concept called "equal"  This equals that.  I will simply bask in his light and give true credit where it is due.

Dr. Kay wrote the first book I bought and read on programming.  Smalltalk 80.  That was back in the 80's.  This morning I enjoyed catching up on his progress through history and contribution to its making since then.

This from Dr. Kay:

He refers to the Internet (TCP/IP) as being one of the few large-scale software projects that was properly engineered where its level of complication is balanced by its level of complexity which was achieved in < 20k LOC that acts behaves like a living, dynamic system able to handle billions of nodes that has never been stopped after it was turned on in September, 1969. As this was so rare many people don’t consider the Internet as normal software made by man:

"The Internet was done so well that most people think of it as a natural resource like the Pacific Ocean, rather than something that was man-made. When was the last time a technology with a scale like that was so error-free? The Web, in comparison, is a joke. The Web was done by amateurs."

Further in the Deep Insights link:

He had this to say of the Internet - which he considers is “possibly the only real object-oriented system in working order”:

"To me, one of the nice things about the semantics of real objects is that they are “real computers all the way down (RCATWD)” – this always retains the full ability to represent anything. The old way quickly gets to two things that aren’t computers – data and procedures – and all of a sudden the ability to defer optimizations and particular decisions in favour of behaviours has been lost. In other words, always having real objects always retains the ability to simulate anything you want, and to send it around the planet. … And RCATWD also provides perfect protection in both directions. We can see this in the hardware model of the Internet (possibly the only real object-oriented system in working order).....emphasis mine....You get language extensibility almost for free by simply agreeing on conventions for the message forms. My thought in the 70s was that the Internet we were all working on alongside personal computing was a really good scalable design, and that we should make a virtual internet of virtual machines that could be cached by the hardware machines. It’s really too bad that this didn’t happen. If ‘real objects’ are RCATWD, then each object could be implemented using the programming language most appropriate for its intrinsic nature, which would give new meaning to the phrase ‘polyglot programming.’"

 Yup!  Nuff said.

My problem domain of Money takes on a new conceptual view.  One in which the Object Oriented concept of the Internet really does serve as a model of choice in a problem domain where optimizing system design and integration with absolute reduction in error of structure and operation is vital. 

In my Digital Monetary system the three main Objects are Users, Currency and Accounts.  Each is a distinct and inter-related fundamental Intelligent Virtual Machine in the system.  All tied together as Virtual Machines by sharing the Object Oriented Attributes, Methods and Messages of a Parent Object Class:Internet Protocol.

Each instance of the aggregate class is discretely identified  by an IP number in the system each unique User, Unit of Currency and Account.  Sub-net object IP extension as required by UML design.

User entities are all people using the broad concept of business entities as people with a broad identity attribute of a business entity being one that has the same attribute as a human being called "ownership" that gets into "rights" and all that requires specification of what attribute rights as children of what Parent Class are involved and their associated Methods and Messages. 

In my Walled Garden Monetary System.

All discrete object units of Users have an IPv6 number. In the Walled Garden Monetary System.

All discrete object units of Currency at the unit value of One have an IPv6 number.

All discrete object units of Account have an IPv6 number.

Anyone is free to enter and play by the rules and regs and agreement of terms.

The physical system structure of the Internet is to date the finest of a long line of Objects we have created to serve us.  It gives us a bridge as well as a model to build farther into the construction of Conceptual Objects of the Information Age to serve us as well as the Physical Objects of the Industrial Age. 

The Internet viewed in retrospect from a future where we can see the forest for the trees just might be looked at as the bridge that emerged from the Industrial Age to take us into the Information Age. 

Hopefully, from the point of view looking forward into the future that bridge will take us to a place where Conceptual design object systems and their operation based on reason and logic will dominate by elimination of dysfunctional systems and subsystems of the Industrial Age.

Was the Industrial Age driven more by the design development importance of what things can do more than what they are because the Industrial Age worked with given natural physical resources to put them together to assemble the products of the Industrial Age that have advanced us>

In the Information Age design development of what things can do becomes a function not of putting together physical resources like the Industrial Age, although that will always continue to give us better physical things,  but creating the Big Conceptual Object thing resources analogous to physical natural resources that at the most fundamental level were made for us to work with? 

In the Information Age we create the fundamental building blocks assembled to serve us and the nature of the conceptual entities to be created shifts the focus of what things do in the Industrial Age based on their given attributes to what those object attributes are that we build into them in Information Age that enable them to do something.

It is a shift from Function Orientation driven construction of physical things in the past to Object Orientation of constructing conceptual objects and their inherent attributes and associated methods in the future.

There are many current legacy systems from prior ages that continue to exert their functions on society because the were functionally oriented designed systems in the first place.  Where these systems involve concepts more or exclusive of physical natural resources in their nature, Object Oriented driven design becomes more important to produce a desired function by building into the object concept what it needs to do, not applying what needs to be done to the object to make it work as a thing that we want to do something. 

Design what Money Currency is at the granular level and it will do what we want it to do.

The legacy design was driven by what Money Currency does.  In that system Currency does not have conceptual intelligence to employ its own unique attributes, methods and messages to be an intelligent virtual machine.  That is what is necessary to build into it to serve us better.

Walled Garden Monetary System

My prior post examined Users of the my Monetary System design concept structured on the triad of User, Currency and Account.  Logically there should be two follow on blog entry examinations.  One being Currency and the other being Account.  I will skip that.  They were sufficiently presented in  the prior blog entry.

User is the focus of the system.  The system is a "Walled Garden".  This link is a Google search on the term.   It is a broad selection of what a Walled Garden is and how the concept is applied.   Wikipedia explains Walled Garden Platform at this link.  It is a closed ecosystem.   Strictly Members only. admitted to do what Members can do exclusive any non-Members.  I like that un-ambiguous concept.  It is modeled on nature, natural information structures.  Parent/Child relationships of natural things.  Living things being a major category that pass on attributes to their children.

If your Parent did not have and Children then you can't have any either.  It is an end of the line proposition of real or conceptual life of every thing.  Everything is related in a Parent/Child relationship.

Create a Parent attribute that is inherited only by its Children objects and shared with no other object in the total universe of all other Parent/Child attribute relationships and it makes all children of that parent and the environment in which it operates unique.  It is a "Walled Garden" into which no other entity can enter except the Child of the Parent that has that real or conceptual attribute.  Child members of that "Walled Garden" can however have relationships with other different Parent/Child objects outside the Walled Garden.

No Walled Garden is an Island.  Great thought!  It came out of nowhere when I key stroked the last period in this linear stream of symbols into where ever that period resides in concept and reality over time.

A Walled Garden works both ways.  Keeps protected things inside.  Keeps unwanted things outside.

If a Garden is "Not Walled" then it is not a "Walled Garden"  Is that a binary relationship?  One state of being....being Walled the other state of being....not being Walled.

My Walled Garden Monetary System is one where entities called Users having the conceptual attribute identity of IPv6 number can enter as the key to interact or play with two other entities that are also Walled Gardens, one being Currency and the other being Account all three being within a Parent Walled Garden Monetary System encompassing User, Currency and Account.

It is a tight system.  The key to entry for all three is an exclusive IPv6 number at the lowest granular level of each of the interacting triad entities; User, Currency, Account.  IPv6 is a Walled Garden but that is one that external to the Monetary System that the Monetary system where the triad entity members inherit attributes of an IPv6 Parent.

It is all ploymorphically incestuous by Object Oriented design.

As simple as our natural language is basically simple but look at all the complex things that be constructed with it as ambiguous at the fundamental building blocks of letters become as they are put together by application programs in our heads.  That is how the current Monetary System was built with conceptual symbols of letters and numbers.  Numbers have far less ambiguity than letters in natural language generated systems.  That however preceded the computer information age when descriptive system specifications are being written in a more rigorous language than Natural Language.

My Digital Monetary system is re-writing the system specification is a more rigorous manner that reduces the ambiguity of User Benefit from System Design to isolate abusers of System Design who emerge as the original institutional legacy Monetary System designers that built in features that are now clearly bugs in the system that sub-optimize it.

Focus on the User of the Monetary System is therefore the most important object entity to start with.  All else falls into place in the design.  All else being requirements for Currency and Account.

It is a tightly controlled Walled Garden.  It includes as Users all entities that conduct business with Currency as a medium of exchange.  "Money Like" financial instruments currently outside of ambiguous specifications of what money is or is not must be reduced to either in or out of the Monetary System Walled Garden objects.  Their complicated relationship must be highly defined.  A task that becomes easier after the conceptual structure specification of the Monetary System is highly defined.

"Money Like" financial instruments are things that Users of the Monetary exchange for currency.  Use as if they were currency.  Want to exchange at given values with currency.  As "Money Like" as they wish to be in form and function, they are conceptual representations of value that have varying degrees of connection to real world physical things with market associated/derived value.  At the extreme they are conceptual representations of Snake Oil but not even traceable to some real stuff in the real Walled Garden of a bottle.  "Money Like" financial instruments at this extreme must play in a Walled Garden called Fantasy where objects have no relation to reality.  Currency in the Monetary System cannot be used to resolve Fantasy object debt nor can Currency System be expanded to accommodate illegal or fantasy created debt.

Systems to create or satisfy obligations not involving a medium exchange in the Monetary System may exist outside of the Walled Garden of Currency.  However, those systems are based on direct trade not involving a conceptual medium of exchange but direct trade of two or more things between two or more contractual parties.

The concept of the last paragraph is elusive but required to distinguish the role of medium of exchange from trade in Economics.  Direct trades of value not having an intermediate medium of exchange are in the domain of the Walled Garden of Trade.  Different Garden, different relationships, different rules.  Generally in the domain of contracts.

No, that won't work.  "Money Like" things are too much like money that they freely operate as a medium of exchange.  Dark Money.  Convertible to the official money called Currency.  However they must be assigned characteristics of direct trade objects, not medium of exchange with value as a function conversion to Currency by right or demand on the Currency System.

Essentially it is a systemic risk matter.  Currency must be protected from shift of systemic market risk incurred by "Money Like" things masquerading as close to currency under the concept of money but are only objects of direct trade that can be purchased with Currency but once purchased cannot be exchanged for currency but only other objects in its Non-Currency (Money Like) Walled Garden.  That Walled Garden would probably have to employ an IPv6 identification to all objects in its direct trading system exchanged for other objects on the system.

Maybe just leave all trade not involving a medium of exchange to the Mr. Market to figure out.  Their user problem. It is a problem of things being expressed in money value units but not being settled by medium of exchange but traded on an agreed value of the objects involved.  Sometimes settled with a combination of Currency and the trade value of the objects involved.  Usually talking big business negotiations here normally involving contracts.

It requires a Problem Domain definition.  Currency as a Medium of Exchange is by nature a convenient intermediary to the conduct of business at the lower transaction value level where the bulk of transactions take place.  High values of few transactions called Loans are where money is created in the current system.  A system where money is not a medium of exchange that seals the deal but a contract is.  A contract that is sealed by a direct trade where each party walks away with a piece of paper signed by both that created money by a key stroke.  Money was not the medium of exchange but the product of the exchange of contractual obligation.  It them became a medium of exchange as a proxy of that contract agreement exchange.

The argument:

 Is Currency a contractual related thing making it a Child of the Parent Contract of a bank loan?  Yes that is what it is today.  All money is debt money.  (excuse the insignificant 3% that is paper currency circulating in the USA).  97% is digital debt based created by bank loans key stroked into existence as a function of a loan agreement creating an equal debit and credit account.

Or should Currency a child of a different Parent than a Contract  Parent? 

Yes, to the latter and a system structured on that thought.

The Parent of Currency in an Object Oriented structure  is answered by its methodology of discovery of Parent/Child relationships that asks: What Parent is this a child of?

It is the child the Parent that gives it either the greatest number of attributes and/or attributes independent of number that are unique to the Parent in both its Parent attributes and methods to do things as well as messages it can receive to do them.  Think of it as distinguishing genes and their methods and messages inherited from the Parent.  What Parent object does it look like, act like, more than any other possible Parent as an offspring product child of that Parent object thing?

Child of a Contract Parent?

Looks more like the Parent should be Us, We the People, the user and all of our institutions we form that use the medium of exchange in Persuit of Happiness.  Money can't buy it but it helps us get where we have endowed ourselves the personal freedom where we choose individually or collectively to go.

Money in the form of our Currency is the social decision making tool in our individual hands and collectively in the hands of our nation.

We are the Parent of a child called Currency.  It has more of our attributes and more important foremost distinguishing attributes and methods to apply them to actions than a thing of the business world called Contract that creates something called money that is owed at birth delivered by a Bank and a Child of a Parent called Debt.  As debt money it converts in use to a medium of exchange that facilitates our Pursuit of Freedom.  At its genesis  however is the tyranny of debt.

The game is rigged to force us into debt with debt money and enhance the power of those that extract the price of debt money and finance of our endeavors.  The power that becomes a tool of our politics, our form of collective decision making beyond the objectives and sometimes in conflict with objective of the profit motive.

Currency is a Child of Us.  We are the collective Parent that gives it child attributes to serve us as we choose.  One of those choices is to incur a debt obligation if we wish but that is a matter of contractual agreement with an agency that a fiduciary obligation to administer loans of existing positive money. 

Some tangled thinking here but throwing it all out as tangled as it may be puts it out there to untangle and find the pony.

Monetary System: User Identification

I propose using IPv6 to identify all users and accounts in the Digital Monetary System restructure.

Each is already identified in the current system.

Users:  Almost every entity (person/business) that transacts with money has a money account of some type.  Probably more than one.  Some of those accounts are not "money in the bank" accounts but "money owed the bank or other credit entity" accounts.  Either way those accounts are identified by a number associated to the authorized user of the account.  The "true" identity of the authorized user in relation to their account number is established by any of a number or combination of data elements associated with the account user/holder sufficient to assure security.

Focusing on people, living human beings, as account holders distinct from those that are not, the number of people that do not have an account through which to conduct money transactions today are in the category: Un-banked.  There is a trend to get more people banked.  A trend that either forces them to become banked or entices them to do so voluntarily.  I doubt that it is entirely for the purpose of increasing business for the banks but to facilitate the business of business in general.  There are some related big data objectives as well.  Big Data can't get all big data on all the people unless they are in the system.  Why do they want it?  Because Big Data.

13% of households are unbanked 7% known to be unbanked the rest are just unknown.  Households are not the same as people but it gives an idea of the magnitude of the population that is unbanked.

There are protocols and standards for bank account numbering systems.

Here is a great account number portability idea based on the telephone number portability concept.  It is not a novel idea.  Obvious, actually.  The evolution of the Information Age as it consolidates information in relationship to an entity that may have several different identifiers wants to reduce the number of identifiers to the maximum extent for ease of management, reduction of redundancy, abiguity, etc.  A nature Big Data tendency.  Not surprising.  What really drove telephone number portability?  Consumer demand or business desire?  Hmmmm.....

Cutting to the chase (belatedly but getting there at my usual speed..."There" being the point)

The ultimate level of ID efficiency is to have a single universal unique identifier for every person in accordance with an industry standard protocol.  I'd have to search to see if there is a single national or world wide protocol for a formal standard applicable to the unique identification of all human beings.

There is a bank account PIN protocol standard.  A universal standard applies at country level in several countries called a National Identification Number for government use but a universal number for universal application?  Even a futurist would not have to gaze too far into the crystal ball to see it coming.

This link looks at IP numbers and data protection.

Tim Berners-Lee floated and idea of everyone having an IP number.  A public IP number like their name is public.  However there is a private password to go on the internet and find out who has what private information, and if was information they were authorized to collect or have access to.  More or less the idea.  I blogged about it previously.

Not a bad idea but like when someone has the secret password to your bank account......what could go wrong?

How to protect privacy in a world where information aggregation and personal data accumulation has great momentum for profit and other reasons it is a hard protection fight when the other side with all the money and technology seeks more private info.  All the private person has left is the right to know who has what info about them an if they obtained it, allow access to it in accordance with a person's permission.  Then big info has to figure out how to "buy" that right through rewards programs or a stipulation tied to use, like those of Facebook.

The NSA is probably a front runner in a National ID register.  No privacy issues.  No need to know our own number.  It is that private.  Does the NSA have a block reserved in IPv6?  If so, it could be the genesis of the Account User ID system as well as any other system that it would be portable to.

Personal Portable ID for Life.  For your security from the NSA.

The Trinity of the Monetary System

The foundation of the Digital Monetary System that I propose are the Big Three components:

1.  User of Digital Currency (Class:User)

2.  Digital Currency (Class:Currency)

3. Currency Account  (ClassAccount)

The lowest granular uniquely identified singular conceptual unit representation of each of these components is an IPv6 number.  There are enough of these numbers to cover the total requirement for a numbering identification scheme with enough left over to create a long string of zeros after it.  Look at the IPv6 link.

In a Parent/Child Object Oriented System these three components are all Children of a Parent Class: called Digital Currency System.  In Object Oriented methodology all Children of a Parent Class inherit attributes of the Parent.  One of the Parent Attributes and its associated methods and messages is IPv6 system identification. 

Starting to see the light?  IPv6 itself is a Class that shares its attributes with many other types of Class Objects.  The Internet and World Wide Web have and use IPv6 attributes.  Object Oriented Parent/Child relationships become extremely complex but are structured to reduce complexity to simplicity.  Think of it as a mapping system for sharing attributes at the lowest level that are children of progressively higher levels all the way to their to their origin at the top.  Associated with those attributes are methods for them to do something and messages to pass between objects that get things done.  Conceptually it is an information structure analogous to the real world.

If your parents did not have any children to whom to pass on the attributes of life you can't have any either.  It is kind of like a block chain.

Grab selected Class Owned Attributes from here and there as necessary to build a system, Create a few new ones that never existed before and are therefore uniquely owned by the Class object (not a child of any other class)  and presto:  A System emerges.

State of the Object Oriented art is such that just about everything required as a necessary to build a system is on the shelf.  If what the Information Engineer cannot find on the shelf is not there then the Information Scientist must discover the requirement's nature and in the Object Oriented scheme of things and provide for its proper place in Parent/Child relationship.  Sometimes necessary to change parent ownership to resolve conflict, comply with protocol, create a new class as the picture of the forest becomes clearer as a function of better Information Engineering.

The beauty of Information Engineering is so much of the engineering has been done that a great number of Object things and attributes have already been created.  Just plug them in.

IPv6, its Parent/Child attributes, methods and messages is a multi-purpose plug in.  It brings with it a vast number of associated plug ins from a side variety of other top level Object Classes, many related to the generalities of the Information Age that make things work.

All Monetary System components: Users, Currency and Accounts have an IPv6 number at their respective lowest granular level of identification because working up the Parent/Child relationship chain the Parent has inherited some specific attribute/method/message to pass on to the child. 

The next step is to design/discover all the Parent/Child relationships in the Monetary System.

Those relationships are whatever we want them to be!  The fashion in which they are put together produce an Operating System in which Application Programs serve the system design objectives.

We already have an operating monetary system.  It is dysfunctional.  A legacy system designed to serve the objectives of creators of the system while serving us.  It is serving them better than us.  They became to greedy and structured social and monetary object relationships and functions at a fundamental level to serve that objective. 

Restructure!

IpV6 identification is mandatory for all User, Currency and Account participants in the Digital Monetary System.  Without one there is no participation in the system.  All other systems, dark money systems, "money like" instruments are not legal tender and may or may not be convertible to the digital monetary system currency.  They are "off the grid" The Digital Monetary System is a tightly controlled relatively closed system and the the only one through which to settle tax liability or is "legal tender", whatever that may be defined to be.

Total system ownership is public.  Monetary system component ownership is public.  Users and Accounts systems may be public or private.

Users:  Entities authorized and registered to participate in the Digital Monetary System.

Currency:  Digital Monetary System unit of exchange

Account:  Record of User ownership of Currency in an aggregate variable amount of Currency at the uniquely identified Account level.

This restructure extracts Currency from its role as a child object of Account where there are only two components of the current monetary system; Account and User in the current scheme of things and elevates it to Parent level owning unique attributes, methods and messages independent of strict inheritance of attributes, methods and messages of Account in the current monetary system.  In the current monetary system Currency is a created number, purely a child the Parent:Mathematics with inherited mathematical attributes used to keep score. 

Note: The exception is physical currency, less than 6%, all else is presently digital currency.  Of that 6% about 3% is outside the country in the form of $100 dollar bills.  All attributes of physical currency are eliminated in the Digital Monetary System.

This from Zero Hedge gives the magnitude of things;

Consider the structure of the financial system.

1)   The total currency (actual cash in the form of bills and coins) in the US financial system is a little over $1.36 trillion.

2)   When you include digital money sitting in short-term accounts and long-term accounts then you’re talking about roughly $10 trillion in “money” in the financial system.

3)   In contrast, the money in the US stock market (equity shares in publicly traded companies) is over $20 trillion in size.

4)   The US bond market  (money that has been lent to corporations, municipal Governments, State Governments, and the Federal Government) is almost twice this at $38 trillion.

5)   Total Credit Market Instruments (mortgages, collateralized debt obligations, junk bonds, commercial paper and other digitally-based “money” that is based on debt) is even larger $58.7 trillion.

6)   Unregulated over the counter derivatives traded between the big banks and corporations is north of $220 trillion.

That is the big change in restructure of fundamental object entity relationship but it shake up all relationships and their connections.  To say the least.  How it does that becomes rather mechanical because methodology for design of any operating system information structure has been well established as logical in relationship among things and the functions that implement relationships.  It is the domain of Information Engineering.

The current monetary system is Rube Goldberg thing. "In 1931 the Merriam-Webster dictionary adopted the phrase "Rube Goldberg" as an adjective defined as accomplishing something simple through complicated means.<sup>[13]"

He must have been attempting to describe the Banking System!  Information Engineers un-complicate this kind of thing.

"Banks" generically manage Accounts therefore all money created as a function of Account called accounting.  Accounting is a functional method of Money that when asked to do so by a request message (keystroke of a number) it performs its method inherited from its Parent called Math to perform "divide" which communicates  message to another attribute of math called "equal" to do its thing with its method, return a result of two numbers that create two distinct Money Accounts of equal value: Debit and Credit children.  Each has methods and messages.  

Much of the current Banking Accounting System is already object oriented structured.  That is the way business programming is structured on a computer today.  Structured at the lowest level, absolutely not yet at the more abstract higher conceptual structure.  The higher abstract level where currency must be recognized as a stand alone entity with more attributes and relationships at a higher conceptual level than exclusive low level math attributes.

The simply elegant way to cut out all the noise in the Rube Goldberg currency system is to give currency an object identity beyond a score number.  It once had that unique identity as a dollar bill with its score number in the corner but it also had a unique identity serial number.  It lost that identity assigned by the Bureau of Printing and Engraving when it became a digital entity created by key stroke.

One way of looking at the problem domain of restructuring the Monetary System is the re-establishment of uniquely identified monetary units.  Used to be when physical cash was a dominant form of exchange that denominations of amounts in the corners of a bill facilitated large exchanges of money to a certain extent below amounts of account to account transactions.  No need for that physical convenience.  Each unit at a given level of value can have its own identity.  Computer are good at handling that now.

Currency itself at the single unit of value can and must once again, at least conceptually, be uniquely identified with an IpV6 number.  That extracts it from a role as an object of Account and returns it to the conceptual identity it had assigned be Printing and Engraving.

When currency is assigned a unique identity at the unit level and extracted from Account and elevated to it proper system relationship level then new attributes that are children of other Parents in the Monetary system can be attached to it with methods and messages to enhance total system structure and operation.

That change is dramatic.  It facilitates the management of currency as a discrete object rather than the product of a math function that has no intrinsic identity other than mathematical.  Banks will have a problem with that.  Banks are the problem, this is how to resolve it in the same way that our entire society is being and/or in need of the logical restructure of legacy relationships in the Information Age.  

Money is a big "Information Thing System" dominated by a dysfunctional but powerful and well entrenched institution.  Today gives ample evidence of the emergence of new Information Age institutions and their effect on legacy systems of the Industrial Age. 

In a debt based monetary system, and all our money is debt based, money only has a numerical unit value identity for system management and only really exists as a division of a number in two parts having a two faced debt identity until it is extinguished by debt repayment. 

Essentially, the dynamics of the system will not change.  They will simply become a situation where money as a number in an debit/credit division of itself into two numerically equal parts is abolished and replaced with an object that has persistent identity and constant unit value of one.  It does not come from nothing at a keystroke and go back to nothing when the debit and related credit account are zero.  It retains its assigned identity as a unit of currency and is continuously over time persistent and only changes is condition state of being either in circulation of out of circulation and held in reserve for future circulation as system control management requires.

I Gotta Name 

 A unique identity is what gives an object "being", existence beyond just a number.

A unique existence to which can be associated a vast amount of unique interactions over an life time.

Perhaps there is nothing more important in the living of our lives or representative of how we live them than the decisions we make throughout our lives.  They tell our story.  For what it is worth. 

Money is a social decision making tool.  Decreasingly private at the micro level requiring increasing but foot dragging protection, increasingly important at the macro level of private and public decision making that relates to our quality of life and national objectives.

Money cannot give us the necessary information about what we do with it at any level of analysis until it is given a persistent identity and block chain history record to which, at least at the macro level we can account to the penny where it goes for what purpose.  

Money without a unique identity such as IPv6 assigned to each unit as positive money extracted from its relationship to debt based creation will perpetuate monetary system mis-managment by design or default that gives currency an ambiguity of a a big marshmallow of a split personality created by a bank as its reason for being in two parts one of which is a conceptual figment of imagination and the other its shadow.

Money, currency, will always be a figment of our conceptual imagination to which we assign value as a medium of exchange.  

The trick is to turn the shadow on the wall cast by money in the current debit/credit based system structure created by a function that divides a single number into two states of being (positive and negative) that are both derived out of nothing in the first place.  

That trick is done simply by assigning an identity to the object.  Make it an object, not a function that comes and goes.  It becomes a conceptual object when it is given a unique identity and has persistence over time.  There is no shadow, not when the object and light is recognized as things outside the cave.  Hard to convince those still in the cave of the reality producing what they see as shadows.  

The situation is as old as witch doctors and modern medicine.

Choose your own analogy.  

Wizard of Oz tells a newer version of the same story.  It was not only the man behind the curtain that was given an identity but the Tin Man, the Straw Man and the Cowardly Lion.  The identity relationships changed everything for the better. 

Happy Ending!</sup>