Skip to main content

General

Why is it better than what currently exists?​

  • Less restrictive with regards to tradeability of the tokens.​

Some UBI-based crypto alternatives use a trust graph system for determining who can send and receive tokens, which makes it harder for two people who don't directly know each other and their character, to trust and trade with each other. Even transitive transfer methods are not enough to solve the problem, because you still have the issue of trusting new people.



  • No need for resource-intensive means of redistribution.​

Since BRN is not a token and instead is points that only exist to serve as a limiter for how much TRST a wallet can produce, it need not be distributed periodically which saves much computational resource.



  • Fault-correction mechanism for potential incorrect results from voting.​

Even if a bad actor gets voted in, its not the end of the world since all the transactions that were made from the wallet can be tracked and orphaned if a revote decided that the wallet was indeed illegitimate.



  • Adaptive means for unique human verification.​

Since the actual method for determining unique humanity is not baked into the system, it provides an opportunity for the market to develop unique human verification methods that they are confident in, and can trust. It ensures that even the verification system evolves overtime.



  • Doesn’t demurrage the amount that’s a birthright and limits unnecessary purchases.​

Universal Income is supposed to be a birthright that every human should get in order to survive and live a decent life. If even the bare minimum is a subject of demurrage, people can easily spend the Universal income unwisely just to not be a victim of demurrage. They might make purchases that they don't need to make, only to save themselves from loss.



  • Democratic means for voting and changing the rules of the ecosystem.​

The humanity verification mechanism unlocks another potential usecase for this ecosystem. Self-amendment can be implemented in the system so that every individual's opinion can be taken into consideration while changing the rules of the blockchain. It ensures that forks will be kept to minimal, and the ecosystem to actually serve people and changing times, effectively.



  • Can work in a consumer-centric economy where means of production are not privatized / centralized. Preserves accountability.​

I am of the opinion that a fair society should also try to limit the private ownership of things that take power away from the people, to prevent centralization and generational hoarding of power. Things that have the ability to affect the well being of a lot of people, like water resources, farm land, power lines, factories, roads, artificial intelligence, etc.

In such a society, people won't be owning the means of production, and hence will mainly serve as resource cultivators and transporters. They don't need to be paid a huge amount because the means of production is not something they privately own. That implies that, in future, the goods and services may be cheap enough that the BRN points might be enough for living a lavish life, and TRST can just serve as a means of accountability for that time.

Here's how it might work:

Let's assume that, in this kind of society, the expiry date for all the TRSTs have been collectively decided to be set as two days from the time it got minted. This would mean that TRST will act more like points instead of tradable assets. The goal for this kind of society would be more reputation-oriented and less on collecting more value. Expired TRST tokens will still be shown in their wallet even if it's expired, which will serve to heighten their reputation, and also serves as the proof for how much value they have provided. That means it will gamify doing service to others and provide an easier means of keeping account of your contributions.



  • No need for pathfinder to be baked into the system.​

Circles uses transitive transfers which use pathfinder. Although it is a clever solution, it relies on heavy computation which is not easy to decentralize, and gas fees are an issue.



  • Efficient method for ledger pruning.​

All of the history of expired TRST can simply be pruned from the ledger as they don't matter anymore as you don't need to account for tradability of that TRST token anymore. This drastically reduces the ledger size overtime, and is future-proof.



  • Free market-based solution to the trust problem.​

Since its ultimately upto the wallet holder to accept or reject someone's TRST token, it facilitates a system where everyone who is accepting TRST can have their own method for checking the unique humanity for that wallet, if they don't want to solely rely on the correctness of the decision made by BURST ecosystem.