Is a trade economy necessary?

[Reignforest]

Anthropology is is the study of diverse social systems throughout history.  Through their research we have discovered that humans did not need to have a centralized government or trade economy in order to make complex civilizations. Yet in modern times its nearly impossible to imagine a world without those things. A good book to read on this topic is called "Braiding Sweetgrass " by Robin Kimmer. In her book she describes various native American teachings, such as the honorable harvest,  how language got inverted,  and the idea of a gift economy. I will also attach a video that expands on this idea. This is how I can imagine a Turquoise level civilization using an economy. If anyone has practical methods to apply these techniques,  or if anyone completely disagrees that this is even possible,  I would appreciate your input. 

 

[nuwu]

Traditional markets are allegedly efficient because survival incentives naturally reflect on prices in ways collectives strongly reinforce products and supply chains that overwhelmingly benefit the whole. The invisible hand is a dynamic of ever-learning, short-term latent altruism, allowing society to remain arguably stable, self-sustaining its own development with theoretically infinite accuracy. However, traditional markets are mostly constrained by the limitations of bottom-up infrastructures, where entities are simultaneously limited by competitive pressures and inertia of encompassing organisms mutually lock at intermediate local-maxima of growth. Smart-contracts may redefine markets and the resulting invisible hand, and for our presumably ‘human’ purposes, towards a society able to maximize its long-term survival and wellbeing.

I am not sure if hard currencies nor artificially scarce resources are useful outside transitional stages of civilizational growth. The exact opposite may be true. Finance could entirely depend on scarcity-less assets, i.e. rating systems as a function of value. Whether this is labelled algorithmic dystopia, techno-communism, or whatever, does not matter. Society may benefit from increased top-down abstractions over itself. Inflation is not inherently unfair as economic mechanism, depending on roots, ramification and distribution of mints. E.g. a perfectly neutral inflation distribution acts as a smooth global reset, and is equivalent to decay relative to total supply.

Economic uncertainties are exacerbated by bidirectional relationship between demand and supply. Bonding or prediction markets are interesting in this context. They may offer a solution to reflect on value in manners detached from products themselves, which potentially mitigate the issue of non-independent variables. For instance, bonding markets can rate the utility of resources without directly affecting their prices, manufacturing incentives, and competition. As such, the invisible hand is elevated from immediate survival requirements, and may potentially reflect on deeper levels of collective intelligence, to result in optimal decision processes. E.g. such ratings may be used as sources of inflation, reputation, or in ‘market democracies’, to govern bodies of interests, DAOs, and global organizations.

Bater hypergraph converging and diverging resources within production, storage, and users, may be interesting, but these points should be considered:

•  'needs' are not clearly defined for most individuals or endeavors. Entities often strive for superfluous amounts of advantages, such as resources, reputation, etc, because these maximize their chances of survival, even if their objectives could be achieved with much less. In fact, efficient or altruistic entities often signal less 'needs', and would be punished under such system.
• Actors may still store and accumulate resources with subsequent trade intents. They may adopt appropriate algorithms and schemes to temporally analyze implicit asset values, leading back to markets through convergent evolutions. Though a top-down surveillance state with strong social control could potentially monitor such activities and ward from them, or maybe the species could evolve sufficiently spiritually advanced to universally stabilize towards the avoidance of superfluous desires.
• Perspectives have inherently incomplete views of reality, and may fail to commit optimal decisions and self-evaluation of needs without adequate top-down structures and collective intelligence.
• It's unclear what parameters should the system optimize for. 'Longest chain' could strongly reinforce quantity over quality within collectives. Large monolithic actors could sometimes be desirable and more efficient. This is an open metaphysical question.
• Competitiveness can not be disregarded, even at systemic layers. Models are pressured by evolution into constant changes, and eventually do not preserve their original simplicity. This argument is valid against any design and does not discriminate, but the idea is that 'purity' or 'simplicity' sometimes hide important misunderstandings and incompleteness which should be carefully analyzed and accounted for.

These are some smart-contract ideas, not sure where to share this

1. Density Function Market Makers: Computational reducibility of CFMM with the flexibility of order-book exchanges, enabling mechanisms such as ‘neural’ liquidity providers and single-side, cross-pool liquidity in computationally limited execution environments. For instance, implementations may depend on piecewise polynomial functions to define the distribution of liquidity by their areas.
2. Bonding Surfaces: Financial concept which dimensionally expands upon bonding curves (1), to define the relationship between several resources and their respective valuation. They potentially allow more sophisticated, interconnected, and dynamic incentive structures, and may be employed in adaptive reward mechanisms defined by stateful allocations, time, or both. They were first introduced by Balancer (2) to allow market intelligence deciding upon proper reserve distributions on a concave shape, but they may potentially be adequate in diverse bias-minimization problems and eco-systems where inclusive cooperative strategies among shareholders must be encouraged. (Pylab)
3. Bonding Fields: Spatial generalization of bonding surfaces built upon scalar or vector fields, with potential utility in latent-space patent systems, along other spatial or temporal incentive structures
4. Bonding Networks: Recursive usage of former concepts in scale-independent organisms, i.e. ’fractal governance’, collective learning systems, and other instruments of market socialism.
5. Algorithmic Peer Review: Epistemology towards harmonization of scientific fundings, qualitative appraisal, mitigating the influence of excessive abstraction in corpus defined by state-of-the-art transformers. (3)
6. Probabilistic Asset Networks: Latent lending protocols based on statistical resource carriers. Theoretically possible infinite self-initiated lend-mints for any resource, with flexible, soft, time-based convergence of reputational guarantees, hard repayments, or equivalent. May allow interplay of prediction values and collective intelligence similar to tradfi derivatives.
7. Whole-History Currencies: Time-varying strength and continuous evaluation of actors' contributive capacities, inspired by whole-history rating systems (4), which aims to determine the sustainability and long-term layered impacts of entropic financial dynamics. 

Examples

• Bonding systems may be used in combination with retro-active funding and whole-history assets, to create environments that reward originality, specialization, or both.
• Implementations may potentially depend on global gradient descent algorithms to smoothly evaluate algebraic systems, with cyclic graph or whatever. Multi-dimensional polynomials are also worth consider. Implementation must ensure approximations are non-exploitable and relevant.
• Researching bonding fields in the design of recursive adversarial neural models or orthogonally homogeneous hives

Edited October 15, 2023 by nuwu