Holos: A Holonic Community Computer

Abstract: Holos is a holonic community computer built with the Cosmos SDK, Celestia, Holochain and Weco. A holonic social architecture grounds a systems of systems approach that facilitates integration and differentiation, as well as part/whole and top/down synergy. Cosmos SDK community computers allow for interoperable, sovereign institutions of programmable culture, governance and economics that underpin coordi-nations. A soft validation ledger design protocol, Social Rollups, and three custom SDK modules are proposed: x/codex, co-created constitutions that bridge code and law; x/currents, value flows that signal reciprocity and relational continuity; and x/commit, a graduated signature as bonding signal that generates a commitment graph.

From the Greek Holos: "whole, entire, complete in all its parts – a thing that has integrity and identity, and at the same time is a part of a larger system".

Holos is part of the Regenaissance

Planetary coordination in an interconnected world^[a]

We are on the edge of a new era.

Blockchain, AI and 5G will revolutionise the world as we know it. If we do not seize these new means of computation, they will be weaponized against us into deeper realms of surveillance states. If we do not learn to bring them into a harmonious whole, they will destroy the very fabric of the earth.

The coordi-nation shines as a glimmer of hope, where citizens can break free from unjust regimes whose institutions support hyper wealth tax evasion, predatory monopolist corporations and death-drive warfare.

We require a higher order of collective integration to adapt to a world in the thralls of a deep and rapid metamorphosis, an organisational structure that is sufficiently granular to hold a manifold of cultural niches, sufficiently unitive to bring this plurality into harmony, and sufficiently hard to maintain stability over time.

Holos is the synergy of interoperable ledgers and holonic institutions to form a holonic community computer, where each community can program their own niche of governance, culture and economics.

Thanks to the Cosmos SDK, and Celestia’s sovereign rollups, any community can keep their own decentralised records of transactions, votes and values. Blockchain institutions can maintain the hardness and continuity necessary for collective trust to support cross-institutional coordination - the organisational foundation of the coordi-nation. And social rollups can program soft to hard validation, building off the agent centric technology of Holochain. ^[b]

A holonic architecture, like that of weco, allows for a community to be part of many other communities, and contain many other communities itself.

The basic conceptual core of holonic systems is the holon, which is an autonomous, independent, intelligent operating entity that is both a system in itself, capable of containing sub-systems also characterised as holons, and at the same time a sub-system of a broader systemic entity.

Community computers allow communities to create sovereign currencies, laws and culture.^[c] Every community can have their own pool of common resources, which they can distribute according to their own rules. To coordinate collectively, community computers must be able to enter into relationships with other community computers, sometimes as peers, sometimes as parent or child computers.

A holonic community computer allows each computer to have child computers, and to negotiate together the conditions of childhood and parenthood. For example, a child computer can inherit the governance parameters of the parent, or the use of their transaction token.

A fundamental rule of Holos is that 1% of all value generated flows up to the community pool of the highest level, which can then be redistributed to the various communities according to the will of platform governance. Every community can program how much value flows up from their child communities as an homage to their ancestors. ^[d]

A holonic community computer also allows each computer to have multiple parent computers simultaneously. For example, the Bristol Karate Club can be part of the Bristol community, and the worldwide Karate community. This allows for complex familial relationships which require coordination amongst parent communities.

Communities can program for how long children remain children, until they mature, and become independent with different value flows.^[e]

The value of holonic systems is further explained in the holonic institutions article with great clarity:

Holonic system principles offer electronic institutions complexity management support by helping:

    •    Centralisation/decentralisation. Holonic structures are both centralised and decentralised. They are centralised in that there exists a coordinating centre and 'brain' of the organisation, but decentralised in that control and management is devolved to the appropriate operating levels, within holons themselves.

    •    Bottom-up/top-down. Holonic structures are created through both bottom-up and top-down processes, without fetishising either. They are 'bottom-up' in the sense that holons are endowed with relative autonomy and control; they are 'top-down' in the sense that the needs of the total system at all times take precedence over those of operating holonic entities.

    •    Autonomous/integrated. In the same way, we may characterise holonic systems as both exhibiting autonomy of the operating parts, through their first order coordination, and system integration, or coherence, through the processes of second and third order coordination.

    •    Order/ambiguity. Holonic systems are tolerant of ambiguity in that they endow holons with operating intelligence that may not be revealed to the rest of the system. On the other hand they generate order through the precise attention to coordinating mechanisms, ensuring that the ambiguity is resolved at higher systemic levels.

    •    Management/leadership. Much has been made in the organisational literature regarding the differences between management and leadership. The holonic architecture is concerned with the operation of both. Each holon conducts its necessary management tasks for itself, while it takes leadership directions from its super-system holonic level. At the same time, it provides leadership to sub-system holons which are nested within it.

But such innovative technology will only take us so far. Our incapability to coordinate stems from not only a lack of tools, but from our developmental deficits. We fail to listen, to communicate clearly, to attune to others, to act with empathy, to resolve conflicts, to adjudicate disputes. These social weaknesses only amplify at scale.

We need testing labs, experimental zones and playgrounds to learn how to coordinate together. The Cosm is a fractal-scaling microsociety that facilitates collective development by tapping into our cognitive intuitions around self-similar structures.^[f] Within its confines, members can learn to communicate, care and collaborate on specific tasks, and then coordinate with other Cosms^[g] towards higher order goals. Small world network dynamics and clear social geometries provide developmental lines to guide communities into deeper levels of collective practice.^[h]

Holonic systems are capable of containing the complexity necessary to organize a globalized world where polycitizenry is the norm, and where nation^[i], network and metaverse states will increasingly intertwine. They allow for a fine grain differentiation of systems into subsystems, whilst integrating into one metasystem. Only a transition to such a metasystem that can outcompete the current system will provide the chance of becoming a truly sovereign planet.

^[j]

Full res: https://imgur.com/a/uG77l7B

The novel governance^[k][l], economic and cultural niches will require new tools of higher resolution and clarity than ever before. To that end we propose a number of new Cosmos SDK modules, commit, current and codex, as well as an agent-centric ledger design protocol, Social Rollups.

x/commit: Signatures as Bond

Commit allows for users to push on chain their commitment^[m] to an opinion, statement, value or goal.

The scale of signing can be purely numerical ^[n](-1 to 1, 0 to 10, 0 to 100 etc) or tokenized (toy token, space-specific token, IBC tokens) to represent a degree of commitment to the information.^[o][p]

For example, commit can represent to what degree one believes in a constitution, or a part of that constitution, or even a sentence. In this way the user can represent complex convergences and divergences within a single social contract.

Heatmaps can then reveal to what extent the community is committed to the same or different things - where do people agree, and where not. Community computers can have thresholds of commitment to access them, as well as slashing conditions for when commitments are broken.

x/commit can integrate staking, where the length of the stake shows stronger commitment. Say a user wants to commit to the value of a post made by another. They could commit an IBC token to the post for 90 days, with the staking rewards ^[q]being distributed to the creator of the post. In this way users can simultaneously represent their degree of belief and distribute ecosystem ownership among the community.

The commitment graph will reveal who believes in what and whom throughout the network. Users who accumulate commitment can serve as authorities in the relevant spaces.^[r]

x/current: Value as Flow

x/current, the expansion and completion of x/streampay, allows for tokens to be streamed per block to and from users, communities and their chains. ^[s]

This allows for continuous relationality beyond the clean cuts of transaction culture.

Users can program custom flows of tokens in different directions and velocities. For example, tokens can be streamed bidirectionally equally to represent time spent collaborating, or mentors can do 70/30 stream splits to signal that while the mentee receives most of the value, the mentor receives value too. Value flows can be modulated to gradually promote and demote within and across groups. Slow increases over time can build value momentums, encouraging long term performance.

x/codex: Code as Law

A Codex is a co-created constitution enforced by both smart contracts and social consensus.

The members of the space write the constitution together in the form of a numerical treatise:

1. Holos^[u] is a blockchain for every community to maximize their sovereignty in interdependence with other communities.

1.1. Sovereignty is the capability to regulate the membrane of the communal space of potential futures.^[v]

1.1.1. The space of potential futures is defined by the conditions of social synergy within a community.

      2.  Holos provides an open-source environment for an ecosystem of tools and toys of governance, economics and culture to grow.

Etc.

And represented in different ways to facilitate navigation.

                                  Tree representation of a Codex

“Subway” representation of a Codex

Just as any part of the Codex can be signed with x/commit, any part can be connected to smart contract code, creating the synergy of constitutional language and smart contracts. For example, if the constitution requires users to push a proof to the space on a regular basis, any time a user misses a proof, they can be automatically slashed by the smart contract.

Codexes can also be enforced through softer reward and slashing methods. Users can signal that another user, community or institution has broken or uphold an article with x/commit, which can then be challenged by other users to determine the appropriate slash or reward.

On weco there is a top level codex cocreated by the whole platform, encoded into Holos, that ensures its greatest values.

All communities inherit that constitution, like all states inherit the constitution of the United States.

Subcommunities can have their own constitution, which can be inherited by their subcommunities, and which can be further specialized to adapt to their cosmolocal purpose.

A Codex can define its pulse, the regularity at which it must be reviewed and resigned by its creators.^[w][x]

The Codex can serve as a gate to community membership, only accessible when signed.

x/institute: ? as ?

x/institute is a custom x/groups module that allows communities to mint an institution.

Institutions are enduring organizations committed to upholding a communal value. Communities mint an institution when they feel they have reached a level of stability that will serve their long term interests. To do so they must follow the minting requirements of each community as well as the requirements of Holos. For example, institutions should:

1. Create a strong Codex, preferably backed by smart contracts, which defines a regular pulse and a long span. The pulse of the institution is the regularity at which it proves its performance to the community. If an institution is opaque, meaning that its activities are accessible only to its members, it must prove its performance to the public. The span is the total length of the duration of the institution, preferably to at least 2030. The span should be long enough that it can generate the stability necessary for the value the institution upholds to emerge and develop.
2. Pay a minting fee. Minting an institution should be expensive, representing a serious communal commitment, increasing with the length of the span. The minting fee can include a long term staking commitment, even a perma-staking commitment, as well as vested tokenomics.
3. Negotiate, if necessary, with the communities they are representing, as to the rewards the institution should receive for accomplishing its task, and at what regularity. x/current can be used to gradually increase or decrease rewards over time depending on the institution’s performance.
4. Define a social structure with clear roles and responsibilities.

x/state: ? as ?

x/state is a module that allows multiple institutions to mint a coordination together.

Each community determines the conditions for minting a state:

1. Only a group of long-standing institutions, who have proven their merits, should be able to mint a state. States have pulses, but have no span - states are not programmed to die.
2. A combination of economic, governance and cultural institutions should serve as the foundation for a state. Careful decisions should be made about the separation of powers and the balancing roles of each institution.
3. The Codex should be deep, complex, strong and refined by a community of scholars. Large swathes should be connected to smart contracts. Incentives, duties and rights should be clear, and cosmolocal design should reign.
4. Minting costs should be extremely high, and perma-staking the norm.
5. Diplomatic relationships should be established with other states before the minting.

Social Rollups: Collective Memory as Social Consensus

A social rollup is a programmable ledger focused on a community’s specific record-keeping needs.

Communities form around collective memory, be that of transactions, votes, artworks, or game scores. In some communities, these records need strong validation, like a BFT algorithm, and in others soft validation, like the signature of a peer.

Social rollups allow communities to program the nature of their ledger, its validation, and its rewards. This allows for custom records that break beyond the box of blocks.

Communities can design the record pulse (blocktime), the record content (blockspace), as well as the validation, reward and slashing conditions.

For example, a community could decide that every week, each member has to write a summary of what they have learned. Each summary has to be up to 500 words long and has to be signed by ⅓ of the group as coherent to be validated. If a member posts their summary, and it is validated, they receive a community token. If not, they are slashed a token.

Records can be self-validated, validated by a peer, by a trusted authority, by code or a smart contract. This allows for a spectrum of validation, from soft to hard.

Communities can also program validator rewards and slashing. If a member misses a threshold of validation responsibilities, they can be slashed, jailed or tombstoned. And for each record validated, they can receive a reward.

Social rollups can use Celestia as the data availability layer to record the social consensus, or use Holochain to create their own DHT, which can then anchor into Holos.

But social rollups do not even need to be decentralised. The power of the concept is the capability for any community to organise the nature of their collective memory: its contents, its rhythm, and its validation. For many communities, an elegant ledger interface will be as useful as a permanent, decentralised record on a blockchain.

Cosm: A Developmental Social Cell

Holos provides a self-similar social structure, the Cosm, as a developmental cell where users can practise increasing scales of coordination.

A Cosm is a 3-6 member group that has a common goal. For example:

    •    A Source is a sustainability Cosm that facilitates microcommons and micromarkets. E.G. Micro-UBI, mutual credit, social lotteries.

    •    A Nest is a wellbeing Cosm that facilitates microcommunities of practice and care. E.G Listening, meditation, circling.

    •    A Prism is a generativity Cosm that facilitates microcollective intelligence. E.G. Multiperspectivalism, cocreation.

A Cosm scales by one power at each level, creating for example 3 groups of 3, then 3 groups of 3 groups of 3; or 6 groups of 6 groups of 6.

        A Cosm of 6 scales to 62=36, 6³=216, 64=1296, to 65=7776

At each level of scale, the Cosms coordinate with one another to fulfil the same task as within the Cosm. This self-similarity of both social geometry and task helps the group focus on its task. The intuition is that the clarity will help break through the coordination limits of the Dunbar number.

Implementation

Weco.io is the holonic social network that serves as the interface to the interchain.

It allows communities to organise themselves into complex arrangements of parents, children and siblings.

A social container on weco is called a space. A space has its own social feed, with image, text, audio posts, as well as polls and collaborative post types like Weaves and The Glass Bead Game, a WebRTC game room.

Each space will be able to customise its governance, economics and culture. For example a space could be governed by liquid democracy, with its own token with a supply of 1,000, and where only text posts of max 1000 characters can be posted. Or governed by a dictator, using the Juno token, and where only chess games can be played. Each space will have its own community pool, and can decide if a % of transactions within a space flow to the pool, or if % of the pool flows to the top-rated posters within that month.

In weco’s architecture, we’re keeping track of each space's direct parents as well as a list of all it`s ancestors (regardless of depth), making it easy to check inherited constraints in any space before updates/actions are taken.

Weco already has the capability to inherit privacy, where all spaces created below a private space are only accessible to users who have been invited into the private space.

This will make it easy for spaces to negotiate relationships with their parents and children. For example, a parent could require of their children that 5% of their generated value flows upwards. A child can require increasing governance independence over a vested time schedule, with the option to mature into their own space. Sibling spaces can perform token exchanges, or share currents, according to treatises they commit to.

Any space could decide to use Holos as their L1, or any other IBC chain, allowing for a proliferation of VMs, rollup designs and specialisations.

Speculative Roadmap

0. Tipping and subscriptions

Smart contracts on Juno/Neutron to allow any user to connect a wallet and tip any post or user, and subscribe to users.

1. DA0 DA0 as DA♾ DA♾

Integrate DAO DAO V2 into spaces on weco, allowing each space to have their own on-chain governance and community pool^[y]. Initial experiments with nested governance and economics can then be explored using the subDAO functionality. Tips and subscriptions can be made directly to the community pool to incentivize activities within each space.

2. Integrate social operating systems for more programmability

Abstract is an app platform that allows users to create and monetize decentralized applications using a modular component system.

Andromeda is an application platform layer that connects all public blockchains in the Cosmos ecosystem.

Both allow for composable, modular smart contracts to build custom governance and economic dynamics for a space. Once integrated with weco, each space will be able to program the operating system of their community computer.

3. Codex, Current and Commit as Cosmwasm contracts

To test their viability, codex, current and commit should be built as CosmWasm smart contracts on Juno/Neutron.

4. Holos the appchain, Celestia Rollups, Holonic Interface

Holos becomes its own appchain, receiving and providing mesh security for space-specific appchains and serving as the settlement layer for space-specific social rollups deployed on Celestia.

5. Codex, Currents and Commit as SDK modules

Once Holos has been launched as an appchain, the tested and audited Cosmwasm contracts can be ported to SDK modules and made available to all appchains independent of their VM.

1% of all transaction fees goes to the Holos community pool, including x/commit, x/currents, x/institute and x/state, as well as all tips and subscriptions to users, spaces and guilds.

New spaces are encouraged to commit a % of their choosing to the community pool.

Aurora: Holonic Quadratic Funding

From the sky falls the light

        Aurora is a holonic quadratic funding framework for public goods, built on Cosmwasm, the Cosmos ecosystem, and Weco, as an example of a Holos institution. It aims to solve the public goods funding problem for the Cosmos, and serve as an example for solving the wider complexities of public goods funding.

Aurora is a space on Weco holding a holarchy for coordinating quadratic public good funding. Weco’s holonic architecture allows users to fund public goods at any level of granularity, from the whole ecosystem, to a specific chain, to a specific category, project, post or user, as well as visualize the complex flows when projects are nested in multiple locations simultaneously.

               Interchain Holarchy

        Sankey Diagram Flow

Bi-directional Sankey  🤯

Donations made to any space, project, post or user within Aurora’s holarchy can be matched quadratically from:

1. the global pool,
2. the pool of each space,
3. and the pools of its parents.

Pools are funded by donations and grants from users, organizations and chains within the Cosmos ecosystem. In the future, a 20% commission validator brand, starting on Atom, then expanding to other Cosmos chains, provides a continual flow of public goods funding, where 10% funds the global pool, 5% funds the validator chain’s pool, and 5% funds Aurora’s development.

Integrating Abstract SDK modules into Weco will allows DAOs to steward each space and subspaces within the holarchy, and define when quadratic rounds should take place, and which roles and interactions trigger quadratic distribution.

Once Aurora has proven a fertile testing ground, holonic quadratic funding can be expanded to the whole Weco holarchy to create a holonic quadratic funding social network for public goods worldwide.

                        Sankey representation of holonic flows, including how much it keeps for its growth (black) and how much it allows to flow down the holarchy (white)

TLDR; Gitcoin for Cosmos x Holonic Architecture

Spec:

• Every space has its own wallet holding IBC tokens in a pool.
• Each space has its own distribution rules.

• Quadratic funding is a first and primary distribution method, but spaces can experiment with novel distribution rules.

• A space can be stewarded by a user, a multi-sig, or a DAO.

• Subspaces can inherit distribution rules from their parents.

• For example, are funds distributed to every generation, or just to immediate children?

• Users can donate to other users, projects and spaces, and have their donations matched from parent pools according to the distribution rules.
• Tokens are distributed continuously, or during a round, the duration of which is specific by the space.

• Tokens are distributed from each pool to users, to projects and to spaces according to the distribution rules.

• Users can stake on users, projects and spaces to delegate them part of their staking rewards.

• Users ideally stake through Aurora validators, but could stake on other aligned validators if an Aurora validator is not available on that chain.

• Although users receive less staking rewards when staking on Aurora validators, they know that they are supporting public goods in the ecosystem.
• Length and amount of staking on Aurora validators, proving public goods funding, as well as amounts donated, can be used as multipliers and qualifiers for Cosmos airdrops.
• x/commit can serve to reward subtle contributions in discussions and planning.

Appendices

Social Computation

Picture a traditional neural network with an input signal and a series of interlinked nodes, each of which perform a specific computational task before outputting the result to the next node, and the next, and the next, leading to a final output signal.

Now imagine wiring together and harnessing similar computational architectures for collective social processes. We call these Social Neural Networks, or Social Computation.

Each node in the network could represent an individual user or group assigned a specific task in a larger collective computation process.

The arrangement of nodes, the tasks assigned at each node, the agents responsible for performing that task, and the threshold requirements for completing a computation could all be customized by the designer of the SNN, or evolved collaboratively by groups, allowing for a wide range of complex computational tasks to be experimented with and refined over time.

,

Example Social computation

The Bohr Guild sends information to users A,B,C, who perform three distinct tasks of addition (+), complexification (x), and negation(-), then sending their results back onwards to the guild.

The vertical lines define thresholds which only let the information through when user defined criteria are met (time window, individual/collective validation, etc)

We imagine an interface with WebRTC signaling between participants which would enable real-time collaboration within each node, and live animations that would help illustrate progress through the total computation, making it easy for participants and observers to explore each interaction as they are occurring.

Nodes in these social computations could also serve as inflection points, powered by polls, the results of which would lead the computation down different pathways of the network, enabling highly complex and responsive collective computations.

The existing space template, post types, and p2p signaling and streaming already developed on Weco will all serve as infrastructural elements. The UI could additionally borrow from existing d3 visualization techniques developed for the space and post maps. This will shorten development time and increase interoperability with the rest of the platform.

A few example use cases:

• Feedback and refinement processes for content development (essay, artistic creation, project plans etc.)
• Building educational pathways for student learning
• Navigating complex decision making processes
• Building tournament game structures

Relevant libraries: https://weco.io/p/573, https://weco.io/p/491, https://weco.io/p/492, https://weco.io/p/687 and https://weco.io/p/563 

Diki: A Social Computation Template

Data, Information, Knowledge, Intelligence^[z]

The Diki complex is a social computation template that directs the integration of data into information, information into knowledge, and knowledge into intelligence.

Inspired by Wikis and their natural nested structures, Dikis generate a highly structured multi-level unit of information with strong visual geometry that can be browsed vertically to explore the subcomponents of the whole.

The structure of the social neural network is a self similar tree. In this three step diagram, 9 units of information are summarized into 3 units in the move from A to B, which are then summarized into 1 in the move from B to C. Users can navigate up and down the tree to explore the composition of each layer.

The emergent “intelligence” of the Diki can then be placed at the bottom of a new Diki with other units of intelligence, serving as the data for a new iteration of the process.

Weco Repo: https://github.com/wecollective

Task Board: https://github.com/orgs/wecollective/projects/1

Decision Trees^[aa]

A new tool for collective decision making

The polling tools already built into Weco have been designed to help communities make decisions as a group but each decision is still, in a sense, isolated by its poll. The current design doesn't yet make it easy for strings of multiple decisions to be weighed up against each other and then decided on collectively by a community. This becomes particularly relevant when tackling complex multifaceted tasks that involve many related decisions, such as organising a public event or designing a new product. After considering a number of ways in which this might be achieved we eventually came to a new design that we’ve since been calling ‘Decision Trees’.

A new decision tree would be initiated when a user creates the first ‘node’, which could be submitted as a new post to any branch on the site. This could be the proposal to accomplish a complex task such as ‘Let’s start a Science festival in Bristol’ or a complex question with many related sub-questions like ‘What would be the best approach to terraforming Mars?’. Once the initial node has been created and posted, other users could then up or down vote the starting node to indicate their interest in the proposal/question or attach their own new nodes that branch off from the first one. Using the example of starting a Science festival in Bristol, some of the first attached child nodes might be along the lines of ‘What would be the best location?’, ‘Should it involve live music?’, ‘Who would be the best speakers to invite?’ etc.

To make this easy to visualize we’ve decided to order the nodes by popularity in clockwise order around the starting node. The first and most popular child-node would be positioned directly above the starting node and then they would decrease in size proportional to the amount of points they have received as you follow them clockwise to the right. Users browsing the emerging decision tree could up-vote each node once. The positioning of nodes would be constantly updating, just like the wall of a social news community, such that smaller child nodes can move up the list and larger ones can sink in response to user’s live votes, allowing the decision tree to quickly adapt and change shape.

This same process of attaching and voting on child-nodes would then also be allowed on all of those nodes and so on as far as is useful to users, allowing decision ‘trees’ to grow out to any scale; each node shaped proportionally by the votes of participating users. To keep the visual illustration from overlapping, after the initial starting node, all attached child nodes would be limited to a rotation of 180 degrees around their parent node and would alternate sides with each additional layer.

In the diagram above we’ve overlaid red arrows to indicate the direction of the top four decision pathways. Users could therefore arrive at a decision tree of any scale and quickly find the most popular pathways. They could then also easily zoom in to browse all the potential deviations from those routes and visually gauge their relevance by size.

To prevent a decision tree from becoming too cluttered it’s also possible that when a high enough ratio of the users who initially up-voted the first node also then up-vote every node in a chain i.e:

Topic --> Question --> Choice --> Specification

it could be banked as a confirmed decision path and hidden from the live tree. This same dynamic could be used for a wide range of purposes including mapping out and gauging support behind various competing scientific theories or belief systems and weighing up complex political decisions. Because the nodes could scale proportionally to any size, the design could be used by an unlimited number of participants making it useful to communities of all sizes.

Quotes:

A holonic system (or holarchy) is composed of interrelated sub- systems, each of which are in turn composed of sub-subsystems and so on, recursively, until reaching a lowest level of ‘elementary’ subsystems. As emphasised by Koestler [9], each such intermediary sub-system must play a dual role and be both: an autonomous whole controlling its parts; and a dependent part of a supra-system. This helps construct large systems with macro-goals from intermediary components able to achieve partial goals.

Holonic institutions, which consist of conventional rules, are nested within each other, with provision and appropriation systems operat- ing locally at a small-scale (base level) and being organised into multiple layers at larger-scales over wider geographical regions (higher levels).

here is, however, a fairly well-established understanding in utilising holonic architectures to address complex systems issues, such as scalability, heterogeneity and dynamic adaptability, via the recursive coordination of processes that operate at different granularity levels.

Blockchain protocols systems basically allow us to convert the mechanism of enforcement of the much softer breed of informal institutions (which could not be enforced consistently in the old world) into perfectly formalized institutions (enshrined in computer code) that are enforced 100% of the time like clockwork.

Holonic systems help:

– institutions to scale with the number and the heterogeneity of their members, since lower memberships in each holon put less strain on the institutional apparatus and decrease the level of internal diversity;

– to integrate institutions with diverse goals, since each of them only needs to be aware of the others’ observable goals, state and negotiations, rather than of their internal details (e.g. rules and infrastructure);

– to improve an institution’s local adaptation reactivity, while not directly impacting overall system stability, by the way in which the holonic structure modulates overall system dynamics and change propagation;

– system designers to understand, analyse, simulate, adapt and predict complex institutions, by allowing them to focus on a single holonic level at a time, with a reduced number of interrelated institutions.”

• Inward regulation includes the internal rules, governance and adaptation functions for achieving a goal.

• Outward regulation merges, via conflict resolution and negotiation, the institution’s own common goal with the (supra-)institutions’ common goals.

Within an institution, an economy of scarcity may occur when insufficient resources are generated to satisfy all prosumer demands. In this case, it would be beneficial to form ‘alliances’ with other institutions, and in times of excess it would contribute surpluses to a higher-order common pool, in the expectation of being allocated resources from that common pool in case of a shortfall later on.

Note again that participation in the higher-level institution is subject to the mutual agreement of rules of engagement between the institutions; and that just as the prosumers were black boxes to their institutions, the institutions are essentially black boxes to the nested enterprise – the higher- level institution has no knowledge, or any need for any knowledge, of how the components choose to (self)-organise their own affairs

Effective institutions are key to the success of self-governing systems, yet specifying and maintaining them can be challenging, especially in large-scale, highly dynamic and competitive contexts.

CoFi emerged as a generalisation of two specific services - obligation-clearing and mutual credit. Individually and together, these services enable liquidity saving, which directly improves the the health and resilience of credit networks and the real economies they support. We believe CoFi is critical to sustainable monetary and financial systems.

Obligation-clearing enables debts to be reduced when they are part of closed loops of trade-credit. Mutual Credit allows liquid currency units to be created that are collateralized by future productivity. Both emphasize a need to tune to the actual structure of the payments graph in the trade credit economy.

Notes:

Insitutitions and Constitutions

Effective institutions are key to the success of self-governing systems, yet specifying and maintaining them can be challenging, especially in large-scale, highly dynamic and competitive contexts.

Constitutions are the attempt of a group to clarify in language their goals, values and collective purpose.

Blockchain Communities

Blockchains allow communities to decentralize their culture, governance and economics on chain. They can program specific values, goals, voting methods, economic flows, and enter in relation with other individuals.

Mint their own tokens with their own supply. Distribute them on genesis or through currents.

Localizing trust in collaborative finance, mutual credit currencies.

Distribution of the power to create money from banks to individual firms;

Allow spaces to join the obligation network and participate in mutual credit systems of increasing size.

A blockchain community is a community who uses a blockchain to publish a state. The content and opacity of the state is defined by the community, and can serve as information for other communities.

If a community lies in what they push, the will be slashed, and excluded from holonic relationships.

Each community can program the condition of classes and slashing, the value flows, the smart contracts available, the commitment level, the pulse,

Program smart contracts, post constraints, user constrains, privacy, pulse, span, proof of work/play.

Rules of governance: stake weighted, elected, moderators/roles, liquid democray, absolute monarchy.

Each group defines when a move has been made and when a turn has passed, and when a pulse is sent to the chain.

The group defines the required content of a block and its pulse conditions.

For example, the content might be a chess move, a link to a relevant video, 10 ATOM, a 1000 word summary of an article, or a governance vote.

The group decides how many blocks a player can miss in a duration before the user is slashed.

The group decides who validates the blocks: each individual, the whole group.

Users can object to blocks to prevent cheating.

A block can be sent to another institution who can then validate it.

Validated by another group; by x of the members ; by one person within or without the group; automatically, without verification.

The pulse can be sent every move, or every turn, or to a timer.

Proto blockchain institutions with proof of work, rewards, slashing, block structure, decentralized justice for members.

Rewards: turn based blocks, random blocks, most staked weighting, first past the post, elected blocks.

Block pushed if all commit, if x commit, according to pulse

Slashing: Jail, tombstone, demote

Tip and stake on any node within the network: posts, users, guilds, spaces.

Anchor into Bitcoin through Babylonchain

Brought to you on the back of Tendermint the Turtle

Telegram: @AGEID