# Optimization of Resource Allocation

In short, POTUS* elected by SOTUS**
P = people
S = social, military, financial, etc. support

*On governance: We are all interconnected
**On education: The brain is basically a radio antenna with different frequencies

## Vote with your consciousness.
✪
❤
💎

## Why we need continuous voting
**(A Proof)**

By [Gibbard's Theorem](https://www.eecs.harvard.edu/cs286r/courses/fall11/papers/Gibbard73.pdf), any deterministic voting scheme is either:
1. manipulable
2. has only 2-outcomes
3. a dictatorship

Case I. 2-Outcome Voting Scheme

There is always a 3rd outcome: "None of the above" or "all of the above."

Case II. Dictatorship

Manipulating the dictator manipulates the vote.

$\therefore$ Therefore the only way for voting to be deterministic but not manipulable is to go beyond the traditional definition of a voting scheme:
> a function of voters' strategies that outputs a single decision at a single time.

## Continuous Voting

Voting methods that make no decision/are continuous (e.g. voting by contributing, [conviction voting](https://medium.com/giveth/conviction-voting-34019bd17b10), merit signaling--see previous version):
* are not manipulable
AND
* they include all other voting methods (any given population at any given time can decide to govern themselves any given way)
AND
* they satisfy all voters, including:
* voters with preferences (including ties)
* voters that want multiple proposals to proceed simultaneously
* voters that don't like any of the choices
* voters whose preferences are changing

so Gibbard's mathematical proof (which assumes voting methods make decisions/are discrete) doesn't really matter in the end.

**Voting by Contributing**

Anyone can make a proposal by creating a project and directly working on it.

Anyone can "vote for" a proposal by directly contributing to it (work, funding).

**Funding by Web of Wallets**

A web of wallets is necessary to achieve funding without 1) middlemen 2) a central fund:

* Instead of employers, employees, and customers, everyone is a node (wallet) on a graph (web) that connects with (pays, works for) any other node by creating an edge (2-sig wallet).
* Any wallet can pay any wallet. A 2-sig wallet requires both nodes to approve any transaction.
* Any wallet (node) can connect with any other wallet (node).

*Actually such a system is already in place: Karma, the currencyless currency, on the ledger of life, in the metafractalverse.*

## Tools Needed

Meritocracies maximize merit. Nature maximizes efficiency. Why not combine them?

A truly decentralized organization in tune with nature can be easily implemented (truly democratic) in any form (digital, paper, blockchain, etc.). You just need:
1. Projects
2. Currency
3. Continuous Voting
4. Web of Wallets

In other words:
1. Evolution
2. Karma
3. Vote with your Consciousness
4. Fractals

## Implementation

Implementations of these ideas in various forms are being worked on:

Opolis [Off-White Paper](https://opolis.co/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/opolis-off-white-paper.pdf) and [BTC2019 Slides](https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/btc2019/97/BTC2019%20Class%20-%20How%20to%20Become%20a%20Self-Sovereign%20Worker.pdf)

Disclosure Exchange [R&D](https://github.com/disclosure-exchange/whitepaper/wiki/R&D) and [BTC2019 Slides](https://github.com/vkli/BTC2019)

[Web3 Revenue Primitives](https://github.com/FEMBusinessModelsRing/web3_revenue_primitives)

Aragon [1Hive](https://1hive.org/blog/) and [Web3 Summit Talks](https://youtu.be/k7hXkiTCTC0)

and of course, [Bitcoin](https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper) and the various blockchains

## Questions

**Q:** What if there's something that can only have 1 project or 1 owner (like what to build on a plot of land, or ownership of a house) and the community keeps switching projects/owners every day? Or 2 contradictory projects/owners try to proceed at once?

**A:** The community creates proposals/counterproposals on how to resolve the situation until they reach a consensus:

https://youtu.be/C5gRAMFdO_Y

which they are incentivized to do, otherwise they get a half-building:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z4JjgGquA4

**Q:** What if one person is preventing a full consensus from happening?

**A:** People are **directly funding** and **working on** projects they agree with. If it has enough funding and contributors, the project will proceed to completion. If not, either both projects will proceed or neither will (see above links).

## How This Resolves Ownership

It's not about ownership of things, but ability to create things.

* creator is owner by default
* investors (through token bonding curve) fund competence of the **team building** the product, not the **product** itself
* this will take us to the [Future of Ideas](http://www.the-future-of-ideas.com/download/lessig_FOI.pdf)
* enforce by transparency
* lawyers -> fact checkers
* bad actors effectively get shunned (no one wants to do business with them)
* this applies to real estate as well: who takes care of the house = who owns the house