The miracle of Worgl

This was a community currency that actually worked very well but was shut down by the government at that time.

The key thing seemed to be a required monthly stamp costing 1% of a notes value, which encouraged spending of the notes instead of hoarding them.

Things like Solid make it possible for anyone to try something like this. An pod owner could guarantee redemption of a small amount and issue notes against it, collecting 1% per month if the notes are not spent.

Of course counterfeiting would have to be prevented somehow, but where there’s a will there’s a way.

-edit-
Maybe such a currency could be used to rent Solid apps.

2 Likes

Thanks for the interesting link. There have been many intents with alternative currencies and some have also been successful. I think in this topic the last word haven’t been said. The world finance system is IMHO since years in a crisis. Concerning Solid I agree, it would be a driving force for the ecosystem to have an economy built in in, like others do.

1 Like

Nice resources there @tag42git, thanks! We have an interesting discussion ongoing at SocialHub about a related idea: Is your participation in this exchange worth 2 cents? (PonyUPS and PonyXPS) - Fediverse Futures - SocialHub. I’ll make mention of this there.

2 Likes

That is great stuff and sounds really interesting. Thanks @aschrijver!

As I see it, Solid is an interface to the web which appears as a file system, accessible through http, so it is a file system with content negotiation.

Behind a Solid interface might be different things. The ‘files’ might might not actually be files at all, but parts of a database. Or a mix of files and parts of a database. They might be local to the http site or remote from it and accessible by the site through http or maybe some other protocol. The http site itself may be an internal local server or a remote server.

So Solid does not necessarily use remote servers and it can be used to abstract a server-less network too. Solid can be a bridge between the current http web and current or future networks with different protocols. @happybeing has shown that this is possible.

Solid may not only be a bridge to those new protocols, but it may also provide interoperability standards that applications for new protocols will need in order to be compatible with each other.

It also makes sense to me that, while servers may not be a good idea, it still makes sense to describe services out there on a server-less network. This is like making recipes only in your local kitchen, but having a lot of recipes available out there, even if no ready made take out is available.

Because Solid is an extension of the current web, but can also act as a bridge to new protocols, it makes sense to me to develop on Solid in order to future proof an application.

The other thing that makes Solid attractive in the context of community currencies, is that by modeling everyday human interactions more accurately than the current web, it allows for a lot of flexibility in terms of how communities can develop. This is also true of other standards such as ActivityPub, but without the bridging and interoperability abilities described above, ActivityPub by itself is not enough and will be best used together with Solid.

2 Likes

Yes, I am still hoping to see good progression in the applications that are currently combining ActivityPub with Solid / Linked Data, as these technologies are complimentary in principle. At SocialHub I am heavily advocating for various Linked Data based extensions to be modeled on top of the core technology foundations.

In AP there’s also not necessarily a fixed dependency on using the HTTP protocol. Wrt decentralization I see most promise in a mixed model of both federated and peer-to-peer appliances. First steps towards p2p application are made (see also: DREAM), and there’s interesting research into e.g. content addressing (see: ERIS). Most divergence between Solid and AP/Fediverse is in the ACL versus Object Capabilities approaches.

One really complements the other. I guess what makes me most hesitant about Solid is the sorta “we-are-the-new-way reinvention of everything approach along a go-it-alone path”. Maybe I am doing the initiative a great injustice by formulating this way, but it is the feeling I have (but this has improved with latest iterations on the website, feeling is less than it used to be).

As I see it AP is best at federation (message formats + exchange) and Solid / LD is best at data storage (ownership + definition / semantics) in this complementary picture. They have different use cases where they excel, and they are both Linked Data based standards.

Thats interesting, I will look more into that.

I think this is being addressed with Access Control Policies, which as I understand it can accomodate both ACL’s and Object Capabilities. There is also a lot of work being done to incorporate Decentralized ID’s, which presumably will also be used with OCAPs.

The participation of Tim Berners-Lee, with his enormous patience and generosity, is a great thing for Solid and a source of inspiration and fascination for all of us. Its like Gallileo walking among us and answering our questions. Unfortunately it also inspires some to a level of arrogance in the service of protecting him. This is exacerbated by the gitter/forum bipolarism and the choice of gitter chats as the preferred method of communication, which discourages accessibility by apostates real or imagined.

1 Like

He he, well if you think this of Solid, be aware Solid on Safe is this in spades. Sometimes you need to start again and rebuild from scratch, so for me the Solid as a service (or self hosted) approach is incoherent because it isn’t doing away with those aspects which are a large part of the problems I want to solve (and many who come to Solid also recognise this).

1 Like

I’ve been watching your work on Safe Git Portal and the progress you’ve made is amazing. I really value your opinion.

Sooo do you mean that this

is incoherent?

I’m not commenting on any specific project and haven’t looked at that one, if it sits on a server based model then it most likely has the weaknesses of that kind of model, some moreso (pod as a service) some less (cooperative hosting).

For me scalability is vital, because if we leave anyone behind they become the target. So the solution has to scale and achieve the goals of security, privacy and independence/democratisation.

So scalable and decentralised, and as autonomous as possible. A server based solution has great difficulty doing all of these. You end up with one compromise or another, which is what I mean by incoherent.

So maybe you can be fully secure and independent of big tech, but can you do that and be available to everyone? Or maybe you can achieve high reach, but can you also avoid centralisation, lock-in, breaches in etc?

I’ve not seen a server based answer to this yet. Maybe there can be which would be great, but so far I see compromise. So I push on with decentralised autonomous solutions, and Safe Network in particular.

Does Safe have interoperability standards defined to specify how applications will use data in common?

Not at present and I’m not sure it will. Safe is more like internet infrastructure and it won’t ever prevent someone building what they want with that. That’s the role of Solid on Safe.

This doesn’t mean that there won’t be standards at some point, but the focus is on delivering working infrastructure first. The APIs will I think go some way towards providing what’s needed for interoperability, and in time there may be standards developed more along the lines of Solid, or the adoption of a Solid spec adapted to Safe. But that’s speculation.

2 Likes

Personally I am totally with you on that, and I myself am attracted to these kinds of technology initiatives. But if you are aiming to get the entire tech community along (e.g. with a “next-web” scope of vision) then things become more… challenging, perhaps :slight_smile:

2 Likes

I absolutely agree with @happybeing that Solid on Safe would be perfect match taking the best of both worlds. Solid would deliver high level standard protocols for interoperability and Safe the decentralized infrastructure. Concerning your question it is worth mentioning that Safe have support for RDF data on its road map.

A question @happybeing, what is your estimate about the maturity of Safe right now to start developing Solid on Safe applications? What is the perspective?

3 Likes

Depends what you need, kind of app, etc. I’m developing a centralised Git Portal (prototype) right now by not using the API at all. I’ve used earlier versions of the Safe API so know roughly what to expect and anyone can begin development on that basis. It’s not ideal, but it’s an opportunity to be one of the first apps at launch. In my case I chose to have a go at building something that interests me and found a way to do so that means I only need a filesystem layer, so I can easily simulate that until the decentralised filesystem is available in the Safe API.

As for when the API and then the beta network will arrive I don’t make predictions. I do think it’s a good time to keep an eye on the weekly updates which come out every Thursday (and I often tag an update of my own work onto that). Let’s say the noises are very encouraging.

Yes, it seems like a challenge but sometimes you’re building something so new and so needed that I’m not sure how much of a challenge it will be. I think there is definitely a need to take that seriously, and the community regularly discuss how to do this (lots going on in that area again right now in fact). I think the important part will be initial bootstrap and once there’s enough people to ensure a stable functional network people will be able to experience for themselves, and I’m confident there’s so much there for so many it will sell itself. Not complacent, I’ll be pulling out all the stops as well!

3 Likes