A.A.Artemov

I had to admit my mistake. Most likely, rich people will refuse to use the national currency, and the entire tax burden will fall on poor and illiterate people.

In truth, I did not finish reading the article. Much of what is written there is already outdated. Let's start with the simple thing: Today it is not the state that creates money, but commercial banks. And the creation of money by commercial banks is not regulated at all. (Actually regulated of course, but so weakly that a medium-sized commercial bank can arrange hyperinflation in one person) Therefore, it goes without saying that the emission system proposed by me will not work, First, banks need to ban the production of new money. If we are done with this, let's move on. "The velocity of money" has little effect on inflation. And let's not carry this nonsense about the gold equivalent. (And in Wikipedia it is still written, although it was outdated many years ago) This is complete nonsense, it's time to forget about it. It has long been refuted. The main causes of hyperinflation are 1. panic, 2. uncontrolled release of money by the state. 1. In my model, there is no reason to panic. 2. The state does not have access to making money. A "velocity of money" - amenable to calculation and control. The following. No need to consider the national currency as a means of saving value. There are other things for this: Deposit bank deposits Bitcoin Gold, and so on... I propose to consider the national currency only as a means of exchange and no more. Let's go back to the essence of money. Money is a medium of exchange. The model I proposed does a good job. Do not cling to the needs of your fathers and grandfathers. They will soon die, and we live on. By the time this is implemented, we ourselves will be grandfathers. In my old age I see 3 currencies in my wallet: 1 - exchange medium - 1 month reserve (national inflation currency) 2 - currency standard - stock for 1 year (stable world currency) 3 - reserve stock (gold, real estate, Bitcoin) I can’t imagine a person in 10 years with 1 currency in a wallet. And about the size of the issue in the first message, I gave the wrong example. Now I have made an approximate calculation. Clarified. For the functioning and even development of the state, it is sufficient to daily produce 0.03-0.05% of new money. (12-15% per annum) Such a number even with a great desire can not lead to hyperinflation. I apologize for the English translation. Perhaps the meaning of the text is distorted.

Give thanks. I will definitely learn. and also think about it. Once again I want to point out an important point: It is not the government that makes money, but the program, the government cannot influence the work of the program. % does not change for hundreds of years.

I am not a developer. But I want to make the world a better place. Therefore, I help with what I can. In this draft, the question of adoption sticks most heavily against the government and economists. In its raw form as it is with me, no one will accept it. But the idea is theoretically realizable. I think that if the developers support it, then the second step will be the economists and then the government

This is the first discussion. Previously, no one put forward such an idea. Maybe she can't work. But before that, no one even discussed it. Maybe before you put a cross on it still worth discussing it? - inflation is bad when you do not expect it and are not ready for it, or if it concerns the world currency, (means of settlement between states will disappear) And if inflation is planned to be laid in the algorithm, and it will become expected and predictable, This process is very easy to manage. (children from school will know that a lot of money is bad, and as soon as they have money, they have to spend it or invest it) What is money? 1. means of payment. 2. value of the preservation. I live in a country where money has not fulfilled 2 item for many years. But they are very good at 1 item. The method proposed by me cannot be used for 2 item. But it is theoretically possible that he will earn 1 item.

Problem The state has a need for regular replenishment of its own budget. And this is the only reason why there is a tax system. Only the maintenance of which costs the state huge sums, despite the fact that it does not fulfill its function even by half. And with the arrival of digital anonymous currencies, the collapse of the tax system is inevitable. No one will pay taxes voluntarily. (Already today, tax control does not occur through income as it was mortgaged, but through expenses. And what will happen next?) The outdated tax system has many problems that cannot be solved even theoretically. Decision Today, when the process of issuing money can be made not only free, but also transparent, the need for taxation has disappeared. In fact, there is no need to withdraw part of the income from citizens, because there is a much simpler, reliable way to replenish the budget by issuing additional money. And the cost of this method is zero, in contrast to the traditional method of budget replenishment. The new method of replenishing the budget will completely abandon the already irrelevant tax system. Of course, it requires technical refinement, But its essence is as follows. A fixed issue size is emission moneys' into the blockchain. Presumably it is 0.1% per day. That is, every day the blockchain creates and issues for the state, for example, 0.1% of all the money existing in the system. Storage and maintenance of the blockchain falls on the shoulders of citizens, and only the state has access to the issue. The system is completely transparent. Bottom line All citizens will become equal in their rights and opportunities, and everyone can earn and spend according to their abilities. There will be an interest in work and business, as restrictions on income will be removed, which will lead to economic growth in the state. The transparency of the system will also have a positive effect on trust in the state and currency. And the new problems created by the emission system (like wage indexation, printing new price tags for goods and similar problems), in the modern world are solved automatically.

I apologize, I do not understand English well, I speak Russian. 1. My main idea is the AIS base, I only indirectly touch on the issue of the tax system. This is another article, I suggest that the tax system be completely abolished, in favor of the emission system. But I am very far from politics, and I would not like to discuss it. 2. My main question is "accurate information storage", it is based on decentralization. "AIS" is far from politics, just like me. 3. Once again I repeat political issues beyond my competence. a. I want the Internet to change the amount of information to quality. b. I assume that the tax system is outdated as a whole, and as a tool is no longer needed, it’s time to replace it with something modern.

The examples use the ranking works. There is no ranking of users of the level that the Nebulas project offers. As far as I know such level of ranking of users as at Nebulus is offered for the first time. Study their work more closely. My idea is described for Nebulas. And I provided a nominal reward, The real goal is not to sell an idea, but to improve the world. I think we definitely need him. First of all, I want to become an expert in this project. If someone uses the idea, and I will not judge him, but if he wants to be calm, he will not deny me this symbolic reward. The meaning of my letter may be distorted, I don't know English Below are a few more of my considerations, this is not the answer for you, this is a message to all readers About the value. of gold and Fiat (ruble, yuan, Euro, dollar) money in simple words.Value-can not come from an empty place, it appears in a new place, due to the fact that in the old place it decreases.No need to take my word for it, just try to realize it at your leisure by examples from life.Example:today in the world 100 trillion.$ money (value of all money in the world = 100 000 000 000$)a total of 14 zeros.Of these, the value of tokens 100 000 000 000; (total 11 zeros, only three zeros should be added to them to compare)Statistics show that the value of tokens increases 20 times in 4 years.(10 years is sufficient for the production of conclusions volume of statistics)If you have already completed the 6th grade in mathematics, then you can calculate yourself,after how many years the value of tokens and old money will be equal.By then, it's easy to understand. ,those who kept money in dollars (and not in gold, real estate or shares of enterprises), will be exactly 2 times poorer, as tokens have already taken half the value of the dollar.This will be expressed in inflation, but since everything in the world is estimated in dollars, then no one will notice,as the custodians of these dollars became 2 times poorer, and those who managed to hop on the crypto train in 20-400 times richer.Actually it was the answer to the most popular question " and not a pyramid?"Now, whose side are you on?But the government should not worry, because the more values citizens have, the more they are ready to invest in the economy of their native country,it is only important that the country behaves as a native, and not as a stranger, then the value will not flow abroad.The value is affected by the cost of money (to a lesser extent)trust and liquidity (to a greater extent)Here it should be noted that the cost of for example bitcoin is always approximately equal to its value, and as a consequence, the value.Most of the remaining tokens are valuable mainly due to liquidity and are less backed up by cost.Below you will find out that the value of gold also depends heavily on the cost of its production. (This difference from other tokens gives bitcoin the full right to wear the crown of "digital gold", and it will be difficult to move this standard in the next 8 years.)To fill the currency with value, there is no need to provide it with an equivalent amount of non-ferrous metal.Dollar with his printing press is not switched off it has long been proved.Gold-it can fall in price, but not depreciate! Do not expect that bitcoin will replace or depreciate gold.Not only because of the ever-growing cost of its production, but primarily because of the inability to destroy, not subject to corrosion.(all other any kind of money including bitcoin could theoretically be broken)The beauty of gold and jewelry is not at all, it is not an eternal question of chicken and eggs,in the case of gold, it is obvious that it is worn only because it is expensive (and not it has become expensive due to the fact that it glitters)Fiat money-Yes there is nothing to say, since they are cheaper, everyone will try to get rid of them,and then you yourself remember if you were born in the 20th century.About inflation - inflation is bad when you do not expect it and are not ready for it, or if it concerns the world currency,(the means of settlement between States will disappear)And if inflation is planned to lay in the algorithm and it will be expected and predictable,that this process is very easy to manage.(children from school will know that a lot of money is bad, that as soon as there was money they need to spend or invest, )And such a currency "planned cheaper" may well become a national currency such as Russia or any other country.This is what I previously described as a method to completely abolish the "tax" system in favor of "emission". So.What have perhaps in the next life and sleep, while there is the inspiration we need KALYAKAT.(Specifically used the untranslatable Russian word, to manual understand Russians and a bit slow and without moreover slow, but already rich unlike us Chinese)I'm kidding.the theme of the RANKING and NebulusThis is a very complex paradigm to understand, roughly how to show a smartphone in the 19th century.Start learning with simple things, with bitcoin for example.peer to peer (all equal) -this is when the data is not someone one stored such as a classic Internet site, and all at the same time.Theoretically, any user can direct the power of your computer to maintain the network,theoretically, the user receives a reward for maintaining the network, but in practice it has long been the work of large corporations.The network itself does not work, but only due to the fact that we give it our power.The program code is open-it means that anyone can dig into the device and determine that there is no fraud.And anyone can see how it works.Conclusion the token will become worthless when the majority wants to devalue it.While most want it to grow - it grows.Tokens are not stored in a Bank but in a file on your computer.But do not forget that the file can be stolen and choose a password.On the Internet, read what is blockchain,Then read what smart contracts areThen it will be easier for you to understand what ranking is.A Nebulas invented can say ranking.What does it do?Each person, device, project, organization, Bank will have its own rank.The system is so complex that it takes everything into account.Impossible, to cheat, to bribe otherwise fraudulently to cheat your rank, even for huge money.If you're a thief everyone knows that you are a thief, if clean and cool - that all roads are open and good to you!Now shit will be easy to distinguish from negova.All the information on the network will be true.All contracts will be executedAll obligations, too.You will no longer show on the left banner.Do not offer the wrong productWill not offer an unnecessary vacancy.Will not get newsletters and offer loan, if you are no longer needed.Can't cheat.The network will be all about you and your needs to know and please you in every way.And at the same time, no one from the outside can not from the network about how to withdraw, or to read them. They're heavily encrypted.Now you can create your own little Paradise on earth with your hands,BUT remember, none of you will not make it, and pay you can't. Because it's your own ecosystem.On the contrary he's the Nebulus is willing to pay you for this work. Sedative pill for novice investor, who in October bought bitcoin at 6500, and now in a hurry to sell it for 3000 waiting for the death of the cryptocurrency market.Explain.No one but you and your comrades in the bunker, nothing is sold out and will not run.This is the default behavior of the market.What will happen at the beginning of January, is called "bottom",and such a miracle happens only once in 4 years.Therefore, an experienced investor is now doing two things:1. transition from bitcoin to altcoin.Why would he?While bitcoin was cheaper, it was profitable for him to own it, after all, it is a reliable means to store savings. it loses in value about twice as slow as altcoin.After the bottom end, altcoin will go up approximately two faster than bitcoin. And it is profitable for him to change bitcoin to altcoin right now. It's standard procedure.In December 2021, he will change back altcoin to bitcon. It will again be more profitable for him to store bitcoin than altcoin.Such a simple procedure brings him for 4 years 3000-4000% profit, instead of 2000% running in cold storage bitcon.And you see in this only his escape from bitcoin.2. short-sell.The investor whose exchange Bitfinex BTC lies 250, to lend on the stock exchange on 6 December 2018 750 BTC, with its 250 BTC remains the key.On the same day, he changes these 1000 BTC at the rate of 3900$ to 3.9 m$Now he has 3.9 m$at his disposal.Exactly a month later, January 6, 2019, he changes the 3,9 m$ at the rate of $ 3,400 to 1,147 BTC.It returns to the exchange 750 BTC + interest for a loan of 10 BTC.1147-750-10=387.387-250=137 BTCThe profit of this investor for 1 month was 137 BTC, or 55%.And if your friends in the bunker will sell their bitcoins now, his monthly profit can be up to 100%.And you again saw in this only his flight from bitcoin.It is clear, because on the exchange rate chart it looks exactly like a big sale.Citation of the text without reference to the author is prohibited A. A. Artemov, 2018.12.07. All rights reserved

Problem The main problem with the Internet is the lack of accurate information storage (AIS). And the creation of AIS is impossible without ranking users. Today in the Internet the main rate is made on the amount of information, and because of the high competition, the amount of information on the Internet is increasing exponentially. As a result, the increase in the amount of information leads to an increasing decrease in the quality of information. The accuracy and reliability of information is getting worse every year. And according to the author, the crisis of information is not yet, but has already come. Wikipedia is a good resource but has 2 serious problems: 1. There is no limit to the number of characters, therefore, it is used only by analysts and future scientists. And simple users, which 95%, need another AIS, its simplicity and brevity reminiscent of instagram. 2. The information in English Wikipedia and national Wikipedia is very different. This is already a confirmation that Wikipedia is not sufficiently protected from erroneous information. The next problem with the Internet is that the information does not unfold, 95% of the authors give a one-word answer to the question, it is not touching that under different conditions of different readers, the answer to the same question will be different, even if the person who asked the question is 100% satisfied with this answer. As a result, readers who ask the same question, but have different conditions, they believe that they also fit this answer, but in fact under their individual conditions, the answer must be different. Summing up, the author believes that the repository of accurate information on the Internet currently does not exist. In the Internet, the rating information is enhanced by regular users, and sometimes by cheating program. Ordinary users are not a competent resource in assessing the accuracy and veracity of information, a program and does not set such a goal, this leads to the fact that on the contrary false information has a higher rating than true. And the shorter the answer, the more inaccuracies and untruths it contains. The problem is most pronounced in short texts of less than 1000 characters. short texts require a high level of competition. According to statistics, 50% of users do not read the text more than 1000 characters to the end. In the future, the number of readable characters will be further reduced, this will lead to an even lower quality of information. Decision Now, when it became available a ranking of users, the company can begin to create AIS. And here it is very important that the user asked his question (because you can not feed the fed). First of all, there must be a need for the information provided. It is obvious to the author that AIS should be based on the question (need). The author believes that for the effective work of AIS users should be divided into classes, and between classes create competition, in this case we get double control over who asks the question and over who answers the question. The author offers 3 classes of users: user, expert, critical. Weight in any of the three classes to be earned, initially each weight is zero. In this case, one person can not earn weight in all 3 classes. Otherwise, he will be able to ask himself questions and answer them. This is already spam, and for the effective development of the service you need a real need for the question. The author offers the service to organize the authorization, so that the first authorization, the user has chosen which class he belongs to. And at the stage of authorization to consider the mechanism of protection, which will make it impossible to participate in different classes at the same time. But it is necessary to provide for the possibility of growth and change of class, because with age a person becomes smarter. In this case, the user will save only Nebulas Rank (NR), and a career in a new profession will have to start from scratch, after all, in life it is always so, experience in a new profession is acquired from scratch, but a high level of intelligence contributes to a faster experience. "spirit" is a person who has not earned weight. "user" is the person who asked a lot of quality questions and his questions further have additional weight. For its contribution, "user" should not receive a reward in the form of tokens, it is enough that its weight will grow. Otherwise, it would lead to spam, and the goal is to acquire quality, and as we found out earlier, the quantity has a negative impact on the quality of the information. "expert" is a person who has created many quality answers and his answers further have additional weight. For its contribution, "expert" should receive a reward system tokens, this is an indisputable fact, without material motivation, the quality of experts, and as a result, the quality of the information itself will be extremely low. "critic" is a man who challenged a lot of responses and criticism then has an additional weight. There is no need to allocate additional tokens for criticism contribution, as a result of his successful work, not only the weight of the expert Advisor should be transferred to him, but also tokens as a critic of the expert should be taken away. In regard to maturity of work the tokens of an expert remain pledged to the system, and are charged to the expert at the moment when his work from the preliminary section goes to the main one. Or they go to criticism. Without a General Charter, neither the expert nor the critic will understand what is required of them, therefore, it is necessary to force familiarization with the rules of remuneration, otherwise we would again get quantity instead of quality. Instructions for the expert and critic. - Expand the answer so that it satisfies not only the person who asked the question, but other readers, the input conditions are different. That is, the answer should exclude the possibility of several interpretations. But since 1000 characters in most cases it is impossible to fit a detailed answer, in this case, the expert should create several question forks. To do this, we need the function " Create a variant for other interpretations" If the critic finds that the answer that is not deployed does not have enough forks created, then he has the right to challenge and annul this answer. The creation forks under other conditions is considered as one work. "Feedback" - a critic should have a tool that will point the expert to an error. "Coauthorship" - If the work is generally good, but has inaccuracies, it is important to keep it. You need an additional marker, which will be marked as a whole good work, but corrected by a critic. In this case, the critic becomes a co-author, This work is placed on the wall of both authors and marked with a coauthorship marker, I do not see any point in further complicating the function and marking which of them was the author in this work, and who critic. A coauthorship token is enough. "expert blog" is a wall where you can see all the works of the expert Advisor under the filters (only successful ones) The wall is necessary for the effective work of the critic, since the authors if they make a certain kind of mistake, then this error will be repeated systematically. The service must be multilingual, that is, it is connected to the translation of the text, this will give a significant saving of tokens, which will result in a higher reward and will lead to a higher quality of information. Priorities: removal-to remove work critic must have more weight than expert, (the reward and the weight goes criticism) editing-to edit and return the work, the critic must weigh at least 50% of the expert's weight. (the reward and the weight is divided equally) return - With a weight of 25-50% critic can mark and return to work. (the critic gets an extra weight of 25% and 25% tokens) If the weight is less than 25%, the critic can not take part in the criticism of this author. "mature" - full maturity comes at the age of 28 days, after that, critics no longer have access to this work "half-ripe" - Partial maturity comes in 14 days, after that, all the actions of critics are possible in full, but the reward they receive only half of the given algorithm. The remaining part is not spent by the author. "expert archive" - only the author has access to the section. All deleted work, you need to move to the archive, still it is the property of the author. Process description. Preliminary section " question to expert" Description: - The user asks the experts a question (limit of 100 characters). - Selects tags from the proposed standard options. - Experts with the help of filters choose their questions. It is necessary to arrange that questions are automatically sent to the expert Advisor on the settings and topics that he chose. If he has enabled this feature. - The expert gives an answer to the user's question (limit of 1000 characters). You can of course make 2000 characters in instsgram to facilitate the work of experts, But this first lowers competition among experts, secondly, the service where you have to spend 10 minutes to read each article, It will become obsolete in 5 years, and in 5 years even the knowledge base will not have time to gather, In General, he will die before his maturity. - Other experts give their answers to the same question. - At this stage, it is important to connect an additional mechanism, which will prohibit the placement of similar text. The mechanism should check the new texts against those in the main AIS section, that is, with texts that have reached maturity, for which a reward has been paid. If the text matches more than 50%, the work should be blocked. This is perhaps the most important service mechanism, it will protect AIS database from spam. Otherwise, the attacker will be able to get each time a new reward for copies of existing works! It is very important not to make such a mistake! - All answers are sent to the user who asked the question. - The user is forced to select the finger up or finger down, until it makes a selection, access to the AIS and pre-partition will be closed for it. That's significant. This is the only effective way to assign weight to the work. But only for those works, which he opened. It will be incorrect and undesirable for the service to force the user to evaluate the works that he has ignored. Importantly: The user should see the weight of the expert Advisor in the title of the work, otherwise, the advantage will not be those experts who ensure the quality of information, on the contrary, those who answer many questions very quickly and provide quantity. Let me remind you that the key to success is that the number should be ignored and priority should be given to authors with high rank and weight. - After user evaluation, the answer goes to the main section"AIS". From the moment of transition of work in AIS, the countdown of maturity begins, and only here the critic will have access to the work. - Answers ignored by the user are returned to the experts. Answers that got a finger down, just go to the AIS section, On here is with them criticism will be dealt with, it is impossible to decide the fate of the work on the basis of the assessment of one person. Critics, since they are also users, will have to set the weight of the work, with a finger up or down. If maturity occurs, and the work will remain with a negative weight, of course she has to go back to the author. Work with a negative weight in the AIS is not the place. Importantly: After maturity, users can also evaluate the work, but can not change its status. These estimates are necessary for developers at the first stage. If a lot of low-quality work falls into the AIS, here you need to edit the algorithm of competition expert and criticism. After fully debugging the competition mechanism, developers should disable the ability to control AIS. The tonnage of the quality of information (TQI) & user weight (UW) To assess the weight of the user is offered the formula: userUW= Nebulas Rank (NR)*number of Mature jobs in the main AIS section expertUW= Nebulas Rank (NR)*number of Mature jobs in the main AIS section criticUW= Nebulas Rank (NR)*number of Mature works included in the main AIS section marked with the marker " Coauthorship" That is, we do not encourage criticism to remove the work, and encourage him to co-author with an expert, although if its weight is high enough, you might just want to delete works. Since the expert Advisor is controlled by user and critical, and criticism is not controlled by anyone, it is important to criticize the harsh working conditions and to make higher demands on it. This formula of weight gain criticism gives the system control over the quality of its work, and prevent the misuse of its status from critics. To assess the job weight offer formula: TQI=userUW+expertUW*UR UR (user rating) - calculated by the formula: UR= from the sum of NR of all fingers up (NR1+NR2+NR3+NRx, ) subtract the sum of NR of all fingers down ( NR1+NR2+NRx) ( UR - attached after the occurrence of a maturity of work in the formula is not considered ) The author assumes that the payment which is capable to become an incentive for the expert 1 AIS token for each answer. There is no need to conduct ICO and set the starting price of the token, over time, employees themselves will appreciate their work and with increasing competition among employees, and as the knowledge base accumulates, it will become increasingly difficult to mine tokens, this will increase their value and capitalization in the future. This fact is enough for the most intelligent and far-sighted people to start filling the knowledge base even then, when the value of the token is still zero. Especially in such an important matter for humanity there are enthusiasts. I believe that the nebulas campaign team should develop AIS on their own. After all, this is a very important part of the ecosystem, thanks to which the cost of the Nebulas project as a whole will grow much faster. And the team already has enough interest in development, additional stimulation is not necessary for developers. Moreover, the author himself described 90% of the algorithm of the service. Career ladder ( The main tool of motivation to work ) The author analyzed the behavior of the cryptocurrency market, and therefore has full confidence in the following information: The bottom of the cryptocurrency market will come around 2019.01.07 The next bottom will come about 2023.01.01 and it will be the last significant bottom, After that, the adoption of cryptocurrencies in the world will come and the scenario of price fluctuations for more stable but moderate growth will change. The author tried to use these data in the preparation of the service career ladder. The author also believes that this motivation is enough to complete the main volume of AIS writing in 5 years. Schedule of changes in the cost of work: 1 AIS-from 2020.01.01 0.8 AIS-from 2021.01.01 0.6 AIS-from 2022.01.01 0.4 AIS-from 2023.01.01 0.2 AIS-from 2024.01.01 0.1 AIS-from 2025.01.01 Next-0.1 AIS. The essence is the same as bitcoin, but with faster catalysis. Result The service will allow experienced people to adequately monetize their intelligence. Nebulus will receive and store accurate information, designed for 95% of Internet users. The world will become much better if lies disappear and the truth accessible and clear to any person will come to its place. Even a person with a very low level of intelligence who does not like to read, will be able to gradually improve! The author is willing to sell the copyright on this idea for 100 AIS, (about 1 AIS=$1) subject to acceptance of the proposed Career ladder. And guarantees that no one else will get free tokens except the author of the idea. varan.ru@gmail.com Citation of the text without reference to the author is prohibited A. A. Artemov, 2018.12.07. All rights reserved Original text in Russian: Проблема Основная проблема интернет заключается в отсутствии accurate information storage (AIS). И создание AIS невозможно без ранжирования пользователей. Сегодня в интернет основная ставка сделана на количество информации, и из за высокой конкуренции количество информации в интернет увеличивается в геометрической прогрессии. В результате рост количества информации приводит к все большему снижению качества информации. Точность и достоверность информации с каждым годом становится все хуже. И по мнению автора кризис информации не предстоит, а уже наступил. Википедия хороший ресурс, но имеет 2 серьезных проблемы: 1. Нет ограничения на количество символов, поэтому ее используют только аналитики и будущие ученые. А простым пользователям, которых 95%, нужна другая AIS, своей простотой и краткостью напоминающая instagram. 2. Информация в англоязычной википедии и в национальной википедии сильно отличается. Это уже является подтверждением того, что википедия недостаточно защищена от ошибочной информации. Следующая проблема интернет в том, что информация не разворачивается, 95% авторов дают односложный ответ на вопрос, совершенно не касаясь того, что под разные условия разных читателей, ответ на одинаковый вопрос будет разным, даже если задавшему вопрос данный ответ удовлетворяет своей точностью на 100%. В результате читатели которые задаются тем же вопросом, но при этом сами имеют иные условия, считают, что им тоже подходит данный ответ, но на самом же деле под их индивидуальные условия, ответ должен быть иным. Подводя итоги, автор считает, что хранилища точной информации в интернет в настоящее время не существует. В интернет рейтинг у информации повышается за счет обычных пользователей, а порой и за счет накрутки программой. Обычные пользователи не являются компетентным ресурсом в оценке точности и правдивости информации, а программы и вовсе такой целью не задаются, это и приводит в итоге к тому, что как раз наоборот ложная информация имеет выше рейтинг, чем правдивая. И чем короче ответ, тем больше в нем неточности и неправды. Сильнее всего проблема проявляется именно в коротких текстах, размером менее 1000 символов. короткие тексты нуждаются в высокой конкуренции. По статистике, 50% пользователей не дочитывают текст более 1000 символов до конца. В будущем количество читаемых символов будет еще сокращаться, это приведет к еще более низкому качеству информации. Решение Теперь, когда стало доступным ранжирование пользователей, общество может приступить к созданию AIS. И здесь очень важно, чтобы пользователь задал свой вопрос (ведь сытого не накормишь). Прежде всего в предоставленной информации должна быть потребность. Для автора очевидно, что AIS должна строиться на вопросе (потребности). Автор считает, что для эффективной работы AIS необходимо пользователей разделить на классы, и между классами создать конкуренцию, в этом случае мы получаем двойной контроль над тем, кто задает вопрос и над тем, кто отвечает на вопрос. Автор предлагает 3 класса пользователей: user, expert, critic. Вес в любом из трех классов предстоит заслужить, изначально у каждого вес равен нулю. При этом один человек не может заслужить вес во всех 3 классах. Иначе он сможет сам себе задавать вопросы и отвечать на них. Это уже является спамом, а для эффективного развития сервиса нужна реальная потребность в вопросе. Автор предлагает на сервисе организовать авторизацию, таким образом чтобы при первой авторизации, пользователь выбрал, к какому классу он относится. И на этапе авторизации продумать механизм защиты, который сделает невозможным участие в разных классах одновременно. Но нужно предусмотреть возможность роста и смены класса, ведь с возрастом человек становится умнее. При этом пользователь сохранит только Nebulas Rank (NR), а карьеру в новой профессии придется начинать с нуля, ведь и в жизни всегда так, опыт в новой профессии приобретается с нуля, но высокий уровень интеллекта способствует более быстрому получению опыта. "spirit" - это человек, который не заслужил вес. "user" - это человек, который задал много качественных вопросов и его вопросы далее имеют дополнительный вес. За свой вклад "user" не должен получать вознаграждение в виде токенов, достаточно того, что его вес будет расти. Иначе это бы привело к спаму, а целью является приобрести качество, и как мы выяснили ранее количество негативно влияет на качество информации. "expert" - это человек, который создал много качественных ответов и его ответы далее имеют дополнительный вес. За свой вклад "expert" должен получать вознаграждение токенами системы, это неоспоримый факт, без материальной мотивации качество экспертов, а в результате и качество самой информации будет крайне низким. "critic" - это человек, который оспорил много ответов и его критика далее имеет дополнительный вес. За вклад критика нет необходимости выделять дополнительные токены, так как в результате его успешной работы ему должен передаваться не только вес эксперта, но и токены так же критик у эксперта должен отнимать. В связи с этим до наступления зрелости работы токены эксперта остаются в залоге у системы, и начисляются эксперту в тот момент, когда его работа из предварительного раздела переходит в основной. Либо они достаются критику. Без общего устава ни эксперт ни критик не будут понимать, что от них требуют, поэтому необходимо принудительное ознакомление с правилами вознаграждения, иначе мы снова получили бы количество вместо качества. Инструкция для эксперта и критика. - Разворачивать ответ так, чтобы он удовлетворял не только задавшего вопрос, но и других читателей, входные условия у которых отличаются. То есть ответ должен исключать возможность нескольких интерпретаций. Но так как в 1000 символов в большинстве случаев невозможно уместить развернутый ответ, то в этом случае эксперт должен создать несколько вилок вопроса. Для этого нам понадобится функция "Create a variant for other interpretations" Если критик обнаружит, что у ответа, который не развернут не создано достаточно вилок, то он имеет право оспорить и аннулировать этот ответ. Создание вилок под иные условия считается как одна работа. "Feedback" - критик должен иметь инструмент, который будет указывать эксперту на ошибку. "Coauthorship" - Если работа в целом хороша, но имеет неточности, то ее важно сохранить. Необходим дополнительный маркер, которым будет помечаться в целом хорошая работа, но исправленная критиком. В этом случае критик становится соавтором, Такая работа размещается на стене обоих авторов и помечена маркером coauthorship, Не вижу смысла дополнительно усложнять функцию и помечать кто из них был в этой работе автором, а кто критиком. Достаточно маркера coauthorship. "expert blog" - это стена, где можно увидеть под фильтрами все работы эксперта (только успешные) Стена необходима для эффективной работы критика, так как авторы если и допускают определенный вид ошибки, то эта ошибка будет у них повторяться систематически. Сервис должен быть мультиязычным, то есть к нему подключен перевод текста, это даст значительную экономию токенов, что выразится в более высокой награде и приведет к более высокому качеству информации. Приоритеты: removal - Для удаления работы критик должен иметь больше вес, чем эксперт, (награда и вес переходит критику) editing - Для редактирования и возврата работы критик должен иметь вес не менее 50% от веса эксперта. (награда и вес делятся поровну) return - При весе 25-50% критик может пометить и вернуть работу. (критик получает дополнительный вес в размере 25% и 25% токенов) При весе ниже 25% критик не может принять участие в критике данного автора. "mature" - Полная зрелость работы наступает в возрасте 28 суток, после этого критики уже не имеют доступа к данной работе "half-ripe" - Частичная зрелость наступает через 14 суток, после этого все действия критиков возможны в полном объеме, но вознаграждение они получают лишь половину от заданной алгоритмом. Оставшаяся часть не расходуется у автора. "expert archive" - доступ к разделу имеет только сам автор. Все удаленные работы, нужно переместить в архив, все таки это собственность автора. Описание процесса. Предварительный раздел "question to expert" Описание: -Пользователь задает вопрос экспертам (лимит 100 символов). -Выбирает теги из предложенных стандартных вариантов. -Эксперты при помощи фильтров выбирают себе вопросы. Нужно организовать, чтобы вопросы автоматически высылались эксперту, по тем настройкам и темам которые он выбрал. Если он включил эту функцию. -Эксперт дает ответ на вопрос пользователя (лимит 1000 символов). Можно конечно сделать 2000 символов как в instsgram, чтобы облегчить работу экспертам, Но это во первых понижает конкуренцию среди экспертов, во вторых сервис на котором приходится по 10 минут тратить на чтение каждой статьи, Устареет за 5 лет, а за 5 лет даже база знаний не успеет собраться, В общем он умрет еще до наступления своей зрелости. -Другие эксперты дают свои ответы на этот же вопрос. -На этом этапе важно подключить дополнительный механизм, который будет запрещать размещение похожего текста. Механизм должен сверять новые тексты с теми которые находятся в основном разделе AIS, то есть с текстами достигшими зрелости, за которые было выплачено вознаграждение. При совпадении текста более 50%, работа должна блокироваться. Это пожалуй самый важный механизм сервиса, он защитит базу AIS от спама. В противном случае у злоумышленника будет возможность получать каждый раз новое вознаграждение за копии уже существующих работ! Это очень важно не допустить такой ошибки! -Все ответы высылаются пользователю задавшему вопрос. -Пользователю принудительно нужно выбрать палец вверх или палец вниз, пока он не сделает выбор, доступ к AIS и предварительному разделу для него будет закрыт. Это важно. Это единственный действенный способ присвоить работе вес. Но только для тех работ, которые он открыл. Принуждать пользователя оценивать работы, которые он проигнорировал, будет некорректно и нежелательно для сервиса. Важно: Пользователь должен в заголовке работы видеть вес эксперта, иначе преимущество получат не те эксперты кто обеспечивает качество информации, а напротив те, кто очень быстро отвечает на много вопросов и обеспечивает количество. Напомню, залог успеха в том, что количество должно игнорироваться и приоритет должны иметь авторы с высоким рангом и весом. -После оценки пользователя, ответ переходит в основной раздел "AIS". С момента перехода работы в AIS, начинается отсчет зрелости, и только здесь к работе получит доступ критик. -Ответы проигнорированные пользователем возвращаются экспертам. Ответы которые получили палец вниз, так же переходят в раздел AIS, Дальше тут уже с ними критики будут разбираться, нельзя решать судьбу работы на основании оценки одного человека. Критики так как они тоже являются пользователями, должны будут задать работе вес, пальцем вверх или вниз. Если же зрелость наступит, а работа останется с отрицательным весом, разумеется она должна вернуться автору. Работам с отрицательным весом в AIS не место. Важно: После наступления зрелости пользователи так же могут оценить работу, но не могут изменить ее статус. Эти оценки нужны для разработчиков на первом этапе. Если много некачественных работ попадает в AIS, здесь нужно редактировать алгоритм конкуренции эксперта и критика. После полной отладки механизма конкуренции, возможность контроля AIS разработчиками нужно отключить. The tonnage of the quality of information (TQI) & user weight (UW) Для оценки веса пользователя предлагаю формулу: userUW= Nebulas Rank (NR)*количество зрелых работ попавших в основной раздел AIS expertUW= Nebulas Rank (NR)*количество зрелых работ попавших в основной раздел AIS criticUW= Nebulas Rank (NR)*количество зрелых работ попавших в основной раздел AIS помеченных маркером "Coauthorship" То есть мы не стимулируем критика удалять работы, а стимулируем его на соавторство с экспертом, хотя если его вес достаточно высок, то он может и удалять работы. Так как эксперта контролируют user и critic, а критика не контролирует никто, важно создать критику тяжелые условия работы и предъявить к нему более высокие требования. Данная формула увеличения веса критика дает системе контроль над качеством его работы, и исключает злоупотребления своим высоким статусом со стороны критиков. Для оценки веса работы предлагаю формулу: TQI=userUW+expertUW*UR UR (user rating) - рассчитывается по формуле: UR= из суммы NR всех пальцев вверх (NR1+NR2+NR3+NRx, ) вычитаем сумму NR всех пальцев вниз ( NR1+NR2+NRx) ( UR - добавленный после наступления зрелости работы в формуле не учитывается ) Автор предполагает, что оплата которая способна стать стимулом для эксперта 1 токен AIS за каждый ответ. Нет необходимости проводить ICO и задавать стартовую стоимость токену, со временем работники сами оценят свой труд и с ростом конкуренции среди работников, и по мере накопления базы знаний, добывать токены станет все сложнее, это увеличит их стоимость и капитализацию в будущем. Данного факта достаточно, чтобы самые умные и дальновидные люди приступили к наполнению базы знаний уже тогда, когда стоимость токена пока равна нулю. Тем более в таком важном для человечества деле найдутся энтузиасты. Я считаю, что разработку AIS команда кампании Nebulas должна сделать собственными силами. Ведь это очень важная часть экосистемы, благодаря которой стоимость проекта Nebulas в целом будет расти намного быстрее. А команда уже имеет достаточно заинтересованности в развитии, дополнительная стимуляция разработчикам не нужна. Тем более автор сам описал 90% алгоритма работы сервиса. Карьерная лестница (Основной инструмент мотивации к работе ) Автор провел анализ поведения рынка криптовалют, и в связи с этим имеет полную уверенность в следующей информации: Дно рынка криптовалют наступит примерно 2019.01.07 Следующее дно наступит примерно 2023.01.01 и оно будет последним значимым дном, После этого наступит принятие криптовалют в мире и изменится сценарий колебания цен на более стабильный но умеренный рост. Эти данные автор постарался использовать в составлении карьерной лестницы сервиса. Так же автор считает, что этой мотивации достаточно для того, чтобы за 5 лет закончить основной объем написания AIS. График изменения стоимости работы: 1 AIS - с 2020.01.01 0.8 AIS - с 2021.01.01 0.6 AIS - с 2022.01.01 0.4 AIS - с 2023.01.01 0.2 AIS - с 2024.01.01 0.1 AIS - с 2025.01.01 Далее - 0.1 AIS. Суть та же, что у bitcoin, но с более быстрой катализацией. Результат Сервис позволит опытным людям достойно монетизировать свой интеллект. И Nebulus получит хранилище точной информации, рассчитанное на 95% пользователей сети интернет. Мир станет намного лучше, если исчезнет ложь и на ее место придет истина доступная и понятная любому человеку. Даже человек с очень низким уровнем интеллекта который совсем не любит читать, сможет постепенно совершенствоваться! Автор готов продать авторское право на эту идею за 100 AIS, (примерно 1 AIS=1$) при условии, принятия предложенной Career ladder. И гарантии того, что больше никто бесплатно не получит токены кроме автора идеи. varan.ru@gmail.com Цитирование текста без ссылки на автора запрещено © А. А. Артемов, 2018.12.07. Все права защищены