Hey @Glen_Simister, fantastic and very inspiring project you have. It’s very ambitious and you have done a great deal of work. Good to see
I agree that gamification is potent for engagement, and also agree that it would be desirable to maybe shift towards something with a bit more inherent meaning in it.
I’ll try look at this from fundamental view:
We’re basically talking about a digital tax here. Some might oppose to that term, but for the sake of the discussion, let’s call it that for now.
Anything that can be done on this digital platform, and where it isn’t obvious that it absolutely should not require any payment whatsoever, can have this tax.
This opens up a lot of possibilities.
Anything from dating apps to invoicing services, book keeping, legal advice, Airbnb, Ubers and so on…
So, I don’t think there’s a lack of sources for the tax. But from a system design perspective, there’s a lot to consider.
It seems to me all these features would not be feasible to provide from a single provider, for various reasons. That leads me to think that the system should be modular in a way that independent services can integrate with it.
That way there can be n different invoicing service providers, developed and maintained by independent actors, and they can all hook into this digital system of yours (the platform) and community members can choose to use any or all of them.
So that way the developers of the platform do not need to race with competition, do not need to be experts in 1000 different business areas, and always try to keep community members staying with the built in service instead of some other one.
But there needs to be some clear benefit, reason, path for these services to hook up to the platform, so that they naturally tend to do that.
So, this system is supposed to be scoped to a physical location, a community, and then there’s also the question if there might be nested communities, i.e. within a precinct or some current bureaucratic delineation (which might map naturally onto a single community instance of this platform)? Will people go together in neighbourhoods as well? How do the different nested levels interact, should that be taken into consideration somehow?
As for “Smart Contracts”, this is an area I’ve been specifically interested in within SAFENetwork.
Multi-sig is coming (and as an explicitly non-quotable estimate gave it; perhaps in alpha-4), which would allow for some of this.
If you want realtime computation which do not rely on participants to be online, then there’s the route of forming a computation network, with secure membership and a consensus protocol.
So, how that would look like is for example that client machines can run an executable, just like we run the SAFE Vault, where they connect and form a network (much in the same way), but instead of network agreed logic on storing data, it could be anything that your system needs to perform.