@0xGallego Which amount would you suggest?
This is more personal, but I don’t think genesis passport holders should have long-term economic privileges than standard passport holders. I regard the Genesis passport as more of an identity symbol as an early member of the national movement.
Do you really have no dignity in the eyes of Genesis resident passport? After all, nation3 has been locked for 4 years. Finally, you think it is an identification of the early movement. I suggest you change the promotion page of the Chuangshi Resident Passport.
@maydayfeihuan Where is the promotion page you are mentioning? Could you share the URL, please?
Yeah, sorry for that, the amount is not the important thing. To me, distributing an arbitrary amount of tokens to passport holders right now doesn’t feel right. I don’t think it would create the correct incentives for increasing citizen participation. I don’t think it would provide the desired value if we want to unleash creativity and boost economic activity either. I would love someone to prove me wrong on this with data.
I think to achieve a valuable and sustainable UBI program, we have to start by solving the problems @anastasiya already described in UBI as a public good - or unleashing human creativity:
- Sybil resistance, or in other words how to make sure an attacker cannot create thousands of accounts to drain UBI funds.
- How to create a sustainable pot from which UBI can be distributed.
Assessing the first one using Nation Cred is a cool idea. I was there the first time we proposed it. But we still lack data on how it would compare effectively to other strategies.
I don’t oppose testing this in the field instead of doing extensive research first. Still, at least we should acknowledge that the current implementation of Nation Cred doesn’t fit all our needs. Working on that should be a step before N3BI distribution.
The second one is even more tricky. We are very early with Nation3, so finding sustainable sources of capital to fund anything is not easy.
Relying on the potential revenue of other projects feels risky and unhealthy. Suppose we commit only to fund N3BI with revenue. Until we don’t find said revenue, we risk having a zombie N3BI project that can never be used. On the other hand, funding N3BI with treasury reserves right now feels like diverting funds from the projects that could end sustainably funding N3BI in the first place.
I can be totally biased with this, I need a more convincing proposal before fiding N3BI implementation by December-January reasonable enough. I encourage anyone interested to provide their own insights / ideas in the matter and you @aahna to keep improving the proposal as I think it could end being a very interesting one.