Will votes be allocated based on kyc and number of AGI tokens held?
I’ve pulled a quote from Dr. Ben Goertzel (from Telegram chat) that, for the most part, answers your query.
Dr. Ben writes: “If you look in the whitepaper you will see that the democratic governance scheme of SingularityNET allocates votes per KYC’d token owner, not per token… and allocates votes based on a (rapidly) monotone decreasing function of tokens held by that owner.”
Please see page 31 of the whitepaper for additional details on the democratic governance model.
Rapidly decreasing monotone… Does that make sense to you?
It means that the vote wieght of a token decreases the more tokens you have.
Kind of a high pass filter if you like.
Sure, it’s just a “mathy” way of saying that the function is always decreasing, and rapidly. This is just to ensure that the token holders holding the most tokens don’t get too much of a proportionally larger vote. Just ignore the “monotone” and think of a graph in your mind and picture it rapidly trailing off the more tokens you have and the more it “trails off” or “falls off” the less voting power you’ll have as a result.
It’s just a function put in place to stop someone having, say, 10% of the total tokens (100M) and a proportional voting power of 10%. They will have considerably less, thus making the democratic governance model much more democratic. Majority token holders will still have more voting power than your average token holder, but far less than they would have had it not been architected with a democratic nod.
Exactly, a cut-off frequency.
OK, thanks both of you, now the more basic issue for me, an impoverished old pensioner, is do I need tokens to participate and if I buy 100, who does kyc? From memory not everyone did kyc even at the TGE last year…
From whitepaper (page 32): Furthermore, only Agents whose Owners have been verified by appropriate KYC procedures will be permitted to vote (although other Agents can still participate in the network via offering or purchasing services).
The initial default plan is to use standard KYC methodology, likely via partnership with an external firm specializing in KYC for blockchain based enterprises. Before Year 4 of the network’s operation, this will be replaced with a decentralized KYC methodology, in which Agents are KYC’d by other Agents rather than any central authority. One approach here is essentially a “verification federation” consisting of Agents that are democratically approved to perform KYC functions. The ultimate goal is to balance decentralized control and operation with protection against exploitation of the democratic governance framework by wealthy and powerful outside entities.
Absolutely! Well understood Brian!
The KYC process is vital for regulation and control over who gains the ability to exert power toward that control in a decentralised organisation, it is vital for security and the trustworthyness of the market, which in turn is vital for market growth and development. It will be one of the reasons users trust SingularityNET over other choices.
The KYC process is not without issues, it’s time-consuming and expensive the more you scale. Which is absolutely why a KYC agent or swarm will be vital to the success of the governence.
Any developers who create a great KYC agent will likely find much success in the market, and people could do much worse than to stake them
Under the singularityNET foundation vision our kyc would be called know your contractor…
Thanks Tim, have you seen a job description for kyc agent? I would imagine ISO 31000. would be central.