The digital economy has both bad and good, and a person should be aware of both.
Assassination coins are cryptocurrencies which are used to incentivize targeting specific individuals.
They can be used for unpleasant but necessary projects, but unfortunately they also lend themselves to abuse.
This page will discuss the development of those coins, their networks, and how safeguards could be developed to limit or prevent their abuse.
While it is not obviously recommended to solve problems like wrongful convictions and official misconduct with these coins, this page is being put in that section of the website because it offers an arbitrary way to distinguish between 'improper' and 'proper' use of these coins.
Google does not index sites that discuss these coins in depth, and of course most are run by law enforcement.
Different use cases will be given for this type of coin, along with examples of how to limit inappropriate applicable development to prevent abuse.
Example of 'use case 1'.
Could an assassination coin help prevent commercial intrusions into tribal spaces, and help secure indigenous borders?
The polarization of Europe eventually will lead to the loss of UK/U.S. control over global computer networks.
This does not solve the pkc issue but it will allow the creation of networks which can solve that issue locally through tribal languages across digital networks.
Certain intractable social problems will then be easily dealt with using incentivized networks, but the dangers involved in the proliferation of those networks require unusual safety measures.
How does an assassination coin work?
There are many possible designs, but today most people are referring to 'betting coins' when they talk about assassination coins
One person on the network would place a bet such as "I bet $5,000 at 1/5000 that "xx" will die at 2 pm on December 17". If he or she picks the time correctly he or she only wins $1. A person who wants to take the contract would, for example, bet $1 at 5000/1 that "xx" will die at 9 pm on December 13. If that second person guesses correctly then his or her dollar wins $5,000. This is the basic outline of how colonial/corporate groups overpower tribals, but it has been condensed and converted into the context of a coin.
Other bets are 'spam' or 'support wagers'. For example if a person knows the context and supports the project, he or she could contribute by betting $1,000 at 1/1000 that the contract would finish at 5pm on December 19. The employee would then accept that by countering the same way as the first bet. Or, if a person wanted to spam the network or weaken the contract he or she would place bets that weaken it within the rules of a specific contract.
Other options include using smart contracts to add variables.
In the above example a person could add a clause that if a certain thing happens by September 1 then the December 13 contract is voided. A person could make that alternative action pay better if there is some preferred outcome other than the death of the target. Or the amount from the preferred alternative could roll over into the December contract if the preferred outcome does not happen and the assassination becomes necessary.
In virtually all cases there is a 'preferred outcome' that does not involve killing, and that outcome should be incentivized even if it is unlikely.
All sorts of other variables, like cause of death and circumstances could also be added.
One of the problems involves confirming that a contract has been completed. "Oracle" coins or functions typically do this for most 'betting' coins, but in this case more likely would be that the person placing the contract would serve as 'oracle' for when or whether it was completed though he or she would need credibility which could be provided indirectly through a smart contract.
What are the dangers of this kind of coin?
Are 'legality' issues relevant to these coins?
What does 'pretty good privacy' mean and how does it apply to tribal languages?
What is a cypher pad?
What is 'Open Source'