[__MatrixMan__]

The lever is that whenever somebody tries to give you a scarcity-only token like USD or BTC you say "that's no good here, come back with something that proves to me that you didn't make it by making life worse for the people around you". We (the masses) still control consensus on what counts as valuable, and if were going to break from scarcity as the basis for that (and we should) then it has to be a proper break.

Play by rules that have something to do with our collective values or we're not going to acknowledge your stores of "value". "I got this from my grandpa who was a successful swindler" needs to stop being a source of money that you can expect the children of the swindled to accept. We need to drop the idea that scarcity implicitly creates meritocracy and instead deal in verifications of merit.

If they're really ready to go it alone in their bunkers with robots for friends then I guess we won't be seeing each other anymore, but I kinda doubt that'll work for them in the long run.

[walterbell]

> somebody tries to give you a scarcity-only token

Any alternative tokens you could recommend, other than barter?

[__MatrixMan__]

No, that's a protocol that were going to have to build.

I think CirclesUBI gets it partly right, re: different dynamics between parties based on their connectedness on a trust graph. But I think we'll want this on a CRDT, not a blockchain, and I think we'll want more nuance than their treat-others'-tokens-as-equal-in-value-to-your-own approach. But it's a decent start.