Requirements for a protocol for agent-centric P2P economic networks
Here's my current definition of agent-centric. I'll explain what I mean by protocol in this list of proposed requirements:
* Must be a protocol
* Must have an openly published specification.
* Any independently-developed software that follow the specification must be able to use the protocol to communicate with other software components that do likewise.
* Must be agent-centric, where agents can be individuals or groups, and each agent must be able to control their own identity, interactions, and data, and select their own software to use, as long as the software follows the protocol.
* Must either use a common economic vocabulary to communicate, or be able to translate their ingoing and outgoing communications into a common vocabulary.
* The protocol itself must be managed as a commons in the Elinor Ostrom sense.
* Must be able to provide reliable local [consensus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_(computer_science) among the participating agents in a scope agreed upon by the participants.
* More on this requirement in a comment.
Some people might disagree with this requirement, but
* I think, at this stage of the evolution of the general intellect, the protocol needs to work on the World Wide Web. Can provide private spaces as needed, but accessible via a Web browser.
There is no single protocol that satisfies all of those requirements at this time.
Several candidate protocols were mentioned and discussed in this previous thread. None of them is adequate by itself. Yet.
If you don't like google docs, here is an open source framapad with the same info, but without all those comments. Altho that doc is also open for comments.
I don't want to repeat all of those arguments here. I want to discuss how to move forward and assemble a protocol that does meet all of those requirements, and any others that people want to propose. At some stage of discussion, I will create a poll or two to allow people to weigh in on the adequacy of the requirements and maybe, if we are lucky, on the proposals for moving forward.