Contributor Tokens (CT) vs. Extractor Taxes (ET)
How do we gamify crowdsourcing ratings to award Contributor Tokens (CT) as an entrepreneurial venture, powered by A.I. and the future Internet, inspired by Buckminster Fuller’s World Game and mission-driven networks?
CT vs. ET requires a crowdsourced rating system to quantify contributor tokens vs. extractor taxes in a rainbow of diverse domains.
The Plastic Bank brilliantly implemented CT (Contributor Tokens) for the ultra-poor, who pick up plastic refuse for recycling in return for tokens they can exchange for food and services. The Plastic Bank showed how curbing plastic waste in poor countries could be a viable business, which made headlines and won IBM blockchain support and investment.
neXt step:
income for all those performing diverse tasks that contribute to all life and civilization, packaged as a viable investor venture
CT is not UBI (Universal Basic Income), though the many studies of UBI validate CT as income to support each unique individual doing what he/she is most qualified and motivated to do. To match unique individuals with their own self-defined work opportunities, or to work opportunities offered by others that match their profile, requires a collaborative intelligence (human + AI) SaaS platform to match people proposing jobs with people who can perform those jobs. CT can demonstrate the power of the future internet + A.I. to manage the greatest challenges that life on Earth now faces.
This SaaS platform must be able to
Saving civilization and life on Earth includes providing funding to academics, actors, dancers, engineers-inventors, filmmakers, innovators, journalists, musicians, scientists, writers, visual artists, as well as to small, organic farmers, those working on our climate and water crises, soil regeneration, preserving biodiversity, those developing “serious games” and learning resources, and many more.
FOOD
Food Security is one test domain for UCI.