Re: RUBI: A Self-Sovereign Identity-Based Retroactive UBI System - Seeking Community Feedback

Regards,
Nivas


On Sun, Mar 23, 2025 at 9:28 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> ne 23. 3. 2025 v 16:26 odesílatel Nivas <nivas.cool@gmail.com> napsal:
>
>> Thank you, Melvin, for your positive feedback on the RUBI proposal and
>> for raising insightful questions. I’m glad you see value in the idea, and
>> I’d like to address your queries below. See inline against your questions.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nivas
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 12:11 AM Melvin Carvalho <
>> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> út 18. 3. 2025 v 20:17 odesílatel <nivas.cool@gmail.com> napsal:
>>>
>>>> Dear W3C-CCG Community,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope you’re doing well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wanted to share an idea that intersects Self-Sovereign Identity
>>>> (SSI), decentralized governance, and Universal Basic Income (UBI):
>>>> Retroactive Universal Basic Income (RUBI). I have attached a one-page
>>>> explanation of the concept, breaking down the mechanics.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *What is RUBI?*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> RUBI is a framework that proposes a globally governed, open-source
>>>> monetary system where:
>>>>
>>>>    - Personhood credentials (SSI-based) ensure UBI eligibility while
>>>>    preventing fraud.
>>>>    - Democratic governance enables citizens to vote on UBI rates and
>>>>    demurrage policies.
>>>>    - Retroactive UBI ensures individuals receive compensation based on
>>>>    their birthdate, correcting past economic exclusion.
>>>>    - Interoperable and competing digital currencies operate with
>>>>    open-source governance to prevent speculation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Seeking Community Feedback*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would love to hear your thoughts on any aspect of this concept,
>>>> whether from a technical, governance, economic, or interoperability
>>>> perspective.
>>>>
>>>> Areas of interest include, but are not limited to:
>>>>
>>>>    - The feasibility of integrating SSI-based personhood verification
>>>>    into such a system.
>>>>    - Political possibilities of making such a system come to reality.
>>>>    - Design considerations for privacy.
>>>>    - Potential alignment with existing decentralized identity
>>>>    frameworks or monetary governance models.
>>>>    - Broader implications and challenges of a retroactive UBI approach
>>>>    within a decentralized ecosystem.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I understand that UBI itself can be a controversial topic, and I
>>>> welcome discussions on its feasibility, having worked with the
>>>> International Movement for Monetary Reform (IMMR) on sovereign monetary
>>>> policies. However, I wanted to keep this conversation focused on the
>>>> identity, governance, and interoperability aspects. If anyone is
>>>> interested, I’d be happy to elaborate on the economic rationale separately.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Why I’m Sharing This Here*
>>>>
>>>> As someone early in my career and transitioning from a technical
>>>> background into public policy, I want to ensure that I take a well-informed
>>>> approach in integrating governance and identity frameworks into broader
>>>> economic systems. I greatly value the experience and insights of this
>>>> community and would appreciate any perspectives—whether on feasibility,
>>>> challenges, or alternative approaches—that could help refine this idea.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would also like to extend special thanks to Manu and Harrison, who
>>>> encouraged me to step forward and participate in this discussion rather
>>>> than hesitating. Their encouragement means a lot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Seems like a good idea.
>>>
>>> Does it apply only to countries?
>>>
>>> NS: RUBI is designed to be flexible and not limited to nation-states.
>> We can certainly introduce regional RUBIs, which can apply to any
>> participating region- whether a country, a group of countries (e.g., the
>> Eurozone), or even sub-national entities.
>>
>
> Great!
>

NS: Thank you!

>
>
>>
>>
>>> It didnt seem obvious why to retroactively do it according to birth date.
>>>
>>
>> NS: The retroactive design, tied to birthdate, ensures equitable wealth
>> distribution by addressing past economic exclusion. As explained in my
>> response to Manu (NS: Response 4), RUBI currencies are allocated based on
>> the number of days lived—a fair metric that reflects each individual’s
>> lifetime, ensuring those who have lived longer receive compensation for
>> historical inequities. This creates an effect as if RUBI had existed since
>> inception, promoting fairness at a human level. (In simple terms, we are
>> fixing the past as well from the present).
>>
>
> Makes sense.  But then what about people that just died, or die during
> application.
>

NS: Thank you, Melvin, for raising this practical concern—it’s an important
consideration for RUBI’s fairness. RUBI’s digital payment process is
designed to be near-instantaneous, taking only a few seconds via mobile app
authentication with personhood credentials, making the likelihood of
someone passing away just before or during this process negligible.
Payments are calculated based on days lived up to the point of
implementation, ensuring all living individuals at that time are covered.
Additionally, demurrage rates may discourage holding currencies,
incentivizing immediate use or transfer, further minimizing such concerns.
I’d welcome your thoughts on additional implementation details to enhance
RUBI’s fairness.

>
>
>>
>>> Does it discriminate against people that do not join the system in such
>>> a way as to make it unfair?
>>>
>>
>> NS: RUBI aims to be inclusive, but I acknowledge the fairness challenge
>> for non-participants, as noted in Scenario 4. Regions or individuals not
>> joining the system (e.g., due to geopolitical constraints) can’t claim
>> RUBI, which raises equity concerns. Scenario 2.2 mitigates this by
>> collaborating with the World Bank’s ID4D initiative to include undocumented
>> individuals (e.g., refugees) through alternative proofing, ensuring broader
>> access. The long-term vision is to scale adoption globally, reducing
>> exclusion over time.
>>
>
> I see this as problematic.  Because those that are for example illiterate
> or the most vulnerable in society have increased likelihood of inclusion
> possibly corrupting the whole system.
>

NS: Could you give me some examples of what scenarios of corruption you
foresee, so that we can design this fool-proof?

>
>
>>
>>> Did you think about a system where groups could get together and provide
>>> themselves with a self-issued UBI then grow the group?
>>>
>>
>> NS: But how do we ensure the accuracy of birth dates in this system,
>> which is crucial for RUBI to work effectively?
>>
>
> So we need a system for sybil resistance.  Possibly social verification.
> Im not 100% sold on backdating it to birth, it seems an arbitrary rule (not
> saying it's wrong).  I can see the fairness.  But I also see the fairness
> at starting upon an agreed upon, well-publicized date.
>


NS: I will tell you the exact problem that will happen when you fix it on a
well-publicized date. One party may feel it is extremely unfair because
they were born way earlier, and this recent date is unfair giving them
reduced payments, whereas a younger person will be very happy with such a
rule as they get more share of the pie. The logic behind using birthdate is
to provide the fair share of the pie (no less, no high, just fair). This
makes sure there are not too many currencies created of the same type,
similar to what happened in the crypto world.

>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Nivas Sivaprakasam
>>>> Exploring SSI & Monetary Reform for Global Inclusion
>>>>
>>>> Nivas Sivaprakasam | LinkedIn
>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/nivas-sivaprakasam-57972128/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 12:11 AM Melvin Carvalho <
>> melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> út 18. 3. 2025 v 20:17 odesílatel <nivas.cool@gmail.com> napsal:
>>>
>>>> Dear W3C-CCG Community,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope you’re doing well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wanted to share an idea that intersects Self-Sovereign Identity
>>>> (SSI), decentralized governance, and Universal Basic Income (UBI):
>>>> Retroactive Universal Basic Income (RUBI). I have attached a one-page
>>>> explanation of the concept, breaking down the mechanics.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *What is RUBI?*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> RUBI is a framework that proposes a globally governed, open-source
>>>> monetary system where:
>>>>
>>>>    - Personhood credentials (SSI-based) ensure UBI eligibility while
>>>>    preventing fraud.
>>>>    - Democratic governance enables citizens to vote on UBI rates and
>>>>    demurrage policies.
>>>>    - Retroactive UBI ensures individuals receive compensation based on
>>>>    their birthdate, correcting past economic exclusion.
>>>>    - Interoperable and competing digital currencies operate with
>>>>    open-source governance to prevent speculation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Seeking Community Feedback*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would love to hear your thoughts on any aspect of this concept,
>>>> whether from a technical, governance, economic, or interoperability
>>>> perspective.
>>>>
>>>> Areas of interest include, but are not limited to:
>>>>
>>>>    - The feasibility of integrating SSI-based personhood verification
>>>>    into such a system.
>>>>    - Political possibilities of making such a system come to reality.
>>>>    - Design considerations for privacy.
>>>>    - Potential alignment with existing decentralized identity
>>>>    frameworks or monetary governance models.
>>>>    - Broader implications and challenges of a retroactive UBI approach
>>>>    within a decentralized ecosystem.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I understand that UBI itself can be a controversial topic, and I
>>>> welcome discussions on its feasibility, having worked with the
>>>> International Movement for Monetary Reform (IMMR) on sovereign monetary
>>>> policies. However, I wanted to keep this conversation focused on the
>>>> identity, governance, and interoperability aspects. If anyone is
>>>> interested, I’d be happy to elaborate on the economic rationale separately.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Why I’m Sharing This Here*
>>>>
>>>> As someone early in my career and transitioning from a technical
>>>> background into public policy, I want to ensure that I take a well-informed
>>>> approach in integrating governance and identity frameworks into broader
>>>> economic systems. I greatly value the experience and insights of this
>>>> community and would appreciate any perspectives—whether on feasibility,
>>>> challenges, or alternative approaches—that could help refine this idea.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would also like to extend special thanks to Manu and Harrison, who
>>>> encouraged me to step forward and participate in this discussion rather
>>>> than hesitating. Their encouragement means a lot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Seems like a good idea.
>>>
>>> Does it apply only to countries?
>>>
>>> It didnt seem obvious why to retroactively do it according to birth date.
>>>
>>> Does it discriminate against people that do not join the system in such
>>> a way as to make it unfair?
>>>
>>> Did you think about a system where groups could get together and provide
>>> themselves with a self-issued UBI then grow the group?
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Nivas Sivaprakasam
>>>> Exploring SSI & Monetary Reform for Global Inclusion
>>>>
>>>> Nivas Sivaprakasam | LinkedIn
>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/nivas-sivaprakasam-57972128/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>