Source image and edited with power point
The diversity in applications of the blockchain seems to expand in all directions, the idea of decentralization is not satisfied with only apply to direct transactions between individuals, It has also seen in its results the ability to address other problems of the socio-economic area such as trade, business, social networks, public services, records, security among others, these ramifications in which the blockchain begins to set the tone can be seen very well as the success of the work as a whole, and perhaps the greatest benefit that has been produced it is synthesized in trust between third parties.
Currently, trust is a very important element for the success of any project, but in terms of activities through the network is even more vital, every day is greater demand that is recorded on the Internet and one of the trades more frequent are the agreements of work and exchanges of goods and services, such as the simple purchase of a product of necessity, the tickets to the cinema, or contracts of more complex works, are actions that can involve problems of disagreement or discrepancies which translates in disputes, for these inconveniences the blockchain technology combined with other conceptions also proposes solutions in a joint and innovative way, so that the judicial area is not the exception for the applications of the block chain.
Then for these problems of small or large magnitude referring to disputes Kleros was born an Ethereum autonomous organization destined to resolve disputes of different nature, characterized by a decision protocol that is applied through a system of multipurpose courts, acting as a decentralized arbitrator in process of disputes The particularity of Kleros is identified in the economic incentives described by the theory of games and the concept of crowdsourcing,, in order to obtain juries with adequate capacities to those willing and inclined to govern honestly.
A key point of Kleros to achieve the goal of providing a quick and fair solution is based on Shellingcoin mechanism, consider the idea of the focal points of Tomas Schelling as a negotiation tool, it is important to understand the compatibility of this with the disputes, since they are social problems to which you want to reach a solution that is satisfactory for the public. Therefore, the methodology of Kleros is largely a meticulous study in conflict strategies, so it is not necessarily that the agreement is achieved but to know how to influence others, in this case both the juries and the constituents of the disputes. [1]
Initially it is necessary to clarify that "Kleros is a system of voluntary acceptance", therefore at the time of making a contract, we must accept that in case there is a dispute will be solved by means of Kleros [2]. Smart contracts are like a specific arbitrator for each dispute, since in conflicts there is diversity of cause, Kleros addresses the different problems through an optional judicial system, that is, a specialized court (see figure 1), and therefore contains a specific contract for each area in which the jury can be chosen and other conditions related to the problem.
One of the specifications of the contracts are the voting options that the juries have, such as the possible scenarios corresponding to the dispute, consequently, results are also established as options that are in accordance with the scenario indicated by the juries.
The information that serves as evidence can include confidential information of any of the parties, therefore all the necessary evidence and data are sent with the security of the cryptography, it is clear that the level of information depends on the complexity of the fight.
Figure 1: Optional judicial system- Specialized court
Kleros uses a token called pnakion, as a mechanism for jury selection, which randomly chosen applicants to arbitrate, we must take into account that the greater the number of token deposited, the greater the probability of being chosen, in this way a filter is created in which a transparent choice can be assured. On the other hand the economic incentive is inherent in Pinakion, since the juries having non coherent votes will be penalized giving their tokens to the honest jurors, in such a way that the most reasonable option for the juries is to be coherent in their votes.
For the safety of the juries, they are not obliged to provide their identity to qualify in the position of arbitrator, on the other hand the votes must be revealed after the voting time, in addition to justify their vote to corroborate that they are not influenced by the election of the other judges, otherwise they will also be penalized.
The incentive system not only attracts applicants for the positions of arbitrators, but also establishes the rules by which they must act honestly, through penalty-reward conditions, which makes us expect that the juries proceed as follows:
- The juries are interested in resolving disputes for the payment of the fees they may generate for their service.
- They are inclined to give a verdict and just and consistent votes, because otherwise they will lose tokens that will be granted to the just jurors.
- The mechanism of distribution of tokens is based on the Schelling Coin, by which those rewarded or not are rewarded according to the vote consistent with the majority of the juries.
- Not revealing the vote is penalized with a double magnitude regarding incoherent voting.
Figure 2: Illustration of a case where the losing party has to pay the arbitration fee to the jurors, and the distribution of tokens between fair and incoherent juries
So for "in Kleros, the Schelling point is honesty and fairness"
We can have a conception regarding the impact that Kleros can have on people and companies when facing disputes, due to the structure they have adapted to the technological need that a system requires. online judicial, Kleros represents immediate accessibility for anyone who wants to settle a dispute, either for individuals or companies, the exposure of a problem to the world, for the Thecrowdsourcing technique incredibly increases the chances of obtaining a solution immediately, since we are considering the scope of connections as an immense warehouse from which it is very likely that we will obtain the right tools for a specific problem, then which is more practical for a person or company, than having a platform whose option to the criterion of judgment of an entire community connected to the network, which can very well be sele citar by meticulous mechanism that guarantees the honesty of the same, this without can be the best for all those who at any time we can suffer from a dispute.
Some of the problems to be solved by Kleros can range from hiring for jobs via the web, such as page designs, homework services, purchase of basic necessities or of any nature , even online games, everything related to electronic commerce, people can safeguard these operations by making smart contracts, in which case a dispute can be solved by means of Kleros, for cases of another style and magnitudes, the conditions in the intelligent contracts are specified, the greater the complexity of the problem, the greater the caution when proceeding. The automation in dispute resolution can be very helpful for small businesses and also large corporations such as ebay and amazon, since it is practically the selected juries that do all the work, in this way companies are freed from a a lot of problems that can often take time and money, plus this benefit can be reciprocal, given the large number of disputes that may arise in this market, become a job offer that will not be missing for aspiring referees.
The incentive system is key to equity, the reason is simple, the strategy applied is conditioned to achieve an equitable benefit or Schelling point is a focus where participants can be agreement that is the best for all, this leaves as the only option for such purpose to perform a collective and honest work, the attractiveness for the reward leaves aside the selfishness that destroys all kinds of justice and inserts in the juries an almost involuntary confidence or inherent in the action, motivated in part by not losing money when distributing the tokens. One of the use cases can come from our own experience in steemit, since the beginning in this network it is clearly noticed that plagiarism and abuse is well seen, which may incur a bad reputation, however many users have been victims of this infraction.
As a steemit user, I have seen several situations where plagiarism, abuse and identity theft are part of the weak points of the network, although it has not been my experience to be plagiarized (not that I know), other users have suffered from this, in the network there are cleaners who are responsible for flogging these users by marking them with a bad reputation, however it has already been rewarded for content that does not correspond to them, while the real authors are deprived of these benefits, and if possibility of recovering or having access to rewards rather than the complaint, the causes of this may be partly due to the dynamics of the platform, but it would be appropriate to implement a method of justice, which as far as possible could implement economic penalization, for this purpose can see as a good reference Kleros, by means of an association that help to implement a policy of disputes that allows those affected the opportunity to claim the rewards for their work.
It is a live experiment in charge of testing the arbitration technology of Kleros. You can see the detailed information in the following link
Here is a simple explanation of how it works. An image taken from the whitepaper and whose conflict is explained on page 2-3 of the document
@originalworks for Kleros.Kleros2018
klerostwitter
