Gauvin Publications

Publications (Marc Gauvin):

www.bibocurrency.com 2009-2015

Background Foundation

Methodology

Defining Money

Miscellaneous Articles

Spanish

Digital Media Value Chains and Ontology (2004-2010)

– Marc Gauvin (sDae), Jaime Delgado (UPF), Roberto Garcia (UPF), Eva Rodriguez (UPF) ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 Issues Regarding the Practical Implementation of the RDD April 2005, Busan, KR

– Marc Gauvin (sDae), Roberto García (DMAG-UPF), Jaime Delgado (DMAG-UPF), Eva Rodríguez (DMAG-UPF), Report Preliminary Results of RDD Core Experiment CE for Expressing “Work”ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 MPEG2005/ M12511 October 2005, Nice, FR

– Marc Gauvin, Oil Depletion, Energy Waste, Debt and Capital Production, Association for the Study of Peak Oil Newsletter, June 2005

Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado. Value Chain Ontologies for Intellectual Property Management September 2006. Europe-China Conference on Intellectual Property in Digital Media October 2006

– Marc Gauvin. Interoperable DRM & Content Business Modeling. Europe-China Conference on Intellectual Property in Digital Media October 2006

– Marc Gauvin BIBOCURRENCY. The Science of Stability Applied to Money Systems February 17, 2011 (Self published book online at: http://www.bibocurrency.com/index.php/downloads/downloads (english). Spanish translation:

– Víctor Rodríguez (DMAG-UPC), Jaime Delgado (DMAG-UPC), Marc Gauvin (SDAE) ISO/IEC 21000-10 Media Value Chain Ontology Reference Software Requirements April 2010

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel, and Miran Choi (editors). First Draft International Standard of ISO/IEC 21000-19 Media Value Chain Ontology. Technical report, Output document N11146 in tI amO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, Moving Picture Experts Group, January 2010.

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, Víctor Rodríguez , and Miran Choi (editors). Final Committee Draft of ISO/IEC 21000-19Media Value Chain Ontology. Technical report, Output document N10768 in tI amO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, Moving Picture Experts Group, July 2009.

– Sergio Dominguez and Marc Gauvin. Formal Stability Analysis of Common Lending Practices and Consequences of Chronic Currency Devaluation May 2009 (http://www.bibocurrency.com/images/pdfdownloads/Formal%20Stability%20Analysis%20and%20experiment%20(final)%20rev%203.4.pdf )

– Víctor Torres, Jaime Delgado, Xavier Maroñas, Silvia Llorente, Marc Gauvin: Enhancing Rights Management Systems through the Development of Trusted Value Networks. WOSIS 2009: 26-35 May 2009

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel, and Miran Choi (editors). Final Committee Draft of ISO/IEC 21000-19 Media Value Chain Ontology. Technical report, Output document N10455 in tI amO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, Moving Picture Experts Group, February 2009.

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel, and Miran Choi (editors). Committee Draft of ISO/IEC 21000-19 Media Value Chain Ontology. Technical report, Output document N10264

in tI amO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, Moving Picture Experts Group, October 2008.

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel, and Miran Choi (editors). Working Draft of ISO/IEC 21000-19 Media Value Chain Ontology. Technical report, Output document N10070 in the

ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, Moving Picture Experts Group, July 2008.

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, and Victor Rodriguez. Ontology for IP Media Networks: A response to the MVCO CfP. Input document M15631 for tI amO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, July 2008.

– Marc Gauvin, Challenges for IP Management as Represented & Communicated Digitally. Submission to WIPO “Foro sobre derechos de autor, industrias creativas y políticas públicas”Mexico City August 2007

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, Eva Rodríguez, and Víctor Rodríguez Doncel. Requirements for a machine readable rights ontology.Technical report, Input document M14707 for ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, Moving Picture Experts Group, July 2007.

– Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel, Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado: An Ontology for the Expression of Intellectual Property Entities and Relations. WOSIS 2007: 196-203 June 2007.

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, and Victor Rodriguez. Proposed RRD Text for Approved Document No 3 – Technical Specification: Interoperable DRM Platform, ver. 2.1. Technical report, The Digital Media Project, March 2007.

– Marc Gauvin and Victor Rodriguez. Proposed RRD Requirements.Technical report, The Digital Media Project, January 2007.

– Víctor Rodríguez, Marc Gauvin, and Jaime Delgado. An ontology for the expression of intellectual property entities and relations. In 5th International Workshop on Security in Information Systems (WOSIS), June 2007.

– Marc Gauvin, Jaime Delgado, Víctor Rodríguez, and Eva Rodríguez. OWL Ontology to Represent the DMP Creation Model. Technical report, The Digital Media Project, October 2006.
– Marc Gauvin and Jaime Delgado. Value Chain Ontologies for Intellectual Property Objects. Europe-China Conference on Intellectual Property in Digital Media October October 2006

– Marc Gauvin, Eva Rodríguez (DMAG-UPF), Jaime Delgado (DMAG-UPF) MPEG 21 RDD spec vs MPEG 21 RDD versus 21000-1 (2nd edition) terms and definitions. Input document m11556 ISO/IEC/SC29/WG11. Hong Kong January 2005.

– Marc Gauvin (sDae, Spain), Mélanie Dulong de Rosnay (Medialive, France) The Notion of Underlying Work within MPEG-21, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 11 input document M10616 Munich, April 2004

Materialism vs Idealism

Materialism vs Idealism

By Marc Gauvin

Copyright ⓒ April 3 2016


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfHitaYNZas

Basically, the above video "Sim Theory We May Be In The Matrix" questions the premise labelled as "materialism" that there exists a fundamental nature of "physical matter" that is what determines everything in our universe including consciousness. This premise is contrasted with "idealism" that postulates the existence of an intelligent realm of "ideas" that is what defines our "material reality" and that does not depend on it for it to exist. Hence and from the perspective of our material universe, such a realm appears as the "immaterial" source of "everything". This latter view, is what is referred to as the "sim theory" referring to our reality being the work of some realm external or at least independent to our material world. 

The strongest scientific evidence referenced for the idealist point of view over the materialist view, consists of:

1) The double slit experiment and subsequent variations of it, where it is conclusively proven that rather than behaviour of "matter" being a function of its properties e.g. particle or wave, behaviour of matter is determined by a set of rules only relevant to consciousness. That is, if there is no conscious perception, then matter and its behaviour remains indeterminable within a probability distribution, while the moment consciousness "perceives" or becomes aware of matter, then matter displays a concrete behaviour within a predetermined range of rules of behaviour. 

2) The fact that,  certain phenomenon that has also been shown to exist experimentally, such as entanglement,  cannot be explained without resorting to the sim theory. Specifically, two entangled particles separated by any distance no matter how far, can only synchronise if and only if what governs them is independent of time and space i.e. a simulator that although is responsible for generating the simulation (our reality), has no need for its existence to also be of what it simulates.  Also such it is equidistant to any two points in the system no matter how distant these are between themselves.

These are truly compelling arguments that seem to prove that our universe is governed first and foremost by a rule set that defines matter rather than any independent nature of matter itself. The medium or common denominator between our "creator" and our "physical" universe, appears to be consciousness also stored outside of our "simulated" universe. This idea in part is what prompted contemplating "The Wrath of Certain Eternity Rev. 2 (matter, consciousness and eternity)".

The Best Way To Imprison

The Most Terrible Prison

Is That Which We Build On Our Own Out of

Fear and Ignorance.

Break out of  "The Money PSYOP" and give your kids a future they can be proud of you for. 

www.bibocurrency.com

 

Central Bank Control, Reality or Chimera?

Central Bank Control, Reality or Chimera?

By Marc Gauvin (c) 3/1/2015

Reproduction expressly granted provided attribution and original link are given.

"...It is like insisting on building buses out of ice and then inventing a pseudo science based on ignoring that ice melts..."


A friend wrote:  "My understanding has been, for decades, that fiat is created as a ledger entry with a debt (obligation to repay) securing it as collateral..."

The ledger entry is secured by collateral e.g. your house, business, shares, future earnings (in some cases), deposits, etc.. So it is not "created out of thin air" but rather it is created on the bases of a notion of prior value, the Bank of England explains it well here in "Money Creation in the Modern economy"

Thus, the problem is not the money creation model, i.e. where money is a measure of assets transacted that already exist, which is correct.  The problem is the conceptual framework where:

1) Money is considered itself as an asset or collateral on par with real goods and services.

2) Money is made more or less scarce by central control of creation.

Now, 2) above is required in order to make 1) appear to be true when otherwise it would be false.  But point 1) above, breaks the direct lien between real material wealth and its valuation in terms of a common unit. Also, by making money scarce (point 2)),  the door is opened to making the unit value increase as an unbounded mathematical function by increasing scarcity of money.  This leads to rationalising charging for access to value representation (money) which then introduces equally unbounded devaluation.  Thus, by introducing the false premises 1) and 2), money is made unstable as both unit value increase and devaluation subsequently destabilise society and the economy, because both being unbounded in nature, actions exogenous to the money system proper are required to counter act and compensate. 

This, in a completely circular fashion, creates a requirement for control that otherwise would not be.  But, if money is itself unstable, it cannot itself be used to control,  which is why Central Bank Control is a fallacy.  But more alarming,  is the fact that since money control is an underlying cause of instability it cannot 'control' anything, leading to governments desperately attempting to control the economy through manipulating human behaviour,  but no amount of such manipulation is sufficient if the the source of instability through money is not addressed first! 

Since the political class and economics as it is taught today, have no clue about control and stability science it remains unaware of the fact that controlling human activity will not resolve the instability caused by money control and that is why,  they relentlessly continue to propose the manipulation of human activity to greater and greater extremes but ultimately to no avail.

What is worse, is that without knowing it,  the control and restrictions applied on humans disable  adaptability to a changing natural environment.   This creates a vicious cycle of increased suppression and abuse, without ever addressing the root instability of money.  Meanwhile, the banking sector benefits on the short term,  by keeping the political class convinced that their false 'control' is more and more essential to society when in reality it is a massive and deadly chimera.

Endogenous vs Exogenous Value Accounting

It is very important that people realise the difference between tokens as tradable value and tokens as value accounting, these two notions are often confused but can be proven to be separate following this simple logical proof.  The intrinsic value of a token, cannot represent the value of other things, only its own value.  Thus, when we account for value, we cannot consider the value of the token, that is whether we write a cheque for $100 on a piece of ordinary paper or on a more expensive paper, the value of the cheque remains still just $100.  Thus, the value of intrinsically worthless tokens limits their function to accounting of exogenous value (value other than that of the tokens), while the value of valuable tokens can only represent their own endogenous value or risk forsaking it,  thus limiting their function to that of barter exchange.

Tokens can be used as accounting only without the implication of intrinsic value. This useful for recording trade anonymously and for illiterate populations that are able to count.

The confusion between the exogenous and endogenous value of tokens is fundamental to The Money PSYOP because only by such confusion, can we be led to believe that a practically worthless support for annotating exogenous value possesses itself the value being annotated endogenously.  More importantly, only through such confusion, can the true value being represented be arbitrarily devalued as a function of the market value of a worthless token.

Break out of  "The Money PSYOP" and give your kids

a future they can be proud of you for.

 

Alan's recent friendship request

Screen_shot_2014-11-06_at_1.03.07_PM.png

Additional information