|
| 1 | +Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Epistemic |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +So there I was, minding my own business, when someone handed me a document titled "Architecture, Governance, and Application to AML, Fraud, and Global Civicsystems." Forty. Pages. Long. |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +Did I cry? Maybe a little. |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +Did I read it? Unfortunately, yes. |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +Did I understand it? That's... debatable. |
| 10 | + |
| 11 | +But here's the thing: buried beneath all the SHA-256 hashes, Merkle-batched storage, and M-of-N quorum protocols, there's actually a pretty interesting idea. And because misery loves company, I'm going to explain it to you using significantly fewer acronyms and significantly more Dad jokes. |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +\#\# The Problem: Everyone's Terrible at Crime Prevention |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +Remember that scene in every heist movie where the alarm goes off AFTER the thieves have already escaped with the money? That's basically how modern financial crime prevention works. |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +Current systems are like having a security guard who only shows up the day after the robbery, looks at the empty vault, and goes, "Yep, definitely got robbed. I'll file a report." |
| 18 | + |
| 19 | +The document opens with the cheerful news that "less than 1% of global illicit financial flows are detected." Which means 99% of financial crime is out there having a great time, probably at a beach somewhere, drinking margaritas made with money that should be in your pension fund. |
| 20 | + |
| 21 | +The WHO estimates that falsified medical products cost $30.5 billion annually. The FDA is dealing with an "alarming trend" of fake clinical trial data. And my personal favorite: criminals are using something called "Trade-Based Money Laundering" where they just... lie about invoice prices. Revolutionary\! |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +\*Criminal mastermind\*: "This shipment of widgets? Worth $5 million." |
| 24 | +\*Customs\*: "The bill of lading says $50,000." |
| 25 | +\*Criminal mastermind\*: "Did I stutter?" |
| 26 | +\*Current system\*: \*files report six months later\* |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +\#\# Enter: Ternary Logic (The Hero We Deserve) |
| 29 | + |
| 30 | +Here's where things get interesting. You know how computers think in binary? Yes or no, 1 or 0, approve or reject? |
| 31 | + |
| 32 | +Well, some brilliant person looked at that and said, "What if we added a third option?" |
| 33 | + |
| 34 | +That option is called the \*\*Epistemic Hold\*\*, which sounds like a yoga position but is actually just a fancy way of saying "Wait, hold up, something's weird here." |
| 35 | + |
| 36 | +Instead of just \*\*+1\*\* (proceed) or \*\*-1\*\* (halt), we now have \*\*0\*\* (um, can a human look at this please?). |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | +It's like adding "maybe" to your decision-making vocabulary. Groundbreaking stuff. |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | +\#\# How It Actually Works (Without the Headache) |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +Imagine you're trying to transfer a suspicious amount of money. Here's what happens: |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | +\*\*Traditional system:\*\* |
| 45 | +\- Alarm goes \*bing\* |
| 46 | +\- Gets added to a queue of 10,000 other \*bings\* |
| 47 | +\- Analyst looks at it three days later |
| 48 | +\- Money is already in the Cayman Islands |
| 49 | +\- Everyone shrugs |
| 50 | + |
| 51 | +\*\*Ternary Logic system:\*\* |
| 52 | +\- Multiple red flags detected simultaneously (new device \+ new IP \+ max transfer amount \+ sketchy beneficiary) |
| 53 | +\- Transaction goes into \*\*Epistemic Hold\*\* (State 0\) |
| 54 | +\- System immediately challenges you: "Hey, is this really you?" |
| 55 | +\- You fail the challenge because you're a fraudster |
| 56 | +\- Transaction goes to State \-1 (NOPE) |
| 57 | +\- Account freezes |
| 58 | +\- Crime is actually prevented |
| 59 | +\- A single tear rolls down Batman's cheek |
| 60 | + |
| 61 | +\#\# The Goukassian Principle (Yes, That's Really What It's Called) |
| 62 | + |
| 63 | +This is where the document introduces what I can only assume is someone's name attached to a principle, which consists of three parts: |
| 64 | + |
| 65 | +1\. \*\*The Signature\*\* ✍️ \- Your cryptographic "I was here" tag |
| 66 | +2\. \*\*The Lantern\*\* 🏮 \- Your reputation score (think Uber ratings, but for not committing fraud) |
| 67 | +3\. \*\*The License\*\* 📜 \- Your permission to play in the sandbox |
| 68 | + |
| 69 | +The genius part? If you falsify data or approve sketchy stuff, your digital signature is permanently attached to that decision. It's like signing your name to your crimes in permanent marker. On a blockchain. That everyone can see. Forever. |
| 70 | + |
| 71 | +\*Corrupt official\*: "I'll just approve this fake invoice and—" |
| 72 | +\*System\*: "Cool, we've cryptographically bound your identity to that decision for eternity." |
| 73 | +\*Corrupt official\*: "...I've made a huge mistake." |
| 74 | + |
| 75 | +\#\# The Privacy Paradox Solution |
| 76 | + |
| 77 | +Now, you might be thinking: "Wait, if everything's on a permanent ledger, what about privacy?" |
| 78 | + |
| 79 | +The document's solution is actually clever. They don't put your actual data on the blockchain. They put a \*hash\* of your data—basically a unique fingerprint. It's like taking a photo of your house but only storing the barcode. |
| 80 | + |
| 81 | +The real data stays in a secure, encrypted database where it can be deleted if you ask nicely (looking at you, GDPR). The hash stays on the blockchain as proof that something existed. It's "verifiable opacity," which sounds like something you'd say after too many drinks at a tech conference. |
| 82 | + |
| 83 | +\#\# Real-World Scenarios (Now With More Drama) |
| 84 | + |
| 85 | +The document includes several exciting scenarios: |
| 86 | + |
| 87 | +\*\*Trade-Based Money Laundering:\*\* |
| 88 | +\- Invoice says widgets cost $5 million |
| 89 | +\- Customs says widgets actually cost $50,000 |
| 90 | +\- System: "That's a 100x price difference, which is... suspicious" |
| 91 | +\- State 0 (Hold) |
| 92 | +\- Human investigator: "Yeah, that's money laundering" |
| 93 | +\- State \-1 (Busted) |
| 94 | + |
| 95 | +\*\*Medical Device Approval Fraud:\*\* |
| 96 | +\- Lab submits clinical trial data |
| 97 | +\- AI oracle notices all the test results are suspiciously identical |
| 98 | +\- System: "Did you just copy-paste the same results 50 times?" |
| 99 | +\- State 0 (Hold) |
| 100 | +\- Regulator investigates |
| 101 | +\- Lab's license gets revoked |
| 102 | +\- Patients don't die from fake medical devices |
| 103 | +\- Everyone lives happily ever after |
| 104 | + |
| 105 | +\#\# The Governance Model (AKA "Nobody Gets to Be Emperor") |
| 106 | + |
| 107 | +Here's my favorite part: the system is designed so no single entity can control it. It's got: |
| 108 | + |
| 109 | +\- \*\*Technical Council\*\* \- The nerds who keep it running |
| 110 | +\- \*\*Stewardship Custodians\*\* \- The wise elders who make judgment calls |
| 111 | +\- \*\*Smart Contracts\*\* \- The robots who enforce the rules |
| 112 | + |
| 113 | +To sabotage the system, you'd need to corrupt all three groups simultaneously. It's like Ocean's Eleven, but for doing bad things, which is just called "crime." |
| 114 | + |
| 115 | +The document proudly states this provides a "resilience guarantee." Translation: "Good luck trying to shut this down, corrupt governments of the world." |
| 116 | + |
| 117 | +\#\# The Part Where I Got Lost |
| 118 | + |
| 119 | +Around page 28, the document started talking about "Ephemeral Recovery Keys" and "M-of-N Shamir's Secret Sharing" and I just... my brain went to State 0\. |
| 120 | + |
| 121 | +But basically, if law enforcement needs access to encrypted data, they need approval from multiple independent custodians. No backdoors. No single point of failure. Just a lot of important people who have to agree that yes, this warrant is legitimate. |
| 122 | + |
| 123 | +It's democracy, but for decryption keys. |
| 124 | + |
| 125 | +\#\# The Bottom Line |
| 126 | + |
| 127 | +After 40 pages, countless acronyms, and several existential crises, here's what Ternary Logic boils down to: |
| 128 | + |
| 129 | +1\. Add a "maybe" option to computers |
| 130 | +2\. Make everyone sign their work |
| 131 | +3\. Store proof, not data |
| 132 | +4\. Force humans to review suspicious stuff \*before\* it's too late |
| 133 | +5\. Build in governance so no one can be a supervillain |
| 134 | + |
| 135 | +Will it solve all financial crime? Probably not—criminals are creative. |
| 136 | + |
| 137 | +Will it solve \*some\* financial crime? Maybe\! (State 0, if you will.) |
| 138 | + |
| 139 | +Is it better than the current system of "shrug and file a report after the money's gone"? Almost certainly. |
| 140 | + |
| 141 | +Would I read another 40-page technical document about it? \*\*State \-1. Hard pass.\*\* |
| 142 | + |
| 143 | +\--- |
| 144 | + |
| 145 | +\*The author is neither a cryptographer, a compliance expert, nor particularly good at understanding technical documentation. He is, however, excellent at procrastination and writing Medium articles instead of doing actual work. The Lantern score for this article is TBD.\* |
| 146 | + |
| 147 | +*If you enjoyed this summary and would like to read the actual 40-page document, please seek professional help. Or just hit that clap button. Both are valid responses.* |
0 commit comments