It's a bit clunky as is, and 1% per month increase may be too fast.

The language should also apply to each ICS blockchain, but for now I think it is safer to experiment with liquid staking on ATOMs. Perhaps the same system described for the Cosmos Hub with ATOMs can be applied individually for each blockchain, but this seems complicated. It may make sense to limit the total amount of staked interchain accounts for ICS to the Liquid Staking Factor.

The powers of the world as represented by the WEF is intent on implementing the mark of the beast. As per the Book of Revelation,

• The nations of the world were deceived by pharmakia/medicine (Revelation 18 23)
• The mark (in original Koine greek, a needle prick) is required to buy or sell (Revelation 13:17)
• The mark gives you sores (Revelation 16:2) // NOTE: have no fear about it even if you got the shot.

How could it be that a two millenia old document can predict what is happening today? Well, most people don't read the bible at all, and anyone can see the light and turn into a white-hat. It appears to me that the white-hats have shepherded the black-hats into following a script that ends up exposes them when it is too late. And now the "true Christians" have indeed exposed the NWO agenda, and this awareness is growing exponentially.

This control grid was leaked by whistleblower Senator Larry McDonald in the 70's, whose plane was soon after shot down. (highly censored https://twitter.com/Xx17965797N/status/1578662395358384128?s=20&t=MrwxzKymkKv6ehdfhvKlAA) . The "monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means" was leaked before by JFK who was assassinated in 1963. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhkjYJAHCjM . Now we have experienced the NWO control grid by the WEF, and its young global leaders, such as Fauci, Gates, Gavin Newsom, Trudeau; and even experiencing the war between Zelenski and Putin. The WEF, whose leader Schwab boasted about having infiltrated government cabinets, also wants us to "own nothing and be happy". If it isn't clear enough, their logo even includes a subtle 666.

The fact of the matter is, we probably do want some regulatory system to deal with large scale theft of coins resulting from bugs or human error/malice. Even if such a regulatory system is not imposed upon any zones, zones may want to voluntarily adopt some kind of regulatory policy. And zones probably want to enforce these policies across zones that choose to adopt the same policies.

It follows, that in a minimal system, zones should be allowed to choose their own set of regulatory policies, and the Hub can help enforce these policies when it comes to IBC transfers across zones, or from hub to zone. From the perspective of the Hub, this is still a permissionless, voluntary system.

When it comes to transactions on the hub, and transactions from zones to the hub, we should adopt the most minimal regulatory system. We could arguably do nothing--until it is too late, and we learn our lesson that we need something in the case of large scale theft from malice or bugs. The minimal nonzero policy we can adopt, is to enable one or more bonded DAOs to designate one or more addresses as being affected, with full justification, to temporarily freeze those coins, where the coins will unfreeze automatically until the hub's governance votes to act upon the frozen coins or to freeze the coins for longer to determine the facts. Something along these lines is a minimal regulatory system. Also, it is probably sensible for the hub to implement a kind of delayed transfer system, so that accounts with large token amounts can be protected by this regulatory system in the case of theft. Perhaps accounts can opt out of this transfer-delay protection.

The above minimal regulatory system still begs for a full system of checks and balances. That's another rabbit hole for another issue/document. The ATOM1 constitution hints at a system of checks and balances, but IMO it isn't complete yet, at least not in its current written form.

The challenge is to (a) further refine and minimize the aforementioned hub internal regulatory policy, and (b) to define the inter-zone permissionless regulatory framework. With these implemented, the hub can ensure the rights to property, protect property in the case of theft, and allow zones to permissionlessly set their own policies. This is a critical architecture/constitutional/regulatory problem we should be discussing today. Until it is implemented, IMO crypto will not be ready for the general population.

The problem is, getting this wrong is significantly worse than not implementing it. When done wrong, either it will become destructive (tokens being frozen/stolen by the regulatory system), or it will become abusive (think 1984 global ************ as per the NWO agenda, followed by global human depopulation). It follows that the Cosmos Hub should not implement a regulatory framework such that it can allow the permission innovation and proofing of regulatory frameworks over time. This best increases the chances of success in designing the right regulatory framework.

A Rule should be added to the constitution to succinctly represent the above paragraph.

This is safer for PHOTON users who want to unbond to ATOMs to protect against governance takeover.
When the PHOTON -> ATOM unbonding extension hits, more users will want to unbond, possibly creating a cascade.
The sudden creation of free ATOMs will spook the markets, whereas if it becomes bonded ATOMs, this is less of an issue.

Through discussions with Seb and Brian on the interop, came to the rightful conclusion that the simple ICS implementation with ATOM bonding should be supported alongside the PHOTON ICS system.

The quorum should probably just use ATOM tokens per usual.
The total votes tallied can use ATOM + PHOTON (with the whole of PHOTONs being at most 50% of voting power).

When 1/3 are involved in double signing or a complex attack, how much they are slashed should depend on factors.
The main factor should be whether there was a bug/exploit involved. Even so, they should be slashed.
If the attack was intentional, then they should be slashed 100%. If not, they should be slashed some factor of 100%.

When ATOMs are burned via stake slashing, the ATOMs bonded under PHOTONs get slashed pro-rata as explained in the constitution.
When PHOTONs are burned via ICS2 slashing, or even tx fee burn, I believe they can simply burn and disappear, making the ATOM tokens more valuable in comparison. In other words, the invariant that there will always be 1 billion PHOTONs can always be preserved, for as long as there is one iota of an ATOM.

Current version it clear what base value PHOTONs have, but still doesn't address the slippery slope mentioned in the commentary. That is, it is still easy for whales to launch a hostile takeover of the Cosmos Hub.

Suggestion to define ATOM vs Photons in the Part 0 Definition section.

Chinese: mirror.xyz/0xshushu.eth
Korean: (see PR)