[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

And this escalated the need for multilateral usage of fiat currency. The creditor may want to sell some fraction of the bond certificate while keeping the rest of it. When the creditor was a bank, they issued banknotes.

So far, we have reconstructed the evolution of money based on logical necessity, driven by efficiency, which is a universal instrumental goal. I've mentioned before that there are two types of improvement, i. e. generalization and specialization. They are simply adding necessary functions and removing unnecessary functions, respectively.

In evolutionary biology, those steps are done by mutation and natural selection. Random mutation provides the beneficial genetic codes, along with other useless and even detrimental genes. Natural selection then removes some of those non-beneficial genes.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Here is how money supposed to work.
Someone got resources more than what they need.
Someone else got resources less than what they need, but are expected to produce more resources if they are helped to fulfill their current need.
The first one gives resources to the second one, with the promise of getting return in the future. The first is called creditor, while the second is called debtor. The money represents the promise.

When one or more of those conditions above are not fulfilled, the money system won't work effectively.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

When one or more of those conditions above are not fulfilled, the money system won't work effectively.

In the case where no one has resources more than what they need, nothing we can do with money to make the situation better. To make money useful, we can create more resources.
Alternatively, we can reduce the consumption. In this case, it means killing someone who would consume resources. 

Both solutions may bring unwanted consequences. In the first case, we might see environmental impacts such as air pollution. The second case could bring retaliation, war, and chaos in the society. Moral rules and laws are supposed to be the solution.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Someone else got resources less than what they need, but are expected to produce more resources if they are helped to fulfill their current need.

If everyone has all the resources they need, money becomes useless.   We may want to distinguish between need and want. But their differences don't seem to be a clear cut. It's sometimes only about priorities and taste.
What we want is simply what we need to fulfill our desires. Do we need/want to drink more water? Eat more food?
Do we need/want to have a house? car? smartphone? children?
Do we need/want to live healthier? longer? peacefully?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

We may want to distinguish between need and want. But their differences don't seem to be clear cut. It's sometimes only about priorities and taste.

Someone may put the threshold for the need at bare minimum to survive, such as tolerable level of oxygen concentration, ambient temperature and pressure, gravitational, electric, and magnetic field. Someone else may include the requirements for longer periods of life, such as water, food, clothing, and shelters.
We may include things with less immediate impact to our lives, or those that are less life threatening. Do we need to have pleasure? Do we need to get happiness? Do we need to avoid pain and suffering?
But we may also ask the question in the other direction. Do we need to stay alive? Do we need to  avoid death and extinction?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Do we need to have pleasure? Do we need to get happiness? Do we need to avoid pain and suffering?
But we may also ask the question in the other direction. Do we need to stay alive? Do we need to  avoid death and extinction?

We can't answer those questions until we determine our terminal goal. What we need are those required to achieve our goals. Without them, it would be impossible to achieve our goals.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The first one gives resources to the second one, with the promise of getting return in the future. The first is called creditor, while the second is called debtor. The money represents the promise.

That's basically how any form of money work, from commodity money, fiat money, e-money, to crypto currency.
The success of monetary system relies on the assumptions that the participants keep their promises. The debtors can break their promises by not returning the resources as much value as they've promised. The creditors can break their promises by taking back more resources than the promised amount, or before the due date.
The system can also break down due to corrupted records of the promises. It can happen through random natural process or deliberately by a third party.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Someone else got resources less than what they need, but are expected to produce more resources if they are helped to fulfill their current need.

It's expected that we can get more resources from the production process in the future than what's put into it now. The more resources we put into the process, the more resources we'll get in the future.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The money represents the promise.

Printing more money simply means making more promises. It's not necessarily bad, as long as the promises can be kept.
Making new promises by printing new money may motivate people to produce more resources. It also motivates to find a way to produce more than currently possible, i.e. it promotes innovation.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Money enabled investment, which accelerated innovation. Without it, innovators would have to accumulate enough resources first before they can start to build their innovations.
With functional money, people with useful ideas don't have to be the same person as the people with necessary resources.  It makes innovations can happen more frequently.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Innovation is closely related to intellectual property, which is protected by patent. It usually involves research which consist of a lot of uncertainty. There is a risk that the money we put into it is lost due to failed research, or our competitors find a better alternative in terms of quality, price, or timing.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Innovation is a risky business. It can give extremely high return, but it can also crash in failure. They can be shared between the investors and inventors or innovators, equally or not. When the inventors are very confident with their inventions, they can take all the risk in the hope of maximum benefits by taking a loan with fixed interest rate. On the other hand, When the investors are very confident with their investments, they can buy the invention for a fixed price. The risk can also be shared between them. So do the potential benefits. The portion of the share is determined by the deal between them.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Investment in invention and innovation may sound like gambling. But there's one crucial difference. Gambling is a zero sum game. Someone's profit comes from the loss of someone else, and no net benefit to the society as a whole.
Some may argue that even inventions can also cause loss to someone else, namely competitors who use older technologies. But the benefit for the society outweighs the loss. Besides, those competitors who lost their business could use their resources for something else that's more profitable.

[charles1948]

Investment in invention and innovation may sound like gambling. But there's one crucial difference. Gambling is a zero sum game. Someone's profit comes from the loss of someone else, and no net benefit to the society as a whole.

But, if gambling is a zero sum-game, why do some people set up betting shops, and casinos, to make customers come in to gamble?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Investment in invention and innovation may sound like gambling. But there's one crucial difference. Gambling is a zero sum game. Someone's profit comes from the loss of someone else, and no net benefit to the society as a whole.

But, if gambling is a zero sum-game, why do some people set up betting shops, and casinos, to make customers come in to gamble?

Humans evolved to love winning games. Consistently losing in competitions is detrimental. Winning games activates reward function of neurotransmitters. Those casinos provides a way to "help" some humans to get those good feelings easily. It's similar to smoking weed, surfing, hiking, jogging, swimming, playing video games, board games, etc. Some people feels more excitement and enthusiastic when the game involve real risk, such as extreme sports and gambling.They don't give direct benefits to the society. Although some of them may provide indirect benefit, by giving emotional boost and replenishing mental health. But gambling are known to cause psychological stress to its participants, especially when they lose, which is expected by laws of probability.
The actual impact of winning and losing in gambling depends on each individual's responses which are affected by many factors, such as genetic, education, ideology, physical and psychological fitness, etc. Some of them can control themselves and the negative impacts of losing in gambling can be well mitigated. But this kind of persons may well get positive impacts of gambling such as emotional excitement of winning, without even doing the gamble. It reduces the attraction of gambling and tips the balance of cost and benefit towards detrimental side in the perspective of societies. 
As long as there are enough people with excess wealth who don't mind losing in gambling just to get the excitement, opening casino or betting shop can be a profitable business.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Innovation is a risky business. It can give extremely high return, but it can also crash in failure. They can be shared between the investors and inventors or innovators, equally or not. When the inventors are very confident with their inventions, they can take all the risk in the hope of maximum benefits by taking a loan with fixed interest rate. On the other hand, When the investors are very confident with their investments, they can buy the invention for a fixed price. The risk can also be shared between them. So do the potential benefits. The portion of the share is determined by the deal between them.

New investors can buy portions of shares from initial investors or company founders. It will dillute the share ownerships of the initial investors while accumulating resources to grow the company so it can increase the benefits of the invention or innovation.
In a sense, owning money is similar to owning shares of a company. When new money is created, the value held by existing money owners is dilluted accordingly. So, when a government of a country print more money in local currency, the real quantity of resources don't change. It means that the portion of money own by the government increases, which comes from decreasing the portion of money owned by other parties, including foreign governments and corporations.
US Dollar has special place in international economy on earth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_dollar#Use_as_international_reserve_currency
https://english.pravda.ru/business/114921-us_dollar/

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The complexity of financial system can be used/misused to benefit oneself by sacrificing others without net benefit to the whole society.
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2013/12/09/three-ways-super-rich-suck-wealth-out-rest-us

This is not a matter of productive people benefiting from their contributions to society. This is a relatively small number of people extracting massive amounts of money through the financial system for accomplishing almost nothing.

They Create Imaginary Money That Turns Real

The world's wealth has doubled in a little over ten years. The financial industry has, in effect, created a whole new share of global wealth and redistributed much of it to itself.

In the U.S., financial sector profits as a percentage of corporate profits have been rising steadily over the past 30 years. The speculative, non-productive, and fee-generating derivatives market has increased to an unfathomable level of over $1 quadrillion -- a thousand trillion dollars, twenty times more than the world economy.

It reminds me of the sh1t eating economists joke.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The complexity of financial system can be used/misused to benefit oneself by sacrificing others without net benefit to the whole society.

There are some money related actions that are outright crimes, such as heist, robbery, theft, extortion, fraud. The victims can be easily identified, and feel the direct impact.
Some other crimes are less obvious, such as counterfeiting money, money laundering, price gouging, bribery. Some even on the border line of legal actions, such as donating/lobbying to corrupt politicians/law makers, insider trading and market manipulation.
When the victims are not easily identified, it usually means that the loss are distributed among many victims at once, hence each victim don't feel being harmed that much. In the case of money counterfeiting, assuming that the counterfeit money is indistinguishable from the real/original money, the victims are all other owners of the real/original money in the form of reducing its value. Usually the quantity of counterfeit money is much less than the real one, thus the value reduction is insignificant. But when it grows larger, the impact can be devastating to the economy.

https://www.epi.org/publication/pay-corporate-executives-financial-professionals/

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

These videos describe the alignment between base and mesa objectives, which are basically the same as terminal and instrumental goals, respectively.

The OTHER AI Alignment Problem: Mesa-Optimizers and Inner Alignment

Deceptive Misaligned Mesa-Optimisers? It's More Likely Than You Think...

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

By definition, universal terminal goal must be viewed from the perspective of the last conscious being in the end of time. Currently, we don't know for sure if it's finite.
A conscious being who has no time left can't do anything meaningful. It can no longer make a plan, or choose actions to get the best possible outcomes.
It would be preferable if we can have the perspective of that last conscious being while preserving time, which is one of the most valuable resources. This can be done by building a virtual universe which would be continuously improved in accuracy and precision. It would make us closer to becoming a Laplace demon level conscious entity which can see events further in time and eliminate surprises.
Knowing how the future would be before being there, by simulating it with adequately accurate model is comparable to knowing the mass, size, temperature, and composition of a star without having to travel light years away.