HISTORIA

The distinction between Reality and Truth

The foundation of HISTORIA rests on an essential philosophical nuance: the distinction between Reality and Truth.

HISTORIA does not claim to capture absolute reality. HISTORIA archives what a collectivity considers true at a given moment: the Truth of the Moment.

Our vision

HISTORIA is a chronology of the evolution of human thought.

By archiving an economic and social consensus at a moment T, the protocol protects each stage of our understanding against forgetting, alteration, or retroactive revisionism.

We are building a system in which:

• truth is verified, not imposed;
• economic alignment encourages honesty;
• epistemological humility is the rule: what we consider true today may become tomorrow a historical curiosity.

Centralized revisionism

Current information systems — collaborative encyclopedias, institutional databases, state archives, private platforms — are mutable. A past truth can be erased, corrected, reformulated, or replaced to fit present interests.

Crisis of trust

The absence of skin in the game in information verification allows:

• manipulation campaigns;
• artificial consensus;
• the use of bots and synthetic identities;
• the diffusion of narratives at no real cost for their authors.

When no risk is associated with taking a position, the value of collective validation collapses.

Loss of historical context

We gradually lose the memory of our own frameworks of thought: what we believed, why we believed it, how our certainties evolved. Without this memory, we sometimes preserve the conclusions, but we lose the history of their formation.

HISTORIA introduces a decentralized consensus protocol designed to archive the truth of a given moment. It relies on:

• a commit–reveal voting mechanism;
• a staking system in SUI;
• an economic redistribution model;
• the immutability provided by the Sui blockchain.

Each submission takes the form of a claim: a clear, contextualized, and categorized statement submitted to collective judgment.

The protocol relies on a hidden-commit vote structured in four phases.

1 · Proposal

A user submits a claim with: a description, a context, a category, a stake in SUI, commit and reveal phase durations, and a cryptographic hash corresponding to their own initial vote. The proposer automatically becomes the first voter.

2 · Commit

During the commit phase, voters submit their stake and a cryptographically sealed vote. The vote is not revealed publicly at this stage — only a hash is recorded on-chain.

The hash is computed as follows:

This ensures that the vote remains invisible, no trend can be observed, and it is not possible to opportunistically follow the majority as it forms.

3 · Reveal

During the reveal phase, voters reveal their vote and their secret. The contract verifies that the revealed data matches the original commitment. Participants who fail to reveal lose their stake.

4 · Resolution

Once the reveal phase is over, any user can trigger the resolution of the event. The protocol determines the final result, the majority side, and the rewards claimable individually.

Winners recover their stake and receive a share of the stakes lost by the losing side. Rewards are claimed individually through a dedicated function.

HISTORIA is implemented in Move on the Sui blockchain.

Object model

The protocol relies on a main shared object, Historia, which contains: the events table, the commits table, the table of already claimed rewards, the global event counter, and the founder address.

Structured data

On-chain events

To allow indexing and frontend reading, the protocol emits:

• EventCreated
• VoteCommitted
• VoteRevealed
• EventFinalized
• RewardClaimed

The current protocol defines: a minimum stake to vote and propose, a maximum description and context length, a minimum duration per phase, a maximum total duration, and a predefined set of categories.

Supported categories

• Science
• Economics
• Politics
• Society
• Technology

Note on current parameters

In the current contract configuration, minimum values are set at a reduced level, in test mode, to facilitate experimentation on Sui. These values should not be considered final. Final parameters depend on deployment context and desired Sybil resistance.

Each participant commits a stake. After the vote: losers lose their stake; winners recover their stake and share the losing pool; non-revealers are penalized; a small fee is taken.

Distribution

In a normal resolution:

• 1% of the losing pool goes to the proposer;
• 1% goes to the founder / protocol;
• the remaining 98% is distributed to winners proportionally.

Special cases

HISTORIA creates a Schelling-game-like environment where the rational strategy is to vote according to what one believes will be the strongest consensus based on available evidence.

The system encourages serious evaluation of claims, anticipation of collective judgment, and avoidance of impulsive voting.

Commit–reveal is essential because: majority cannot be followed, coordination is harder, and vote buying is inefficient. Economic alignment creates epistemic discipline.

Sybil resistance

One wallet = one vote, but each vote costs SUI. Creating many wallets is not free. Resistance is economic, not identity-based.

Vote buying resistance

Commit hides the vote. Bribery cannot be verified before reveal.

Collusion resistance

Votes are hidden during commit. Coordination is difficult.

Immutability

On-chain state is permanent. No retroactive editing. Each event becomes part of collective memory.

Resolution only computes the result. Rewards are claimed later via claim_reward().

This architecture is scalable, modular, safer, and cheaper in gas.

The user should only: read, vote, reveal, claim. Commit–reveal complexity remains hidden.

HISTORIA does not capture Reality. It captures a situated consensus.

• low participation may skew results;
• manipulation is possible but economically costly;
• depends on the quality and diversity of voters;
• majority consensus ≠ absolute truth.

This is intentional. HISTORIA records what a community believes — not what is objectively true.

HISTORIA is not only a technological tool. It is a philosophical infrastructure of memory.

By recording not only statements but the way they are validated, HISTORIA becomes:

• a defense against revisionism;
• an archive of intellectual progress;
• a mirror of human thought;
• a foundation for future understanding.