Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Colony: A platform for open organizations

colony.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 181 posts

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#161

Post by nate_martin »

This looks really cool, but I'm a little bit confused about why this needs to be decentralized. You could theoretically just implement this network as a saas instead of on top of a blockchain. You could even still do all the financials with ether but just maintain the state on servers somewhere.

The big fear I have is immutability of blockchain data in the case that something goes horribly wrong. If there's a problem with the ethereum core protocol, solidity compiler, wallet software, colony contracts you could lose everything. Vitalik already said that there probably wouldn't be anymore hard forks.

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#162

Post by AgentME »

macandcheese wrote: post #147

Genuinely curious, how would this affect the way we work differently than, say, a SaaS product that powers decision making at an organization with voting / assignment of tasks. What is the inherent advantage to using Ethereum to power this? I'm not _trying_ to be cynical, I just struggle to see how this is anything more than shoehorning a new technology into an existing product / space. Not saying it's not cool or th…

Using Ethereum means that everyone can agree on the state of the system without needing to place trust in any central authorities. You don't have to trust whoever is running the service to not accidentally or maliciously change the data or force a change in the software. You don't have to worry about the service going down (business says they're pivoting / gets bought out) and arguments about multiple different members setting up new accounts at different services claiming theirs is the true one that everyone should use (putting that member effectively in charge). The Ethereum blockchain provides a durable recording of the organization state.

I'm not familiar with Colony at all, but if the above are possible concerns -- that you need durable consensus between individuals without enshrining any of them as fully trusted -- and especially if you want to manage money/value too -- then using Ethereum is a good fit.

I agree that blockchains seem to be a buzzword that are shoehorned more than necessary, but depending on Colony's goals then they may be the actual target market for Ethereum.

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#163

Post by marssaxman »

I love the concept, and the principles driving it feel both good and familiar, so I hope humans do eventually learn how to build organizations like these.

This particular attempt feels impossibly utopian. I don't believe that we can simply jump into the destination we'd like to achieve all at once; we need to work up to it, building all the social technologies of organization, communication, and knowledge transfer which have to exist in order to support a complex group effort.

I'm glad they're working on it, though. I hope that something valuable will be learned in the process, and that it'll help incrementally move us toward a world where we can manage our society more humanely, organizing ourselves collectively and voluntarily by default.

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#164

Post by vertex-four »

Kiro wrote: post #77
vertex-four wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A protocol token can actually be used to do something.

What is it then? How does it differ from regular tokens, from a technical point of view?

There is some program in existence which uses the tokens to fund or incentivise actually performing some useful action.

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#165

Post by heroprotagonist »

AgentME wrote: post #160
heroprotagonist wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was exactly the same. I read this comment, then went back and looked again and saw: > One organization should not be beholden to, or have to trust another, in order to confidently conduct their business. > > That’s why the Colony protocol is built as open source smart contracts on the Ethereum network. In one breath, "We shouldn't have to trust any other organization" and then immediately after it's "built on the E…

The Ethereum network isn't an organization. It's decentralized without anyone having full control over it.

Ethereum lost my trust when they suggested a soft fork to make transactions with a specific account invalid, eg, the DAO fix.

It showed both that a) code as contract is still too hard when even core contributors can't get them right, and b) the dev team is willing to shunt the underlying principles under the right conditions (eg, financial ones)

A central team that is willing to de-authorize specific transactions through control of the code base is at conflict with a decentralized network. Sure, the network didn't have to go along with it, but they also probably wouldn't have performed the change on their own, either.

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#166

Post by archagon »

conatus wrote: post #101
archagon wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question: are you guys legally organized as a cooperative, or is it still a conventional corporate structure?

Legally organised as a cooperative. There are three categories of membership and a democratic process to move between each: 1. Members - formal cooperative members with legal responsibility. 2. Outlanders - people more dedicated to the cause who get benefits like first refusal on incoming work and so on. 3. Collaborators - the first stage. You work at Outlandish basically. No status prevents you from participating in…

That's really great! I've been rooting for the cooperative model to take off a bit more. Seems like a more humane and societally friendlier way of running things, especially if it helps ensure a more equitable distribution of wealth and power among the working ranks.

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#167

Post by archagon »

mgkabar wrote: post #159
conatus wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legally organised as a cooperative. There are three categories of membership and a democratic process to move between each: 1. Members - formal cooperative members with legal responsibility. 2. Outlanders - people more dedicated to the cause who get benefits like first refusal on incoming work and so on. 3. Collaborators - the first stage. You work at Outlandish basically. No status prevents you from participating in…

This is a really intriguing organizational structure. I'd love to ask you some more questions about how it works if you have any free time... please hit me up at (griffin {at} colony.io)

Let us know if anything comes of this! I'm very interested in seeing more tech companies organized as cooperatives, and it seems that Colony's tech could be very complementary in that regard.

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#168

Post by pookeh »

stefano wrote: post #130
mgkabar wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really seems like the most appropriate response to this is indeed ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ You're assuming quite a lot of this hypothetical hacker - the response above clearly addresses the hypothetical by stating "here are the relevant reasons why this hypothetical is impossible or at least unlikely, and here are the relevant sections in the whitepaper for more verbose information". >The many sentences that come before the shru…

> What kind of answer would satisfy you? In the real world, with an actual registered company/cooperative, you can call the police or sue people in court as a last resort. This is not possible in a distributed world, so a new kind of recourse needs to be invented, if that's even possible.

Not if they are large sophisticated state sponsored attacks.

I think we have to forego the stereotype of lone wolf havker (or at least not treat as the only hacker stereotype) when considering having a large population put their valuables into a single pot.

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#169

Post by jdjeiiie310 »

orcdork wrote: post #82
tinkerrr wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of such a knee-jerk reaction to crypto, perhaps you can ask if the crypto token involved makes sense in this use case. If it doesn't, like in 99% of the cases, you can dismiss it then. Colony, IMHO, is one of the few projects where it does make sense to have a token.

Being suspicious or cautious, particularly considering the amount of people expressing the same sentiment in the comments, is not a knee-jerk reaction.

Especially when it’s been shown crypto currency can be expropriated and no one cares

Oh boy another platform that can be gamed by a minority for their overwhelming benefit

Re: Colony: A platform for open organizations

#170

Post by crucialfelix »

fab13n wrote: post #73
asymmetric wrote: post #69

Interesting project, but I find it unfortunate that they chose such a historically loaded term.

I thought of ants and bees. In a pro-decentralisation context, the interpretation you're referring to--which is the pinnacle of centralisation forced through violence for selfish goals--is so obviously irrelevant, that it didn't even come to mind.

My first association was "space colony". Colony on the moon, mars etc.
Post reply on HN