11–20 of 924 posts
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/5002/economics/pros-and-c...
Agreed. And that will be 10,000 different things. Right now all the media fuss and discussion from it is about deciding "what do we know is right" without recognizing (intentionally?) that there's no one answer to that question.
I strongly believe that money itself has been corrupted lately, this then causes all number of bad flow on effects to happen. A massive shift happened when central banks started getting involved in direct purchases of various asset types and we started to see a major distortion happen in monetary policy that which has distorted the functioning of money itself. For example who would care if their business is completel…
Why bother with setting the price of bananas and everything else, when you can set one price and have a greater effect?
> Okay, great. Now skip paying your AWS bill for a few months.
If you ran your database locally and with multiple reundant power sources, it wouldn't have this problem.
That's of course a bad idea, however it shows it's not impossible to do it without a single point of failure.
I think most sensible people had figured this out already. The people that don't and honestly believe everything will be fixed by a DAO or whatever... they're beyond reason.
https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/neverwrk.htm
Their solutions may not and perhaps probably will not work because it's a hard problem.
The payoff for solving this problem is civilization without single points of failure. No more wheel of rising and falling empires that take all our progress and knowledge with them when they die. No more pretending to bow down to megalomaniacs and ideologues to achieve stability. No more vast centralized moral hazards that attract sociopaths like moths to a lamp.
I've taken to calling the zero-trust decentralization problem "computer science's fusion." It's perpetually N years away, but if we solve it the payoff is immense.
Edit: Proof of work sort of kind of solves it, but not really, and at tremendous cost. Nevertheless the fact that it gets close is maybe suggestive that the real solution is somewhere nearby.
I think most sensible people had figured this out already. The people that don't and honestly believe everything will be fixed by a DAO or whatever... they're beyond reason.
I think that eventually, anything that can be run by a DAO will be run by a DAO, just like with automation, any process that can be automated will, eventually, be automated.
Even if "governance" is "decentralized," there are still going to need to be people in the DAO, day to day, doing the work that no one wants to do, making decisions that no one wants to make.
It seems to me like a DAO is just a college group project but if you add crypto it solves everything?
Organizational behavior and its challenges don't go away because you've issued tokens.
Honest question, what the heck am I missing? It has to be something!
I think most sensible people had figured this out already. The people that don't and honestly believe everything will be fixed by a DAO or whatever... they're beyond reason.
I think that eventually, anything that can be run by a DAO will be run by a DAO, just like with automation, any process that can be automated will, eventually, be automated.
*DAO doesn't need to run on Ethereum blockchain, it can also be a sufficiently autonomous collection of ERP systems.
I think most sensible people had figured this out already. The people that don't and honestly believe everything will be fixed by a DAO or whatever... they're beyond reason.
I think that eventually, anything that can be run by a DAO will be run by a DAO, just like with automation, any process that can be automated will, eventually, be automated.
In particular I'm thinking about some of the procedures aboard nuclear submarines where automated systems were tried and eventually rolled back, because the automation would be fine 99.9% of the time but when it failed it would cause disaster at computer speeds instead of just at human speeds. I can definitely imagine a bug in a DAO being completely unacceptable in some domains even if it is more efficient than doing the same job with humans. (For example, in national voting)
Finally even for those cases where automation is desired and could be done by some autonomous entity, I'm not sure why you would specifically need a Distributed AO instead of just regular cronjobs on a server somewhere. Any real-world system is going to need regular updates anyway, so you end up centralizing trust in whoever can update the code for the (D)AO.
What's hard about this particular situation, and what we often don't recognize enough:
- We regularly overestimate the power of "traditional" systems such as government, courts, civil society. To a large degree, we've just been lucky that they work, but it's neither obvious nor guaranteed that they will continue to do so.
- One of the hard problems is that we don't have any clue how new (human-designed) systems affect society. And that's not for lack of trying - economics, sociology, psychology - they are just insanely hard because people always lie, keep changing and are so damn inventive.