Why This Top European Fund is Bullish DAOs - 1kx Team, Ep. 208 - Transcripts

August 02, 2022

  • Favorite
  • Share
Decentralized Autonomous Organizations or DAOs for short are hailed as the future of managing organizations and work.   However, many are starting to doubt the feasibility of DAOs given its major blockers for it to succeed at scale.  In...

Transcript

Ladies

and gentlemen gentlemen, welcome to the Block Crunch podcast. They go to podcast for investors and builders in crypto and before we get started, just a reminder for you guys out there. The block crunch podcast is intended for informational purposes only. Neither the host nor its guests or licensed financial advisors and nothing discussed should be construed as financial advice views held by block crunches, guests are their own and sponsorship messages do not constitute financial advice or endorsement with that out of the way. Let's jump right in now before we get started with today's episode, I've got some great news for you now a lot of you have been asking for how I analyze projects that I bring on the show. That's why I decided to create Block V. I. P. To share with you all the heavy research that goes on behind the scenes now. Every week or so our team prepares an in depth research memo with things like sector analysis, technical concepts, made simple in depth, competitive breakdown and even interactive models. So you can learn about the most important projects before they become important and our team is putting in hours every week scouring, discord twitter forums and blogs to help you get an edge in crypto and understand the latest projects and themes at the deepest levels. That goes way beyond just an interview.

Now in addition, we also host exclusive AMs with myself to answer any of your questions. So all of these are only available to block V. I. P subscribers and the good news is that while our interviews will always be free. the V. I. P. Tier cost less than one coffee a day. So head on over to the block crunch dot com slash V. I. P. Or click the link in the show notes below to sign up.

Hey everybody, welcome back to another episode of the podcast. Now, this is an episode that I've been wanting to do for a very, very long time, which is an in depth look at Taos, the dow thesis, What's wrong with the house today and how can we grow this Tao universe? And with me are two of the biggest proponents, Peter and Dimitri from one K experience. You have been on the show before, but peter, this is your block crunch virginity. So welcome to the show, both of

you. I am proud to have lost my blood crunch virginity here. Excited.

Yeah, super stoked to have both of you on. So now you guys both are part of this fund called one K X, which our listeners are familiar with and you guys put out this really great block block post recently about this future of Taos. So before we dive into that, can you just give us a little definition of just what those are? Because you know, people out there that seem to think that anything with a discord and twitter is a doubt. So is that the right definition?

Yeah. So I think first of all, we're still really understanding, you know, what could douse B but I think on a property level, yeah, the organizations that are christian native the digital first and the organizations that have distributed ownership and governance structures. Um, so unlike traditional equity companies in which there's sort of total board control or ceo controlled sort of organizations, ownership, governance of assets, rights, um, all properties of the organization completely, I guess distributed in governance by the community members that are part of these organizations and hence decentralized autonomous organizations. I think a lot of people mistake autonomous for being automated software. But in my definition, the autonomy of a lot of these visual native organizations comes from the fact that the management of these organizations are permission lys by token holders or the owners of that disputed organization. Right. Um, yeah. And I think, um, there's a lot of exciting things, but I think the most exciting thing about Dallas is the fact that they're very easy to start, arguably much harder to run, but you can start them in a couple of minutes with the nurses safe. Uh, and sort of a snatch up dash dashboard just as quickly and you're off to the races, coordinating and discord or telegram or whatever communication tool you want. And I think the cool thing about this is that, you know, you just have a lot more experimentation. You have a lot, you know, a more open source innovation happening just because of how easy it is. And if you have a lot more experience happening, you'll find a lot more things that are working.

And I think this is where things get really cool that you get to, you know, have, you know, different permutations and different attempts at building different, I guess at building products that building services that make investments and different people are able to try different things, you know, in ways that, you know, we would never completely sort of expect with a rigid, you know, legacy uh structure that's fully paper based, right? Um instead it's all software based, it's all programmatic, it's completely flexible. Um and that's sort of, I think why people excited about downs

and then I'll offer two more definitions, I think, you know, you ask 10 people what the definition is, you get 10 different answers to more perspectives. One is it's a group of individuals who are loosely organizationally coordinated and strongly economically coordinated towards a common goal. Um, so really groups of people with a shared mission and a shared bank account and I would actually argue 10 people with hypnosis safe using discord emoji voting is a doubt. Um or more traditional definition is actually if you just look at what cooperative is, um, you google it, it tells you they're member owned member governed businesses that operate for the benefit of their members. And I think uh from another light douse are effectively these digital

cooperatives

and do that we need a token to be about. Like if I'm just a community, like what, what differentiates a digital community from a decentralized autonomous organization,

I would say at least from my perspective, I think, you know, dow's can totally exist about the token itself. I think, you know, people can definitely coordinate around shared objectives

and

I guess, you know, cooperate and collaborate without economic alignment. But I think the token is what establishes the economic alignment and establishes, I guess the social contract that everyone is working together and deposit some way towards that shared goal.

Like it need not be a fungible token. You know, we've seen douse operate with N. F. T. S. As I think now is a good example of a tao that operates via one N. F. T. One vote.

That's a really fantastic point.

Arguably it doesn't even need to be a transferable token at all. It could be completely reputational based, right? So arguably dowels have existed for many years or hundreds of years before even crypto with like religions right? Where it's just purely social contracts and purely social reputation, bunch of, you know, I guess priests and churches and scribbling down who's good and who's bad and who can be trusted, right? So, um

yeah,

there's a lot to explore

that. I guess it's really just a digital way for people to um collectively coordinate, but this time we can actually do it the centrally, like for first is like churches before, where you need like local kind of parishes, you know, local communities, you can just do it completely online right now and the tokens are just one of the many tools to introduce economic alignment, which Dimitri mentioned. Um and I think it's really refreshing that you guys are bullish styles because in this market environment, every influencer out there is bearish styles and I think for good reason as well because there's been so many stories of just like um free riders and uh things getting too bureaucratic at the dow level. So before I get into kind of specific examples that we've seen in the recent kind of months, what are your general thoughts about that? Like our, our doubts just fundamentally harder to manage than an actual company and they're like specific use cases that can only be done with a doubt and not with a startup company.

Yeah, it's fascinating right? I sort of a lot of the sentiment towards douse uh sort of echoed the sentiment towards tokens back in the law cycle in 19,018 off the last crash. Right massive. Their sentiment towards tokens, no one believes in tokens as a means of value cruel. Everyone believes in equity companies. I think in a similar way, you know, the idea of dowels is quite a valid one. I think the excitement is valid. However, the implementation of the current dowels have been not great to say the least right. I think 11 core issue is I guess, you know, one you can sort of think of dowels as digital organizations, but other ways to think about uh dowels as, you know, games uh that were the object instead of like the objectives being purely digital and purely, you know, virtual around business objectives around creating things around, you know, investing the around building services. And I think the main difficulty of tao is is the fact that most of the dow's are trying to build organizations who build digital organizations around um objectives that they are not yet clear on uh until it's like they're trying to build game loops over things that are very, very difficult and unable to build game loops for I think a lot of the dowels that we've seen fail or struggle really. Uh built around really, really difficult processes and objectives such as product development was we've seen many douse with simpler, you know, game loops such as, you know, service dowels or investment dowels or even NFC collection dowels operate pretty effectively. Right.

And I think that what just yet, I think we're in the process of discovering how to build uh more, I guess gamblers for more and more sophisticated, no more complex, you know, activities, I mean like product development is the hardest gamblers, arguably, you know, product development in a centralized team by itself is extremely difficult by nature and if you throw that into a decentralized environment where everyone has power, Yes, you're going to end up with a mess right? Um to say. And I think um it's so like zooming out, I think that the idea of aligning groups of people um permission, see through tokens is uh is still a highly powerful idea. I think we've just yet to figure out how to actually execute on these ideas and maybe Dimitri has a few faults here.

Well, I could offer the bullish bear perspective in the sense that most are probably broken, especially when we're looking at protocol details. Um but I would frame it as a thing, we need to figure out regardless of whether we want to or not. Um It's almost like the web three vision of having these open source protocols and public goods that span across generations. You effectively need to solve the human coordination layer and establish the right ownership and coordination structures that allow individuals From around the world to continue stewarding the software. This is very specific to protocol down anything like Peter was mentioning like the different flavors. Um but I think if you believe in the Web three vision, you need to solve for the human coordination

layer.

Um and I think it's really important that you guys brought up these different types of doubts, like there's product focused out like basically like make her doubt the entire dow is surrounding one single product and the development of the product and then there's more, I guess objective oriented, douse more generalist dowse, for instance, like this VC doubts like meta cartel, which peter you're, you know very intimately familiar with, which for our listeners, it's basically a ventured out as a group of people investing money into startups. So, but then, you know, regardless of what type of tao it is, I personally am a hardline progressive decentralization believer, which is this belief that we should always start with a centralized entity and have just a bunch of people extremely motivated to solve a problem and then over time decentralized and include more people in. Um and I've never seen the opposite work, like I've never seen something that starts completely essentially work except for Bitcoin and ethereum. So I'm curious what you guys think there is progressive decentralization, the only way to do this properly. Or have you guys seen counter examples of that?

I think from my perspective you probably need to have it be progressive, I think it helps. I think um the initial 10, 20 members of your dau will dictate the culture of the next 100 to 200 members of your dau. Uh and I think you actually need to be very thoughtful um with how you scale the initial group of people and how you expand that. So first you need to be able to onboard really passionate, you know, find 10 really passionate contributors ship product or or achieve some shared goal with those 10 people and then you could expand to 2040 80 et cetera. And I think a lot of dow's grew too quickly and they have, you know, 100 plus contributors and no one really knows what they're doing, no one really has like clear responsibility over uh specific areas and I think before you scale you need to uh get the right people to join and then figure out structure and then figure out ownership

on top of to that point, you know, most of these gals, onboarding hundreds of people or you know, into pay positions about actually understanding what the game looks like, you know what the game plan is, what the sustainable, you know, participation revenue loops look like, right? And um and when you do that, all you do is just burn money, right? Um I think, you know, there's sort of like two things that balance. So I think that like, I am generally in the camp of like progressive decentralization, but I'll argue the other side right, uh just as a thought experiment to, I think that it's a balance rather than a pure one sided progressive decentralization and the different modes of operating that you can sort of, you should be careful, you should you can decide to opt for as well, in the sense that when you're launching a dow, there's two things to get right, I think first you need to understand what is, I guess like called business loop, that is sustainable, and at the same time you need to attract contributors that can contribute to these business loops, right? Or revenue loops. And and I think like it's a balance between freaking out the loops by themselves as well as bring a community of people alongside the journey with you, so that the lines, the involved, they feel like they're part of a movement that's bigger than what they are. And I think it's hard to achieve that if you just, you know, forgot the business loops and start day one with absolutely nothing, uh nothing started right from scratch effectively. And I think um I think yeah, it's I think it's a different case might be the fact that like if everyone uh if you throw in 100 people, you know, into a group in which everyone really understood the core business looks very well, could they, you know, participate and could they become a meaningfully decentralized tao also being affected from day one and I think maybe yes. Right. So I think like there are different ways to start dowels, I think the progressive decentralization route, you know, definitely, it's a lot simple, it's a lot more iterative, it's something that we understand as the operating model for web two, but I also suspect that are, you know, different ways of launching organizations, maybe start at scale, but I would admit that we haven't yet figured out effective operating processes that allow us to achieve meaningful results at scale yet. Right? So I think that's like a T.

V. D. Like that's a design space, a coordination design space that we haven't yet figured out. I wouldn't just discard it as something that doesn't necessarily work. But yes to the data I totally agree. Like you know nothing has super really worked from a decentralization for us perspective. That's a, you know it's just a different perspective I guess.

And are there like good examples of progressive decentralization done well in your in your opinion like projects that maybe people can look to as a template for how to do this properly?

Yeah. I think um one of the I guess one of the doubts that really surprised me was code arena. Code arena is a down that basically coordinates auditors and software engineers to look for bugs and to audit code. Right. Traditionally smart contract audits have conducted by a handful of auditing shops, right? Uh Instead what they've done is that they've created you know, a service dial that coordinates auditors to run audit contests. You know they basically commit the bugs that they find and they're rewarded once, you know the reviewed and the fascinating thing about why Katerina is working is that the game loop, I guess smart contract auditing is actually fairly straightforward I think in comparison to much more complex, you know I guess game loops or revenue loops such as product development where you're trying to build a new product, discover market and find revenue right? And monetize it. Um auditing is actually much more straightforward and as such have been able to really I guess um identify what it takes to automate the process of code contests, code auditing contest and scale that. And at a you know, stage in which they're beginning to automate a lot of the manual processes that they've like initially facilitated and they're starting to really step back while also seeing the machine run uh fairly efficiently. So you know that you know, they were able to really do roughly initially like one audit contest a month. They're roughly doing um handful of like maybe 11 order contest a week.

Right now they want to scale to a point where they can do 10, 20 per week. Right? And they're able to really do that in a fairly straight forward way without actually introducing increasing fixed costs that traditional services business would be able would have. Right. Um And I think that's just like it's an interesting data point because yeah, it's sort of enlightened me to this idea that like, you know how well your doubt can operate is wholly depend or at least how hard it is to build a wholly dependent on how complex your participation loops look like and whether you can really automate incentives, automate the processes involved and then be able to scale that way, right? Um But I think that's one example, maybe Dimitri can talk about. Yeah,

well it's a good example and and and also with the, with katerina, the wardens, at least the initial wardens um have a sense of ownership, they do receive a token allocation, it really helps the retention rate um of the highest quality auditors. And if you look at the discord, it's actually not very buzzy, you know, it's not like a lot of these douse that have, you know, thousands of people in their discord. It's actually fairly yeah, like people are doing work and they have a very clear understanding of of the the job to be done and then how to coordinate around that. So, so I don't think a a successful dow um necessarily means that your your discord is always buzzy it. I think it's actually more so like how can you clearly define the rules of engagement? Uh and and like the economic loops and then have people coordinate around those loops in in somewhat of a decentralized way.

And for these like successful examples of dow's out there, who managed to pull off this progressive decentralization? What are the things that they decentralized first? Like what are the things that for the projects out there, who are trying to do the same? Um what are some of the things that they should delegate to the community to vote on first? And then what are some of the things they should probably keep it as centralized as possible until the final part of their decentralization,

conceptually, I would start with the most simple things first, like the the lowest risk, because I do think it's a bit of a learning process with the community members and I think, you know, if you're building a play to earn game, which you probably don't want to do is hand off economic modeling, you know, to, to the community, it's it's a very difficult thing, there aren't many subject matter experts and actually, I think that's why a lot of the early experiments around basically our governance um and and like dow structures around basically our governance hasn't played out, like a lot of people thought it would, because there's so few people that understand things at that technical of A level. Um so I think things around based protocol changes, um like product development are probably things that could come at a later stage, um and I think you you almost need to teach your community how you want them to engage uh with the core team and then participated with the core team in the beginning

to that point, we've actually been doing some work with Sky Mavis on scaling the governance recently, where, you know, the vision alone for Sky Mavis is really to have decentralized, you know, governance of the ACSI game and economy, right? But however, and, you know, as much as people are screaming for governance, if you just transferred governance access holders from day one, or at least right now would be complete chaos. It would just probably be people proposing to give themselves a lot, lot more slp than they have right now already. Right? Or or some of the sort of self interested, you know, proposals without a lot of signal, uh they sort of the team has recognized us and that's why this they're taking a different approach. And I guess the project we sort of like came together on right to sort and landed on this idea of, I guess, credential based governance. Well, you actually want to have subject domain experts identified through verifiable credentials, whether identified manually or programmatically, you want to identify the people who can uh you know, actually participate effectively in governance, who have subject matter experts expertise, right to have informed decisions and then you want to organize those people together as under political parties, almost as groups that can form like that can basically form informed opinions and form signal around them while also giving them highlighted, you know, governance bonuses in the areas that they are experts. Right? So I think like, you know, maybe one or two years out the vision is like people who who have gone through the actual school of Economics have a 20% you know, governance bone, it's in all economic related matters, right? People who, and you can sort of scale this with, like in traditional world government, you have the Minister of Defense, you have Minister of Health, you have Minister of Education, blah blah, I suspect we're gonna see the same with actually, but that governance uh I guess like that governance coordination doesn't sort of necessarily like, you know, emerge so organically you need to do the groundwork to actually form these groups, you need to do the groundwork to identify the right people and then highlight them and give them away more, a lot more leverage than everyone else. And yeah, I think this is probably sort of a hint of where governance is going. You know, credential based governance is going to and reputation based governance is going to only become a lot more important, at least endows

in which you really need to effectively govern at large scale. Hey guys, I'm really excited to tell you more about one of my favorite products in crypto right now. DYDX. This is a team I've known since 2018 and they've built one of the best exchange venues out there. That also happens to be decentralized and mobile friendly now listen until the end because there's an opportunity for savvy traders out there as well. And here are just a few reasons why I like to I. D. X over other exchanges first is very liquid. It processes 2 to $3 billion every day in volume and has 35 perpetual swaps as of this recording, which means you can trade things like ethereum Bitcoin does Selena and most of the most popular assets with up to 20 X leverage in the venue today. The second, it's also extremely cheap and if you're down bad from the bear market you don't have to worry about gas fees at all because there is no gas fee on Stark wear layer to where do I. D. X.

Is built on now. That brings me to my next point as well. It's incredibly fast. Unlike other layer two at high speed texas, you don't actually have to wait to withdraw your assets anymore. And as an additional point by using Stark wear. Dy Dx also provides users with increased security and privacy. And my personal favorite feature is to cross margin feature which means I can see one account with us dc and trade across multiple markets from there without needing to start sub accounts because I really hate managing so many different sub accounts and their IOS mobile app is also live right now and it's amazing because it's compatible with meta mass coin based wallet, coin 98 wallet and a lot of the most popular mobile wallets out there and it's available for people outside of the U. S. Or sanctioned countries today. And one last thing, one exciting opportunity is their competitions. The most recent tear in the $10,000 equity tier have won over $95,000 in rewards and you can get started with as low as $500 in equity to compete for prices. So if you're already trading might as well get paid to do it.

So if any of that sounds interesting to you, I highly recommend that you head on over to dy dx dot exchange to learn more and I thank them for sponsoring this episode. Yeah, that's so interesting because I actually just recently read about this as well, your work at one K. X. With meta portal dow basically helping actually infinity. Trying to credential at least 1000 contributors and set up formal processes. And this ties in pretty well with a recent episode we did with Project Galaxy, which is a credentialing project and you know for a. V. I. P subscribers, we did write a 10 page report on just how it works and I do think you know that is probably going to be how a large tiles have to govern themselves over time. But at the same time I think actually is also an exception because at least my impression is that most of the dow use cases are often very short lived and very ad hoc. So we have things like constitution dow basically a bunch of people decided, hey we're gonna raise some money and try to buy the constitution like nic cage in national treasure and then their city dow where they just kind of bought 40 acres of land in Wyoming. Um and then there was a people pleaser where you know, bunch of whales just pulled together capital to buy some art.

So all of these actually strikes me as more. You know less companies more like S. P. V. S with a very finite duration in terms of their lifespan. I'm curious about where you guys think most as we head towards just more gonna be like these at hawk organic may be short lived type of entities or is it, you know, all corporations are going to become taos.

I think it's an end. Um I think there we've been talking about different flavors and I think that distinction is important around protocol. Douse service, douse collector douse. I think in a few years quantity wise we're probably going to see many more of these. Collector does like the pleaser type flavor. Um I think the members of the house is going to be much smaller in like the single to to low double digit digit. Um and likely the dollar amount that they'll be managing um is also going to be much smaller than uh what's in a protocol doubt treasury. I think it the collector dow and investment now use cases and like flavors into some extent service that was play better with more of like a retail type type use case and I think like add as the concept and and crypto is like a tech in general reaches more mainstream. I think that's going to be a fairly popular um flavor of multiplayer coordination.

Yeah and peter anything to add there as

well. I think Dmitry hit the nail on the head,

awesome. Yeah, I I totally ripped that. I I do think it makes sense that there will be more collector douse than the project out. Um, and I'm really excited to see kind of where they evolved into, but I think we've got a shield down enough so I want to focus a little bit on the maybe more negative stuff, which is people scribes towards the house. So I think one notable example is the unit swap. So they established this defi education fund. I think back in june 2021 they received like 30 to 45 million in uni tokens. And then most of the votes for those tokens were, you know, voted in by institutional holders and there's a proposal that passed through despite major community push back and then, you know, as expected they dump their tokens because of market conditions and not much news and progress since that. So this seems like a lot of this like bureaucracy and you know, fake governance is still happening, especially for very large tiles. What do you guys think about that? And is this something that we can resolve over time?

Arguably the unique example. Um actually highlights, I feel like highlights the benefit of distributed decentralized governance. I feel like the fact that, you know, that proposal was allowed to pause while the community itself was pushing against. It should rationality on the community's pot for the maybe as exception more than the rule in this space, but once, you know, the crowd showed some level of wisdom and it was actually sort of, I guess like the larger whales who had, you know, who were investors before, right? And I think this goes points towards the fact that that just shows the degree of decentralization for that very gal, maybe, right. Um, but I think generally speaking, yeah, like dowels have tons of issues today, right? So, um I think like Dimitri said earlier in the podcast, right, you know, your tao, the 1st 10 contractors are going to see the culture of your down and the next 100 will drive that momentum forward and so on. And I think a lot of, I think that's been a structural issue of a lot of, you know, um retroactive air drops that have been used to kickstart downs, you know, they're not, they're done at scale so that, you know, culture is completely out of the control of the community or even the team, you know, it's, you know, just these communities are let loose, you know, and I, I think that's just like led to a lot of coordination failure on that front. You know, people don't have the time to form relationships to form and build these coordination structures to effectively work with each other and you just end up with this very antagonistic, very zero sum environment where people are just trying to extract value from one another without actually caring about the shared objective here and I think you know, definitely highlights that, but it would also add that, you know, I've talked to the use of team and other supporters and a lot of the activity is by design, you know? Uh And I guess it's always in hindsight. Right? So I think a lot of doubts have just meaning really meaningless li like spend money hide people.

I think we get to see the effects of that in activity or lack of activity or the high barrier to any activity, fold that down. Right? Um Yeah.

Yeah I think you could frame it as um like governance, extractable value. Um uh This could be proposals from a core team to like raise their own salaries when there's like no like actual revenue being produced um by the dow itself. Um You you almost act as like a union, like a worker union. Um That that that might you know that that could be threatening to leave if uh the Treasury doesn't allocate more funds to uh keeping you on. I think that's an issue that needs to be solved. I do think N. F. T. Based voting, reputation based voting could address a lot of the issues with um just pure token based voting. Um And yeah I think peter mentioned a lot of the points on contribution. I think you don't need to scale contribution for contribution sake. I think it's more so activation.

Um that's important around how do you find who your highest quality contributors are? Because they're out there um there there but they might not be fully engaged. And it's like how do you activate all the latent talent that's in there in the specific cases where where you need them. So I think it's like more selective like high performance contribution and it's really knowing who do you want to give a voice to in which situations and then how loud of a voice do you do you want to give them? Um And I think like that that nuance um again we're still trying to figure out how that works um in uh in the flavor of protocol doubts, especially with a large number of token holders.

Yeah. And I think that nuance is probably one of the most important points because on one hand I think Peter's point is is definitely right in the sense that the units, for example illustrates why we should have more transparent and more decentralized governance so that, you know, not a few whales don't control decisions, but at the same time there's this humorous quote that I'm paraphrasing but it's basically to the meaning of democracy is government for the people by the people, but the people are dumb and we kind of saw this example with with the recent tao dispute between Merritt circle and Y. G. G. Where the t. I was actually somewhat against this. But the members of the merit circle tao voted to terminate the relationship with Y. G. G who is an investor in that dow basically scrapping their legal contract, which is actually illegal, um, and citing conflict of interest, among other reasons. And a lot of people were like for this, um, in the community, but it was clearly not something, at least in my opinion, not something that's correct just because it's illegal to kind of breach of contract. So in those situations, you know, how do you, how do you balance like giving the community a voice? But also, um, you know, when you're in a situation like this with things that are maybe kind of illegal?

Maybe controversial. How do you resolve things like that?

It's a good question. Um, I guess the root of the problem that is more about the quality of your participants, the quality of your token holders, right. I think people really understand how important this is. It's not just about, yeah, we got like 20,000, you know, token holders, but it's all idiots. Then you're kind of sucked, you know, like it goes to the point of curating curating your coal community, right? And an issue structural issue of liquid USC twenties, right? Um, and um, I guess how do you prevent it? Um, I honestly don't have a good answer for this. You know, I think most teams would probably claim decentralization or I guess, uh, argue some level of like, you know, regulatory arbitrage to say like, hey, we have nothing to do with this. We couldn't have stopped it, right. And I guess that is also the dangerous part about decentralized organizations. If they are truly decentralized, no single party can pull the plug on something dangerous, reckless and, or evil, whatever.

Right? So, um, I guess it's more points towards like, yes, we can expect a lot to go wrong and more the point where we should be careful about building decentralized organizations that can't be stopped.

Yeah. And I think there's a lot of experimentation you could do here, um, to say it could potentially be mitigated over time. So one example or one experiment I'd like to see is more of this kind of like retroactive reputation based governance power where say a dow proposes a vote, um, with that vote is very clear. KPI attached at a specific point in time. And then at that point in time you evaluate, uh, was this a good idea or like, did we hit the goal that we wanted? And, and maybe that's tbl volumes, You know, some, some quantifiable metric. And if you do then the people who voted yes on that proposal get like a boosted governance power, um, uh, they get more weight. Um, and over time you can start to effectively curate the best decision makers, um, in your DAO. Um, and that's kind of done by pseudo reputation. Um, and it's, it's retroactive, so it'll take a few cycles to to make that in. But I think that's one experiment that I love to see.

Yeah. And I think that fits into the discussion that we had just now, but credential as well, I do think that's one key missing, missing part of now governance. Um But anyway, I think this has been an incredibly interesting conversation. There's so many more tensions we take this on. But as we wrap up, I'd love to get your thoughts on just what is one dow that's like interesting to you or you're most excited for or maybe just top of mind for for both of you so that our listeners can go check it out um Demetria. Would you like to go first?

Yeah, I think I mentioned um I really liked us very clear goal. It's to propagate the ones I p. It has a sustainable funding structure. Um uh One noun per day gets auctioned off. It's a very natural progressive decentralization And just by nature of that supply taking higher and you don't need in your C22 to government. And the community has come up with some very interesting innovations around um uh effectively like the coordination governance space.

My favorite one right now is some camp uh they bring their basically a doubt that brings people together to produce music and they've behind the latest Headless band known as Headless Chaos and they put together so many creatives artists, musicians produces visual artists to produce a whole album, you know where the royalties and the music revenue of the investments that are selling, you know, go directly real time to the participants. And I'm just like fascinated by yeah, like uh multiplayer uh cooperative sort of like you know, like collaboration I guess. And they're sort of really pushing the forefront of what's possible.

Yeah, most definitely. And thank you so much for those recommendations and once again, thank you so much for coming onto the show. Um really really enjoyed this conversation for people who want to follow both of you. What are the best channels for them to maybe reach out or learn more about your thoughts on Taos.

Yeah, Thanks for having us D barons and on twitter for me. D B E R E N Z O N.

I am Peter with a free in the middle on Torah and yeah, easily reachable by awesome.

I will include those in the show notes below and thank you so much for coming on again guys.

Yeah.

All right, that's it for this week's episode of the blockage podcast. So thank you so much for tuning in. If you enjoyed this episode, please make sure to subscribe on your favorite apps and in case you didn't know this interview is also available as a video on youtube. And if you attack the block french on twitter this week and tell us what you liked about this episode, I'll be sure to respond to you as well. Now, if you'd like to go even deeper, we have a V. I P tier where every week or so we write an in depth research brief or investment memo on a project and we'll have exclusive ams with myself where I answer all your questions as well. Now we already have analysts from some of the top funds and companies in crypto ask subscribers. So if you're serious about getting an edge in crypto, head on over to the block crunch dot com slash V I P to learn more. And once again, thanks for supporting the show and I'll see you next week.

00:00:00
00:00:00