Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   jonny (good kind) (jonny@neuromatch.social)'s status on Wednesday, 17-Jan-2024 17:10:36 JST jonny (good kind)

   just finished reading about DAOs for like 12 hours and i need a hot bath, an exorcism, and to scrub my whole brain out with steel wool

   • Embed this notice
     phiofx (phiofx@hachyderm.io)'s status on Wednesday, 17-Jan-2024 17:10:33 JST phiofx

     in reply to

     @jonny there is also the falacy that an automated system will somehow bind people to behave according to its builtin assumptions and they will not game it in every which way. Only people can put themselves in other people's shoes and imagine why and how they might game a system. DAO is either stupid or evil.

   • Embed this notice
     jonny (good kind) (jonny@neuromatch.social)'s status on Wednesday, 17-Jan-2024 17:10:35 JST jonny (good kind)

     in reply to

     y'all do know that you can just govern stuff by talking to ppl right, u simply do not need to invent a money for making decisions with.

   • Embed this notice
     phiofx (phiofx@hachyderm.io)'s status on Wednesday, 17-Jan-2024 18:10:11 JST phiofx

     in reply to

     @jonny this is not to say that contract automation or expanded notions of accounting and money are not potentially incredibly useful. In some form they are necessary as our communities are too big, our activities too varied and too impactful and our brains not suited for this type of work. As per Wikipedia: "The earliest uses of writing in Sumer were to document agricultural produce and create contracts" 🙂

     Hopefully eventually we'll see real proposals.

   • Embed this notice
     jonny (good kind) (jonny@neuromatch.social)'s status on Wednesday, 17-Jan-2024 18:10:12 JST jonny (good kind)

     in reply to

     • phiofx

     @phiofx
     Yes and in the other direction, it misattributes how governance systems do work under normal conditions. Laws arent real, people break laws all day long. the thing that is real is our belief that a system does or should behave in a way. If you cant reason about a system or understand how it will behave - and algorithmic governance only makes sense at a point where one cannot trivially derive expected behavior, or else the algorithm is unnecessary - then why would you pay attention to the system?

     It ceases to be a governance system and becomes a religion in the nominal case, and a really shitty religion at that

   • Embed this notice
     pettter (pettter@mastodon.acc.umu.se)'s status on Wednesday, 17-Jan-2024 21:09:02 JST pettter

     in reply to

     • Dan Goodman

     @jonny @neuralreckoning A good litmus test for a lot of politics to me is 'does this expand or contract the role and use of money?'

   • Embed this notice
     jonny (good kind) (jonny@neuromatch.social)'s status on Wednesday, 17-Jan-2024 21:09:03 JST jonny (good kind)

     in reply to

     • Dan Goodman

     @neuralreckoning it's super frustrating! because i'm like YES! we care about the same things but for some reason you decided the answer was to make everything into money!

   • Embed this notice
     Dan Goodman (neuralreckoning@neuromatch.social)'s status on Wednesday, 17-Jan-2024 21:09:05 JST Dan Goodman

     in reply to

     @jonny how can they be simultaneously so close to being right and also so far from being right?