I think that governance is the best way to get the community more involved, especially those without dev experience. If a DAO (decentralized autonomous organization) protocol aepp was built, lots of different things could happen: funds allocation (possibly for aeternity anstalt as well), community proposals, raising funds, organizing physical locations like hackerspaces, the list goes on.
Would love to hear anyone’s thoughts on DAOs! Have any experience or think it’s a good direction to go in?
I don’t think we need DAOs. The organizations can be centralized, but they need to run their business on the blockchain platform.
It means people can only pay with crypto currency and all deals are on-chain. This makes the organization transparent in finance. And stakeholders of these organizations can get revenue automatically from the business. And investors can decide whether to be stakeholder or not.
We can call it TAO, transparent autonomous organization.
I think this is a bit tricky. Some of the business of the organization must not be public. Do you have any info on TAOs? An article somewhere on the topic?
Best,
Vlad
no. It is a new concept invented by me.
The most important thing is the financial to be transparent, all payment and income on-chain. Affairs not related with money need not to be on-chain.
DAOs are also transparent, what is your argument against decentralization?
There are some cool use cases happening now with DAOs and decisions not money related. If you have metamask and a little ethereum to play with, try https://alchemy.daostack.io/ to see. Lots of decisions are made without proposing finances.
Use-case of DAO is too limited.
TAO just open the new world for blockchain and crypto currency. More business can be operated on-chain. We can involve more people, more capital. Even google’s business can be Operated via TAO one day.
Most of the company in the world can operate on TAO.
Imagine Google or Facebook business on blokchain. All ad revenue can be transparent and all stake holder can receive earning. Payment and stake exchange can all be on-chain.
Hey @ddedi,
I am also interested in DAOs and how this idea could be applied in real-life companies, but I find it especially fascinating when it’s combined with the so-called platform cooperativism - meaning that blockchain can bring to the table not only decentralization and transparency, but also profit sharing and rewarding the actual producers of the product.
One of æternity’s partners - Comrade Cooperative is already doing that and it’s a great example of how employees actually own the company and are thus much more motivated to contribute on a daily basis:
https://comradecoop.com/
Do you have any other examples of a similar structure?
Albena
Actually I like the distinction between TAO’s and DAO’s.
A DAO has limited use cases and so does TAO - to each it’s own.
DAO is more suitable for a flat/network business structures where each entity is somewhat autonomous and can operate without supervision and only needs connection to a “central platform” for job/task acquisiotion. Each entity can easily calculate it’s own profits and costs depending on the unique environment in which it operates. The network itself need not have “all” the information about the operations of each individual entity. In a way DAO’s are akin to a bottom-up architecture of a model, where the design of each unique element indicates a need for a change at top of the structure, i.e. the network itself.
TAO’s, on the other hand, are just an improvement to the current hierarchically operated companies, with the much-needed element of more visibility to stakeholders and customers which typically operate at “lower” levels. This can enhance trust and allow the company to operate more freely knowing that all concerned entities have the proper information.
I can imagine a progressive organization using both of the approaches for it’s different units of operation.
Something relevant to the discussion:
Good analysis. A former colleague of mine, Michael Schillo, wrote his dissertation on organisational structures in multiagent systems, including a framework of parameters to specify forms of organisations and a simulation environment. Though this was targeting autonomous software agents instead of humans, and it’s 15 years old now, but it might still be relevant for this discussion, or maybe there’s follow-up research (though Michael left academia afterwards AFAIK).