a1z2 💫 on Warpcast

polynya pfp

As some of you have noticed, a big theme on this Farcaster profile is objectivity vs. subjectivity The human experience is extremely complex, multi-faceted, diverse, and thus deeply subjective Financialization is an attempt to dumb some things down into objective numbers. For some things, like capital allocation, exchange of goods, it works brilliantly. Blockchains are exclusively the domain of the strictly objective. But for almost everything else, forcing subjective matters into objective outputs leads to potentially catastrophic outcomes, and the root cause is plutocracy - determining governance by wealth, to the worst-case scenario, truth itself. I don't need to tell how that's peak dystopia and an affront to humanity. Fuck "info finance" with a bag of stale scrotums

9 replies

12 recasts

88 reactions

a1z2 💫 pfp

Token-weighted governance for DAOs is far from ideal, but I don’t dismiss the feasibility of other mechanisms or organizational designs. The question of whether DAOs *need* blockchains is a separate but interesting conversation. I tend to lean toward your perspective, but I also think it depends on the technological paradigm they’re operating in. In terms of “info finance”— I wanted to get your opinion on prediction markets post-election. Imagine more mature information markets in a world that looks to them for high signal, what are they actually doing? Are people really trading on what they perceive will happen, or will information markets be so high signal that capital actually ends up steering sentiment? In traditional trading, hedge funds generate alpha and FUD to gain advantage or influence events. Wouldn’t capital do the same thing here? It almost seems like it would be more appropriately called “info trading.”

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction