Looks like Sam's likely outcome flipped a total of *four* times over the last week. Must have been intensely stressful for him.

I hope that world-consequential AI firms can have governance that is more open and transparent. Neither the "profit maxing trad corp" nor the "unaccountable board of 5 people making decisions based on secret knowledge" thing sit well with me. Need a better approach.

Ok but what would you recommend? Famously Ethereum governance is… at best nebulous.

The only problem is externality pricing.

Building https://negationgame.com

I do think the nebulousness is on balance good.

Do we *want* there to exist a specific set of people who have a clear formally specified right to get together and vote to make a DAO fork?

The strategic ambiguity in the current approach actually makes such actions appropriately costly imo.

I think that’s right, so formalize that property it into a mechanism set.

What’s more concerning is that if someone wants to argue for a change to governance it’s not clear what properties to preserve, this is the classic Bitcoin block size problem: lack of clarity just means stasis, which is ok until it’s not

We won’t always have the consensus mechanism called you, and then what?