onchainorgs

@oco

3 Following

15 Followers

onchainorgs pfp

(Thoughts while reading Brave New World Revisited) Do DAOs over or under organize compared to existing organizations or existing means of organizing?

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Rolf Hoefer pfp

1/ DAOs are fundamentally about the O in DAOs. The subject in the phrase "decentralized autonomous organization" is "organization", and not "decentralized" or" autonomous" other two words.

1 reply

1 recast

2 reactions

Rolf Hoefer pfp

3/ Put simply perhaps, we might as well replace "decentralized autonomous" with "onchain". DAOs are really just "onchain organizations". OOs?

0 reply

1 recast

1 reaction

onchainorgs pfp

The irony is that *trust between individuals* in frontier markets have a much higher premium than *trust between individuals* in developed markets because trust between individuals depends on trust towards the government. If individuals trust government less, trust between individuals cost a lot more.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

onchainorgs pfp

These 4 reasons apply to frontier markets. When compared to developed markets: 1. Admin procedures are less cumbersome. 2. Your jurisdiction and its law is clear on legality and guarantees your operating agreement. 3. You trust your guarantor—out of respect or fear. 4. Less determined by market than on/offchain.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

onchainorgs pfp

You need DAOs when: 1. Admin procedures ie registering businesses is cumbersome. 2. What's on your operating agreement is illegal, alegal, or not guaranteed by your jurisdiction and its law. 3. You distrust your guarantor ie govrnment. 4. You need immediate execution of decisions that's free from human error.

2 replies

0 recast

2 reactions

onchainorgs pfp

Far East Asia governments such as Japan and Taiwan are embracing and leveraging DAOs for public and common goods. Are there any examples like these outside Far East Asia or are all examples centered around individuals and groups of individuals so far? https://nishikigoinft.com/crypto-village

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

onchainorgs pfp

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

onchainorgs pfp

What are some Network States questions that keep you awake? A couple of mine: 1. How tightly is citizenship tied to land ownership in current human history? 2. How do we differentiate between states and land boundaries?

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Rolf Hoefer pfp

DAOs are often reduced to ideas of "governance". DAOs can be more though. As *organizations*, DAOs can accountably and reliably deliver goods and services. Is a DAO with governance that doesn't reliably deliver goods and services better than a DAO without governance yet reliable delivery of goods and services?

0 reply

1 recast

3 reactions

Rolf Hoefer pfp

1/ Creators can leverage DAOs as a way to easily and quickly measure the way people want to manage value in a system. The focus is on *managing* value in a system, not on creating, distributing, or owning value per se--that's arguably more token related. DAOs do not, per se, require a token to manage value.

2 replies

2 recasts

4 reactions

Rolf Hoefer pfp

1/ I was reading up on a friend's research paper. While the authors viewed top down hierarchies as hard to design and enforce, many DAOs view top down hierarchies as ideologically undesirable. There are some fascinating insights. A thread ⬇️

2 replies

3 recasts

7 reactions

onchainorgs pfp

8/ My hope is we figure out a way to maintain borderlessness at scale on our decentralized systems. Otherwise we'll be back at square 1.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

onchainorgs pfp

7/ The fall of Binance is an L to globalism and a W for internationalism. Much like how the internet has borders under the hood (that's less strict than physical borders) I'm left wondering whether our "decentralized internet of x" will have drawn out borders a few decades in the future.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

onchainorgs pfp

6/ Whether corrupt or not, Binance was a globalist organization. CZ tried to create an organization that walked the tightrope of boundaries between jurisdictions. Coinbase chose to respect internationalism from day 1. They were, are, and will be a U.S. based company that's compliant to U.S. law.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

onchainorgs pfp

5/ The road to guaranteed limited liability was very clear—play by the rules of established jurisdictions and their boundaries. Setup an organization in a single jurisdiction.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

onchainorgs pfp

4/ A founder would be foolish to not have limited liability built into her company. Not playing by the rules cut off investors and capital. Limited liability put founders on the hook for fiduciary duty towards investors.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

onchainorgs pfp

3/ When it came to off and onchain orgs that handled borderless money and tokens, founders couldn't just handwave legal threats from the powers that be. Building a business that integrates crypto, whether you issued tokens or not, was risky because crypto was risky.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

onchainorgs pfp

2/ Bitcoin aroused imagination that money could become borderless like communication. It gave birth to an industry and new applications in culture and organizing. It's still mindblowing how all that's happened in only 15 years.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

onchainorgs pfp

1/ CZ and Binance biting the dust and @barmstrong 's take highlights a tension between internationalism and globalism that exists in crypto. https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1727054176763756826

1 reply

1 recast

1 reaction