21st Century Methods for Democracy

[padraig (u.s.)]

I do agree at least that the lowering of demographic barriers in terms of gender, race, etc is a more or less unalloyed good

tho I doubt its particular to DAOs, so much as a gradually increasing byproduct of so much work becoming remote

that is a case where I think greater physical space certainly doesn't eliminate, but certainly cuts down on, cultural factors related to hiring and shift more focus to merit - you still need, perhaps even moreso, the ability to operate on a team, coordinate on projects, etc but bosses are I suspect less likely to hire people who like and sound like them if they're hiring remotely

 

[Clinamenic]

I agree with you and Lorde here, and I disagree with my more optimistic web3 compatriots, those who believe this tech will deliver us from big tech and the other loci of power in the world, public or private. But I also disagree with people who insist that nothing will change for the better, that web3 might as well be tilting at windmills. I think this tech will bring some good and some bad, and I'm just trying to help nudge it toward the former.

And yeah the digital society thing of not knowing phenotypic qualities of people isn't particular to DAOs. DAOs are just an example of an internet-native, quasi post-demographic work environment. I may soon be earning money without my colleagues knowing my name. That, I think, is somewhat novel, and maybe the financial model of DAOs, in the current regulatory void, allows for this.

 

[Clinamenic]

My optimism is more that the big tech powers will find ways to get richer, while life nonetheless becomes more comfortable for the vast majority. That I think is the effect tech-driven capitalism has. Minimizes absolute poverty, increases relative poverty, i.e. wealth disparity.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

My optimism is more that the big tech powers will find ways to get richer, while life nonetheless becomes more comfortable for the vast majority. That I think is the effect tech-driven capitalism has. Minimizes absolute poverty, increases relative poverty, i.e. wealth disparity.

that's at least a realistic version of a good outcome

I have strongly suspect that it will be significantly more Black Mirror meets cyberpunk - not the kool parts that everyone likes about badass hackers wearing mirrorshades, the everything else of a dystopian near-future where unfettered tech-capitalism has basically eradicated social safety nets and the idea of uncommodified leisure time, and we're all being zapped on our shock collars by metaverse thought police every time we try to turn off the mandated stream of advertising beamed directly into our AR interfaces or whatever. but yunno also with massive ever worsening environmental degradation as well.

but I agree trying to nudging toward a good outcome is a better pursuit than just throwing your hands up and saying fuck it

and minimizing absolute poverty is certainly a worthwhile pursuit, even if it I'm not really sure about that the A to B of it always lines up here

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

at first I was like, getting paid without the people paying you knowing your name is pretty fucking nuts

at least at a job that's nominally "legitimate" and not in some black or gray market sector

which speaks as you said to the lack of regulation, can't imagine that's going to last

someone will find a way to tax you soon enough, never fear

the only two things it's possible to be certain of, and futurists haven't conquered death yet either

 

[Clinamenic]

at first I was like, getting paid without the people paying you knowing your name is pretty fucking nuts

at least at a job that's nominally "legitimate" and not in some black or gray market sector

which speaks as you said to the lack of regulation, can't imagine that's going to last

someone will find a way to tax you soon enough, never fear

the only two things it's possible to be certain of, and futurists haven't conquered death yet either

One of the other things about these DAO positions, at least for one of the DAOs I'm in, is that I'd be getting paid from our collective treasury. So a bunch of people bought membership tokens, and the funds have compiled into a treasury wallet. Normally wallets just need one person to make transactions, but we're setting up a "multi-sig" wallet where any fund movements would require three out of five of the wallets owners to approve.

Even so, I'd be reporting any income I get. Not sure as what kind of income, and I think a lot of these details just haven't been clarified yet. And yeah there is a chance that, a couple years down the line, I won't be allowed to join this kind of position of authority without disclosing certain personal information.

And its also an organizational feature that reflects a certain centralized decision-making process that does against the ethos of DAOs, but nonetheless is simply more expedient and feasible in some cases. Many DAOs are reckoning with this reality by taking an approach of "progressive decentralization."

Ideally, in my opinion, there would be a an entirely coded ("on-chain") way of having membership token holders vote to elect or reject treasury board members. If there even is a technical solution to this, I may suggest it.

 

[Clinamenic]

Also, re: environmental dystopia, I actually believe that the major asset managers and stakeholders of the world (EG Larry Fink) are on board with the green transition, just so long as they don't have to absorb the losses. Basically I think the "Great Reset" will more or less be effective, and I'm in favor of it, from what I know.

 

[Clinamenic]

What I'm proposing for how Lobby3 mediates the web3 regulation discussion, and which may be scalable to an international franchise of lobbying consultation DAOs for web3 policy, and which holds a non-trivial chance at informing the next paradigm shift in the evolution of democracy:

 

[Clinamenic]

 

[thirdform]

all revisionist deviations from communism in the final instance amount to renouncing the dictatorship of the proletariat, when one class strangles the other class so that it no longer raises it head to call for freedom. Democracy is for blubby american existential wrecks and stalinists - never mind it Stan.

The worthwhile innovation of capitalism is the economic society. I.E: the inherent tendancy to centrralisation at a national level, and hence globally. Decentralisation is a step even below what we have now.

The German Workers' party — at least if it adopts the program — shows that its socialist ideas are not even skin-deep; in that, instead of treating existing society (and this holds good for any future one) as the basis of the existing state (or of the future state in the case of future society), it treats the state rather as an independent entity that possesses its own intellectual, ethical, and libertarian bases.

And what of the riotous misuse which the program makes of the words "present-day state", "present-day society", and of the still more riotous misconception it creates in regard to the state to which it addresses its demands?

"Present-day society" is capitalist society, which exists in all civilized countries, more or less free from medieval admixture, more or less modified by the particular historical development of each country, more or less developed. On the other hand, the "present-day state" changes with a country's frontier. It is different in the Prusso-German Empire from what it is in Switzerland, and different in England from what it is in the United States. The "present-day state" is therefore a fiction.

Nevertheless, the different states of the different civilized countries, in spite or their motley diversity of form, all have this in common: that they are based on modern bourgeois society, only one more or less capitalistically developed. They have, therefore, also certain essential characteristics in common. In this sense, it is possible to speak of the "present-day state" in contrast with the future, in which its present root, bourgeois society, will have died off.

Charlie - Gothakritik.

 

[sufi]

View attachment 11341


View attachment 11342

how does all the money fit into this?

 

[Clinamenic]

how does all the money fit into this?

I'm hoping this can help with solution discovery, and save congressional budget by fostering a demand for these technical solutions - which I'd prefer to be open-source, but I don't know how to structure that. It could be something we build a grant program around: developing open-source solutions that would make the industry better somehow.

Anyway, this is just the nth iteration of the organizational model, but we're closing in on certain features. The organization is so horizontal it can be hard to get things done something.

In any case, I think refusing to work with the present financial incentives is to ignore the wake of nature. Thats why I'm opting for the more pragmatic "communitarian capitalism" if you will, which seems to be what Glen Weyl falls under.

I believe in trying to nudge the transition from rule of law to rule of code, to a status quo that fosters public goods and a sense of community, more so than the internet does at present.

 

[thirdform]

In any case, I think refusing to work with the present financial incentives is to ignore the wake of nature. Thats why I'm opting for the more pragmatic "communitarian capitalism" if you will, which seems to be what Glen Weyl falls under.

Why would you do this? You are swindling yourself out of a profit. At least the old gangster capitalist can fund a terrorist cell when the occasion necessitates it, you know.

I'm not a moral critic of capitalism, maybe in the distant future i shall be compelled to become a capitalist. But one should go all the way. Ruin your opponents and then fund the strikers of your opponents.

 

[sufi]

I'm hoping this can help with solution discovery, and save congressional budget by fostering a demand for these technical solutions - which I'd prefer to be open-source, but I don't know how to structure that. It could be something we build a grant program around: developing open-source solutions that would make the industry better somehow.

Anyway, this is just the nth iteration of the organizational model, but we're closing in on certain features. The organization is so horizontal it can be hard to get things done something.

In any case, I think refusing to work with the present financial incentives is to ignore the wake of nature. Thats why I'm opting for the more pragmatic "communitarian capitalism" if you will, which seems to be what Glen Weyl falls under.

I believe in trying to nudge the transition from rule of law to rule of code, to a status quo that fosters public goods and a sense of community, more so than the internet does at present.

the money flow is what lobbying is all about though - any policy guff is just a front for businesses and shadowy interests to buy influence (bribe politicians), isnt it?
how would this scheme deal with that stark mafia style political reality?

 

[Clinamenic]

lol I just met with the policy director for the state of Wyoming. Very open to blockchain technology.

 

[Clinamenic]

Andrew Yang, independently from his web3 involvement, advocates ranked choice voting, which is the sort of thing I'm pushing for as well. Unless I become convinced that RCV introduces problems worse than those it solves.

 

[luka]

Stan you've given up all pretence to rhought you just channel the ruling ideology you've gone backwards

 

[Clinamenic]

Stan you've given up all pretence to rhought you just channel the ruling ideology you've gone backwards

Fret not my friend, for the gulag you’ll be sent to will not be using ranked choice voting

 

[Clinamenic]

Correction, I’m in the process of subsuming the ruling ideology, in a properly dialectical fashion - albeit a baroque and dizzyingly circumnavigative fashion.

 

[luka]

We all get lazy as we age. I will remember you at your best don't fret