NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
They're pretty big on law and order though, and it would be ridiculously easy to portray crypto as enabling criminals.
Bitcoin discussion and news
- Thread starter camouflage
- Start date
They're pretty big on law and order though, and it would be ridiculously easy to portray crypto as enabling criminals.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Governments have got plenty of experience infiltrating organisations. It doesn't matter how many DAOs there are, because the weak link in any security arrangement is always the human element.
Why would they do that, if they know it's not true AND it wouldn't be in their interests (with the expection of a few polticians that really are in the pockets of some banks) ????
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Yes, and? That just proves my point. There are a variety of interests pushing that shit, some of them in government even. Yet they haven't been able to do it, at least in the UK.
To infiltrate many DAOs would take many people because each DAO would be local and would therefore meet up with new members in person and ID them before they are voted onto the DAO.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Of course it would be in their interests to sink crypto. You've spent pages and pages going on about how the crypto "good guys" will usher in a new age in which taxation will be optional. That's a direct material interest right there.
I really hope they don't succeed. But my point stands. The crypto narrative doesn't depend on a dangerous CBDC theat.
The CBDC threat is weakened by the presence of public blockchain eco-systems and economies that the government can't control.
I've never said taxes are optional. I've said you don't have to pay if you can accept the consquences of that. That's no different than what we have right now.
All of that was written in the context of CBDCs where the government can take your money directly without even asking.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
So what? Governments have deep enough pockets that even infiltrating a local anti-bypass group is doable for them. If a significant loss of tax revenue is on the cards, you can bet your arse they're going to get stuck in.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
If it's no different to what we have now, then what's the bloody point? Why waste time re-inventing the wheel?
The government can do that already.
That's a local group that exists for one local aim.
Imagine a national organistion with a few hundred DAOs, where each DAO has no leader, they just vote.
If he state infliltrated each one of those hundreds of DAOs they would only have one vote in each DAO.
They can't get hold of the money, because each DAO doesn't need a treasurer.
They could try and influence votes, but hundreds of infiltrators just to create a vote swing? How would that be worth the money?
We are talking about one side effect being the same. Get some perspective. While you're at it, perhaps you could re-read the myriad of posts where I said blockchain / web3 tech would make paying taxes easier and fairer.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It's not a strawman argument at all. You're the one who brought up the BoE, and I don't think you really understand what it is that it does, btw, if you think it (or any other bank for that matter) can just print money without anyone noticing. You're providing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, while not even touching the myriad actual problems that do exist.
Me? You’re the gullible fool who thinks that algorithms operate in some neutral, context-free frame outside of discrimination. Like there aren’t plentiful counter-examples in which both society’s and the programmers’ prejudices become embedded in the code.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
I'm shocked - shocked I tell you - to read the use cases on that website and find absolutely nothing about verifying the delivery of the correct, working goods in order to execute a smart contract for payment. This is why I think there is no point in talking to you. I will wait q_w_e_r_t_y's answer because even if I disagree with her she does answer questions properly in ways that makes me think.
You just post up nonsense that doesn't answer the question at all.
Have a nice evening.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It is an achievement of sorts to post on a bulletin board frequented by a bunch of socialists, anarchists and communists and provoke them into explaining at length how capitalism works from a pov that those aspects of it are better than the nonsense you're peddling.
Storm Fox
Trying the find the next noun to verb
If a DAO is about moving Crypto around then it's open to voter bribes and as there is no hierarchy there is no one to report it to.
If DAOs move beyond just moving Crypto around, people will need to do things, things related to whatever the thing the DAO is set up to do. You'll get the same interplay of personalities. Hard-working people, lazy people, ambitious people. What happens if someone fails to do something, how would that be coded in the DAO's Smart Contract? People are too complicated to codify. What's to stop people just ignoring the DAO vote.
StakerOne the way you write about DAOs it is as an isolated concept, but it's not and cannot be it has to be integrated with the people who interact with.
Edited for clarity
If DAOs move beyond just moving Crypto around, people will need to do things, things related to whatever the thing the DAO is set up to do. You'll get the same interplay of personalities. Hard-working people, lazy people, ambitious people. What happens if someone fails to do something, how would that be coded in the DAO's Smart Contract? People are too complicated to codify. What's to stop people just ignoring the DAO vote.
StakerOne the way you write about DAOs it is as an isolated concept, but it's not and cannot be it has to be integrated with the people who interact with.
Edited for clarity
Last edited:
It's a smart contract Oracle system. It's job is to pass data back to blockchain smart contracts so those smart contracts have the data, to make a decision.
Chainlink is permissionless with it's own eco-system.
It's not going to list every use case imaginable to humanity especially when that use case wasn't live when they authored the page.
You not talking to me doesn't change anything, enjoy your evening.
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
This is a Web2 problem of centralisation.
In a Web3 decentralised solution, the computer modelled version of the real world would stay updated because any entity could update the satnav, rather than just Amazon signing off on it, instead they would have veto power.
yeah, chainlink wouldnt work as an oracle in cases like this. (I dont actually agree with StakerOne's definition of oracles either, but its a bit technical).
In this case, you could either go down the UMA crowdsourcing truth route, or down the more legal Kleros route and then put it on-chain using an oracle that confirms the "judgement".
But thats the point of a DAO that people dont need to do things, the smart contracts do the thing.
The people need to
- design the smart contracts
- write the smart contracts
- deploy the smart contracts
- govern the smart contracts.
Once the first three are done, the smart contract does its thing....forever. If its a smart contract to sent $1 to the cute puppies home wallet every day for the next 100 years, it will do that.
The final one is about control over the smart contract, what if you wanted it to sent $5 a day, or sent it to the growly dogs home. People can do that, but increasingly other smart contracts are taking over that role. In governance, when tokenholders vote, the smart contract changes. Thats what the vote does. No one re-writes the contracts, the changing of the contract is written into the vote.
It's a lot harder to bribe all (or most) of the voters in DAO than a traditional organistions treasurer. Nothing needs to reported to anyone because it's all there for everyone to see on the blockchain.
If people don't vote and there isn't enough votes - then whoever motioned the vote would have to resubmit the vote, because no money is moving anywhere without it.
No one has to codify anything unless they want extra functionality. Most DAOs won't need that extra functionality.
The main attraction to DAOs (At least from my point of view) is that no one can get at the money without a vote to move some of it.
That's powerful because between a load of people, you could be holding a large amount of money and it can't be confiscated as any outside hostile entity would have to compromise a whole load of you.
When you form the DAO, you decide how many votes would qualify as a quorum.
It should be stressed that solutons like https://aragon.org/ have templates for it all, with a friendly front end. It's not like users actually need to cut smart contract code themselves, it's all generated by the Aragon front end.
Communists are authoritarian by nature, so no surprise there.
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
No, the oracle is for taking off-chain data and putting it onchain, or conversely taking on-chain data and effecting the off-chain world.
So suppose for a smart contract that I am writing that will buy gas when it falls below a certain bitcoin price (useful for miners), I need to know the price of gas in order to create that derivative, but the price of gas isnt onchain, I need some entity to tell me truthfully and reliably what the price of gas is. I could rely on a data feed from somebody like the financial times, and datafeeds are available, but how do I know its true? In many markets there could be significant financial advantages to data feed manipulation.
Oracles are the things that verify the truth of the information that is coming on chain, and the truth of information going offchain into smart contract powered devices. They are the bridge between the old world and the new - oracles are the things that keep the two worlds in alignment.
AI is a comletly different kettle of fish as AI has to work out what to do with the data.
A script that is nothing more than a series of decisions that are dependent on financial transactions, can't discriminate or have any kind of bias, if it did, by your logic you would be arguing that simple taxes such as VAT are biased when they hit the blockchain, but magically aren't when calculated in QuickBooks or Sage. Please.
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
Ummm....have you seen the US just sanctioned Tornado Cash?
I love your optimism StakerOne but we have a long road ahead of us and the governments are not our friends.
why don't libertarians join social groups?
it's all handwaving and meaningful ACRONYMS
a fintech ponzi scheme
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
Yes it was discussed on this thread already. It doesn't bother me in the scheme of things.
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
Had to look up ODBC, but no not really, although oracles may use something like that as part of verification, the verification is that the actual data content is correct, not just that it is formatted correctly.
For example, you might have an API from a thermometer that says that the tempreture in London right now is 0 degrees. It may be valid data in that it is correctly formatted, but its wrong. Oracles are the things that pick up that the data proposed to the chain is wrong. There are a variety of designs for how oracles confirm that the data is correct. Some of the most popular are chainlink, UMA and Band, they all have different mechanisms.
Similar threads
