Quote from: vlad12 on May 30, 2016, 08:46:53 PM

Quote from: GreenBits on May 30, 2016, 06:43:43 PM

Excellent article. I had general issues with the concept of crowd governance, I was not even aware of the voting rules that went along with this "grand experiment". Simply insane. As said before, this system makes it too easy for a single actor, or cabal of actors, to subvert the group will to their own wishes. I have a feeling this DAO thing is going to go south quickly in the future, and the entire would will be watching.

Well that's kind of how actual companies work. A small group of people make the decisions for all the stakeholders even if a minority of stakeholders disagree with the motion. I cant buy 100$ worth of Apple stock and expect to have my opinions influence the direction of the company in any meaningful way. The problem I see here is that actual companies have very qualified individuals calling the shots, whereas the DAO you just have anonymous actors, most of which are lucky ETH IPO investors and probably know close to nothing about running a company.

You are correct in that this is similar to how companies work. However, real companies have an additional layer of governance, the SEC. The SEC figured out a long time ago that money and anonymity don't really work to well in practice. The ability to know who has what allocation of shares along with the ability to see how said shares voted, prevents actors from behaving immorally as they would be subject to prosecution. If we don't have an individual to assign liability to, this quickly becomes a quasi legal clusterfuck waiting to explode. Wait until someone loses a significant amount of value on one of these "projects" and becomes litigious. Who gets sued? The yes voters? The caretakers? The developers, or the exchange that hosted the orderbook? Possible even all shareholders (it was a majority decision..)?

Until these concerns are addressed, this 'asset' is a bit poison for my tastes. Ethereum has promise, but shit like this is Ethereum shooting itself in the foot. Something this experimental leaves too much upside risk to associate with, especially as a burgeoning technology that is trying to gain a foothold next to something as established as btc. The only caveat of Ethereum is smart contracts. They are cool, but the use cases seem like they can be solved with sidechains. And the energy being used to develop these alts can be directed towards the technology we have the most experience with, good old bitcoin. Blockchain technology is not going to save the world, it's going to help some facets of politics, and finance. And that's all we really need it to do.