Watch Episode
Episode Description
Most DAOs sound great… until it’s time to make decisions, pay contributors, and ship work consistently. In this episode, we’re designing the ideal DAO and confronting the hard parts: governance that doesn’t stall, incentives that don’t get gamed, treasury systems that protect the community, and a structure that can scale without losing its mission.
Transcript
Click to expand transcript
It’s a Bitcoin podcast. The only one that’s making your money in you to the Bitcoin market. So hold on. Oh, wait. I remember. >> I remember. We have to go where the people are. That that that was what we need to do. So, we need to go into Home Lab. We need to go in these places and like set up the show around the randos that we encounter so we can be like, “Hey, do you know what a DAO is? Let’s talk about it.” And they’ll be like, “We don’t give a We just care about gaming mice and keyboards and fast frame rate for our Overwatch and Marvel rivals and arc raiders. >> Hey man, I recently found out that my brother-in-law is a keyboard enthusiast like you. >> I went to go visit him for the first time in Texas and this dude had keyboards hanging on his wall >> and I was like, “Oh I should take a picture and show Jesse.” >> I watched or looked >> He’s a dink. So, >> that’s a reasonable that’s a reasonable >> uh litinous test on whether or not someone’s like into something if they’re like putting on their walls. All right, you’ve passed a threshold on like this is a Jesse’s is like, “Okay, he heard that.” He’s like, “Okay, I may actually be interested versus like this guy has a has a has a mechanical keyboard he bought from Best Buy. I don’t know.” >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. If he starts putting on the wall, you’re right. Like, he probably has some decent ones. I was messing around with this keyboard at Best Buy like two weeks ago and I loved it. Like I was like, “Oh, this is so good.” And I was like, “If Jesse heard me say that, he probably stabbed me in the kidney.” >> It would not hard like any health keyboards have gotten much better just just to say that. >> Oh, there was one that was it was like perfect. I wanted to buy it on the spot, but wifey was there. Gotta buy that when wifey’s not around. Anyways, everybody, welcome to Bitcoin Podcast. This is episode number 16, 17. It’s in there. You could count. Just count them and watch all of them. Why not? Um, this episode is a little different than we’ve been doing for like the last 10 episodes. We’re going to be trying to have like this one cohesive, long-ending, never- ending conversation. Very meta if you ask me. And something just piqued my interest today. I was just doing my internet thing and then the talic decided to tweet. He said, this is what he said on the tweet. I should bring it up. Let me see if I can bring it up. Let me see if I bring it up. I got it. >> Oh, you’re gonna bring it up. >> I want it, bro. >> Bring it up. We’re gonna bring it up. We’re put it in here. >> Show some comments. >> I got you, boo. >> Nice. I appreciate you. >> That big? Too big? That big enough? >> Uh, I can barely read it. Can you read it? I can’t read that. Ah, there we go. >> We good with that? >> So, let’s just read it and then let’s talk. Right. So, we got we need more Dows, but different and better Dows. The original drive to build Ethereum was heavily inspired by decentralized autonomous organizations, systems of code and rules that lived on decentralized networks that could manage resources and direct activity more efficiently and more robustly than traditional governments and corporations could. Okay. So, it’s a good it’s a good start. It’s a good intro. I’m hooked. All right. Let’s get back. Since then, the concept of Dows has migrated to essentially referring to a treasury controlled by token holder voting, or as we like to call it, a chat room with a bank account. >> Yeah. >> A design uh which works, hence why it got copied so much, but a design which is inefficient, vulnerable to capture, and fails utterly at the goal of mitigating the weaknesses of human politics. As a result, many have become cynical about Dows. I’m one of them, right? But we need Dows. We need them. Asterisks. Asterisks. We need Dows to create better oracles. Today, decentralized stable coins, prediction markets, and other basic building blocks of the DeFi are built on oracle designs that we are not satisfied with. The oracle is token based. Whales can manipulate the answer on a subjective issue and becomes difficult to counteract them. Fundamentally, a token-based oracle cannot have a cost of attack higher than its market cap, which in turn means it cannot secure assets without extracting rent higher than the discount rate. And if the oracle uses human curation, I almost said coercion for some reason, human creation, then it’s not very decentralized. Problem here is not greed. The problem is that we have a bad Oracle design, so we need better ones. And bootstrapping them is not just a technical problem, but also a social problem. All right. So, that’s one point. So, he’s talking about something technical here or something social. I don’t know. Should we read the rest of the tweet or should we break it and stop right there? >> Read it all. Let’s go ahead and get through it. >> Here’s another point. We need Dows for onchain dispute resolution. Okay. All right. A necessary component of many types of more advanced smart contract use cases. Argo insurance. This is the same type of problem as price oracles but even more subjective. So even harder to get right. We need Dows to maintain lists. These include lists of applications known to be secure and not scams, lists of uh canananical canonical interfaces, lists of token contract addresses, and much more. We need Dows to get projects off the ground quickly. If you have a group of people who all want something done and are willing to contribute some funds perhaps in an exchange for benefits, then how do you manage this? Especially if the task is to short duration for legal entities to be worth it. We need dows to do long-term project maintenance. If the original team of a project disappears, how can a community keep going? How could people coming in get the funding they need? Oh, good question. One framework that I didn’t this tweet is super long. One framework that I use to analyze this is convex versus concave like light. We’re talking about light >> lenses. Lenses >> lenses lensing which is a part of optics. So kind of >> yeah optics. My bad. That’s the word. That’s that’s the exact word I’m looking for from my own link. Not not saying it’s a shitty link. It’s just a link that obviously belongs to him. He does have one. Uh if the DAO is solving a concave problem, then it is in an environment where if faced with two possible courses of action, a compromise is better than a coin flip. >> I I just we can talk about I mean I went into the concave versus convex later. We can talk about it afterwards. Let’s get to the whole thing. >> Yeah, let’s keep going. Let’s keep going. Hence, you want systems that maximize robustness by averaging or rather medianing. I think I’ve never seen someone use that as a verb. Medianing. Interesting. By medianing in input from many sources and protect against capture and financial attacks. If the DAO is solving a convex problem, then you want the ability to make decisive choices and follow through on them. In this case, leaders could be good and the job of the decentralized process should be to keep the leaders in check. How do you define? Okay, sorry, my mind just keeps racing. For all this work, we need to solve two problems. Privacy and decision fatigue. Without privacy, governance becomes a social game. See another link of mine to my that I do. And if people have to make decisions every week for the first month, you see excited participation. But over time, willingness to participate and even to stay informed declines. Yes, that is the behavior curve of change. Okay. I see modern technology as opening the door to a renaissance here. Oo, I like the R word. specifically zero knowledge and in some cases MPC FHE what is that fully multiartic encryption >> I’m going to get fully homorphic though these should be used only when ZK alone cannot solve the problem for privacy AI to solve decision fatigue consensus finding communication tools like pollless that’s a good one but going further AI must be used carefully we must not put full-size Deep Seek or where’s GPT 5.2 in charge of a DAO and call it a day or we could and let the chaos rain, baby. No, rather AIA must be put in thoughtfully as something that scales and enhances human intention and judgment rather than replacing it. This could be done at DAO level see how deepfunding.org works or at individual level user controlled local LLMs that vote on their behalf. It’s important to think about the DAO stack as also as also including the communication layer. Hence the need for forums and platforms specifically specially designed for the purpose of multi-IG plus well-designed consensus finding tools can easily beat idealized collusion resistant quadratic funding plus crypto Twitter. Many syllables. >> Yeah. >> But in all cases we need new designs. Projects that need new oracles and want to build their own should see that as 50% of their job, not 10%. Projects working on new governance design should build with ZK and AI in mind. And they should treat the communication layer as 50% of their job, not 10% of their job. This is how we can ensure the decentralization and robustness of the Ethereum base layer also applies to the world that gets built on top. >> All right. Tweet done. >> I have tangential questions after you guys 20 characters. >> Uh you guys resolve uh the meaning of the post and get to why >> why your your counterarguments do stand or don’t stand. I have questions but they’re not relevant to that. So I’ll let you guys go first. >> First off, did you get like now that you read the whole thing? We all read the whole thing. What’s a doubt? >> You’re asking me that question? >> Yeah, I’m asking you that question. What’s a Dow? You have you have you have like you still are a critic of the idea of a DAO being useful. What’s the DAO? >> Uh well, let’s go with the title. Decentralized autonomous organization or distributed autonomous organization, depending who you’re talking to, right? Uh let’s just go with decentralized. um organizations are not that like here’s the only thing here’s one thing I’ll say this before I even start my argument Dows can only really exist for the robots we’ll put that out there like if there is a organization that is deciding what robots do and don’t do how robots do and don’t spend money and how robots do and don’t govern themselves yes a DAO could probably work right but you can’t just brush over human politics because you don’t like them and that is what I fear Vital does a lot. Why? Cuz he’s him. He’s socially him. And people that don’t like politics are socially him. And you can’t just brush it off. Politics are a part of human organization. And we are social creatures. And if you can’t get aligned with the politics, then you’re just not going to be a part of it. And that’s how that usually goes. You’ll get you’ll get ignored. You’ll get isolated. You’ll get what’s the what’s the worst word? Not ignored or isolated, but like ostracized. Politics is a part of human existence. >> Politics. >> Yeah. How is that talking about removing politics? >> Well, he brushed it off in one line. He was like, “We can just program out all the human politics.” No, you cannot. You absolutely cannot. All you’ll get is a bunch of people that like to program and then they’ll develop their own politics and then they’ll control the whole scheme. And that’s currently what we have in crypto. We got like 1% of the nerdiest of the nerds controlling the entire thing. You can’t tell me I’m wrong about that. >> And fails utterly at the goal of mitigating the weaknesses of human politics. >> Does that mean getting rid of human politics? In fact, he says in a in a context of a convex problem. We can get to what that means in a hot in a hot second. >> What the hell does that mean? That’s what’s wrapping my mind. >> We’ll get to it in a second. Uh if the DAO is solving a convex problem, then you want the ability to make decisive choices and follow through on them. In this case, leaders can be good and the job of a decentralized process should be to keep the leaders in check. Now, what’s a convex problem? I’ll tell you, I’ll show you through his article. >> I I imagine the metaphor of light being focused >> or we can just look at the picture that states it. This is a better way of looking at it probably. Right? So if you can’t see that on the left we have a concave world view and the y-axis says how good of an out how good the outcome would be between two different policy choices. So on one on the left silly >> on the right. So like if you’re trying to optimize for a choice any extreme of those two choices is not the optimal solution, >> right? >> I get it. But this is a silly >> choose between the one. And so a convex problem you’re trying to basically meet in the middle and he’s arguing the type of problem depend the whole article explains this idea of like in some cases it’s best to choose something and stick with it in and a lot of cases that are different types of problems it’s best to find your way in the middle and in the areas of problems where it’s best to find your way in the middle then you would like to find a way to average it or median around all the potent potential stakeholders that could weigh in and automating that process via something like a DAO could be a useful thing to do. So, it’s not like this argument of a DAO replaces all the humans. No, it replaces the problem where humans get in the way of the decision-m process. Potentially, we the call is for experimentation and ways of trying to do that. It’s clearly not working in a lot of cases where we’re trying to do that without Dows. And like is the convex world view uh where you’re one of the options is going to be maximally beneficial for the group. So you should be extremist on the convex. >> Yeah. So convex is basically like one of these options is clearly better. Everything in between is worse. >> So like one option is good, the next option is kind of good. Everything in between is bad. Is Ethereum an example of an application of trying to apply a concave world view to development of the protocol? >> Uh or is it >> someone with a convex disposition? We need to focus otherwise we risk becoming the jack of all trades and a master of none. any anytime you use hear like a slippery slope argument they have a world view that is convex of like if we do this it’s gonna be a slippery slope let’s just stick to the simple plan and not not meet meet that change from it in some cases that’s a great thing to do conve concave disision is like going to the extremes has never been good for us you can die from being too cold or too hot we need to find the balance between the two that’s right like if you’re looking for a nuance meet in the middle let’s find out what’s best by taking parts of the options and finding what works for us. That’s a concave disposition and in some problems that’s the right thing to do in some problem. >> So it’s it’s very subjective >> from from like I guess to I’ll just I’ll just I’ll just add my thoughts but then I I do want you and D to figure out some sort of common ground. Like my thoughts are completely orthogonal to that which are uh like paradigm and um their supportive tempo. It looks like they’re more convex worldview in terms of trying to solve the problem of bringing tradi and blockchains together and maximizing performance of a of the underlying blockchain without really uh considering trying to be decentralized because they I imagine they are going to try optics wise to use Ethereum as a settlement layer. But what they will probably end up doing from a business standpoint is try to uh collect most of the EVM uh based liquidity and try to maybe drive Tempo as like a a chain that usurps Ethereum. At least when I I’m not that’s that’s that’s how I see Tempo, especially the people that they’re gathering. They seem to want to make Ethereum rather than a generalized world computer more into a an ASIC meant for financial products if that makes any sense. >> Yeah, it does. I mean that’s that’s the way the trend is going is finance is totally eating crypto which is I mean I mean it’s a great tool. I mean it’s great that that’s just because like especially it seemed like there was tension between Dankrad and Vitalik in terms of development but it was like well well protected I suppose like from both of them kind of going at each other in a public context. And then Danny is also another figure who it seemed like he had differing views as well, but then found some way of trying to get what he wants by creating an organization outside of the EF, which is Etherealize. So like you have like a bunch of different competing organizations trying to see if they can compete to evolve Ethereum itself, the protocol, or to make better versions that >> it’s no different than everything we already have. >> No, no. I’m just again I’m going to the I see multiple convex thinking people brain branch out of the EF to try to form their own version of what Ethereum could be outside of the EF. That would be >> Dank with Tempo and Danny with Etherealize potentially. I’m not I’m not sure that maybe there’s some nuance there that I’m missing, but from the optics of a of a of a passerby, that’s kind of how I see things. But anyway, you guys should go back to your original argument. So, let me go back to the question that Cory asked me. What’s a decentralized autonomous organization? All right, I’m going to try to find a definition to this due. The fact that I’ve worked with like maybe 60 plus organizations in the last 10 years from the high level to the person pushing the buttons on the machine and what I can say is I would say a wellorganized Fortune50 company is a DAO. It’s distributed. It’s autonomous and it is very organized, extremely organized. Sometimes if you step in the wrong spot, you might get fired, right? It is organized to the point and it’s it’s it’s autonomous to the point every 24 hours there’s a data refresh where everybody’s looking at a common operating picture and everybody can make everybody can make decisions based on that common operating picture. within that 24-hour frame, things happen more locally at the local level and how servers and how data and all those things are uh constructed is at the local level. There’s probably policies and how they set it all up and the decisions go from bottom up and top to bottom, but it’s based on fences, right? Like it’s never going to make it up to the CEO to make a decision about something that happens at the local level, right? If it’s a quote unquote con cave problem, right? And there’s a big difference between going one way or the other. Well, that falls on the shoulders of whatever vice principal or whatever person or whatever group of people was in charge at that local level, right? And and if anything goes outside that bound, then it’ll get raised up. But it is very distributed and decentralized because sometimes different regions go down and it doesn’t bring down the whole organization. The whole organization continues to flourish and make money and profit and this that and the other. They just shut a region down because it was failing. >> That’s not decentralized, >> right? >> Well, >> I would argue it’s not when you when you move from distributed. Then >> it’s distributed then. I’ll say we’ll say it’s distributed, not it’s obviously not decentralized as CEO, right? As a person or a board or people that make the big decisions, right? But is it autonomous? Yes. Every single time zone is doing the exact same things hopefully, right? to get to the exact same results. Right? So, in my opinion, a fine-tuned Fortune50 company is a DAO. That’s what we’re striving for. That level of autonomy and that level of organization. I would agree with the striving for the ideal of these organizations such that they can they are autonomous. They do only bring in the appropriate stakeholders for any given decision. But when you move from distributed decentralized, it’s a pretty huge step in that the people who are a part of the organization and whatever opinions they’re bringing to the table that are relevant aren’t necessarily aligned and some can be maligned and that becomes a much much harder problem like Google is a distributed service like provides a tremendous amount of distributed services like Google drive works regardless of what data center you happen to be working on because that data is distributed on the back end amongst a bunch of different servers such that if one dies you don’t see any problem with the service you’re you’re consuming but Google owns all of it there nothing you can do about that and they have full autonomy on how they use that information and what what they do with that stuff and how they change it and what services they even provide you like that step of creating infrastructure that allows for decentralized autonomous organizations, especially at the scale you’re talking about is is wholeheartedly lacking and terrible. And so there’s there are use cases out there where you need to have governance tooling that allows for not just one party to be in control, even if they’re control over something massive. and and and because it’s massive, it needs to be distributed. So what you’re talking about is are massive corporations and organizations that need to be distributed because one part can’t fail because it’s a part of a much more larger supply chain that’s still under centralized control. There’s still a tremendous asymmetry in the power of that organization. Will you would you agree with that? >> Yeah, I mean absolutely. CEO comes into town, uh, people start puckering up, you know, obviously, right? It’d be different if if if that weren’t the case, right? Um, I guess what makes it difficult this DAO thing which we’re trying to like force feed into humanity. I feel like we’re forcing it is that I can’t find great examples in the recent history of something like a Dow helping that much. Chain safe or chain link. Chain link is a Dow. >> I did not know it operated as a Dow. >> A meme pointed out. First comment. >> Is it really? >> First comment. Chain link is a DAO. The chain link corporation shareholders. Dow controls the chain link board. >> I thought he was meing when he said that. >> Who control the executive subso control the oracle. >> What’s wrong with this? >> If chain link corp was on chain, would you consider this a solve problem? I mean, he’s just saying what I’m saying. Chainlink Corporation, >> it’s a corporation. Like, why are we trying to redep? >> Yeah, there’s a there’s a middle ground. And I think I think what you’re arguing against is the like wholesale pendulum swing to the far right where everything is decentralized and that’s not reasonable. >> What I’m what I’m arguing against is the immaturity of it. Right. That’s what I’m arguing against. That’s the That’s the irony of this conversation is so is he the whole thing that he’s talking about. He says it right up front. >> So is he leaning Snickers and I’m leaning Butterfinger, but we’re both candy bars. Is that what’s happening? >> Yeah, pretty much. Like since then, the concept of Dallas has migrated to essentially referring to a treasury controlled by token holder voting and that’s it. A chat room with a with a with a bank account. like he’s he’s he’s throwing shade at Dows with this sentence. >> Like this kind of works, but like >> I like that you use my vernacular. So I get >> it’s like it’s inefficient. It’s vulnerable to capture. It doesn’t do anything you want in a decentralized context. It’s just us using a multisig and talking about it. Like that’s not good enough. And the whole point of this post is like we got to do better >> if you want to get to anything that’s useful. >> How do we get lawyers in the crypto game in a way that they’re not leeches and they’re actually contributive? Like >> I don’t know. >> I feel like lawyers whenever they get into crypto like, “Oo, baby, how do I use these new definitions to skirt the old ones?” >> Charge so many hours. >> Yeah, I could charge and just make a bunch of money, get some tokens and skirt out like a fat cat, and they’ll never have time to sue me. But like there’s never lawyers are like, “Hey, let’s use Polus and let’s actually try and build some like legal infrastructure to I believe Polus is where you can like crowdfund not crowdfund but like I think you can crowd legal like legal like different people from around the planet are deciding like civil cases. >> Polus is built for the public with heart in Seattle, America. uh with contributions from around the globe globe globe. >> Uh let’s see. That’s it. I mean >> globe contributions from around the globe. Globe globe. >> I have no idea what this is. So is there something better here? >> Um I think I might be confusing with something else, but I actually interviewed this dude uh couple years ago and it’s basically like there’s a civil dispute and it’ll be like in a random South American country and they’re having trouble getting through the dispute. So they literally just open it up to the public to adjudicate and like come to a consensus on who’s guilty or not. And it worked really well because it brought their like time to adjudicate a civil event from like 3 years down to like 60 days, right? All you have to do is give a big enough group of people all the evidence and they’re going to make the right decision, right? And I don’t know what it was, but I think it’s polless. It could be something different. But anyways, >> so I guess I guess I’m not arguing against Vitalik. I’m arguing against the fact that like we don’t need a new name for it. Crypto just needs to grow up. Like there needs to be corporations and they need >> reasonable like it’s more like like the real question is like where for any given organization where is it appropriate to insert decentralization? >> I think that’s up to the policies of that organization course and the organization that has the best policies is the one that usually comes out on top. I >> mean there’s no such thing as like an organization that works for everything. That’s not a thing. >> No, it is not. Even though people >> stands the reason that like how you introduce decentralization into an organization is going to be dependent upon what that organization needs >> and no one everyone else is going to say like there’s no such organization that’s perfect. There’s weaknesses and how they work. Mhm. >> So it’s about finding the right balance on making them more efficient and like we have infrastructure that allows to insert tools that help in a decentralized context that remove some of those centralization forces that are bad in the event they’re there. And I think that’s the only real argument here is that like there’s potential to make things better with the infrastructure we’re creating. We just got to be more creative on how we’re doing it. >> Yeah. I feel I feel like crypto needs to go through like a five to sevenyear phase of like historians getting really involved with it. Like sometimes I feel like we’re learning lessons that have been learned. Like these prediction markets blowing up. There was a reason why they were illegal. I think enough time has gone by and humans are so human that we’re just like forgetting it and like everybody’s making money and they’re like, “Yeah, that’s great.” But like I’m already seeing some instances where it’s like people are manipulating the prediction markets. Like they’re going and creating an event and getting enough people to agree to its truth and they’re making out like fat cats like betting on things that they’ve made happen, right? And so it’s like, well, that’s probably why we got rid of prediction markets in the first place because you could just make up any crazy scenario. You get enough cameras to watch it and you can make a million dollar bet and make a 10 million bucks, right? It’s like I mean it’s like you know I feel like humans are we’re crypto is learning the same lessons we already learned. It’s just like we didn’t >> the history books I don’t think. >> No it’s not it’s it’s that >> like I I’ll I’ll um I’ll tell you two things. One is about football and the other one is about storage. I’ve I’ve actually heard from talking to some people who have built hard drives like who have been in storage all their lives that the people who are building decentralized storage protocols in crypto are like full stack developer script kitties. And I I have to like pause and and and listen to them a little bit longer cuz they have a lot of reasons for why they’re saying that that makes sense. And when you’re talking about prediction markets like football, I was asking a question cuz I don’t know anything about ball sports, but I was asking like if most of these teams are owned by a lot of billionaires, why wouldn’t they just collude to make like some sort of outcome of, you know, team A versus team B result in team A winning? And I don’t know, maybe you know the answer to this, D, but I was just told that it doesn’t matter because they’re all still going to make a fuckload of money. I pretty much that’s the way it comes. They’re all so rich, right? And they make so much money no matter what. Like it it’s like why have the energy to collude? >> So maybe like >> you’re already making money. >> So like maybe prediction markets make sense, but you there has to be obfiscation of >> I love how is actively researching something or reading about something as we’re doing. >> She’s a polic. >> Sorry. Go ahead, Jesse. Sorry. Go ahead. But I was distracted by that. >> Yeah, I don’t know. I I I I see where both of you guys are coming from. I don’t know. I tried, you know, I tried to make sense of what would be a reasonable one and I’ve seen other people make attempts and >> yeah, >> it just it doesn’t I have I I like operating in a small group of people. like I don’t need thousands or hundreds or a lot of people to accomplish things that I want to do it. Especially with AI tooling, you don’t really need that many people. >> So like with these systems like I I I agree with you D. I think this is actually more relevant for like sensor devices. Like going back to what a story I’ve said before on the podcast where, you know, I had uh undergrad professors telling me that like the Coke vending machines were going to at some point be able to uh take a percentage of the revenue that they make from selling overpriced sodas versus buying them bulk in Costco and be able to pay for their electricity by communicating with like an upstream solar device that, you know, it’s selling credits to them to, you know, pay for the soda machines. uh power costs per year and then also the soda machine can fix itself and if it runs out of soda I can ping Coca-Cola and then a Coca-Cola robot can come out and replenish its supply like that makes more sense to me. I I I could see that making more sense and and I think if you are to apply it in human systems then like to what Vitalik is saying to what you’re saying like it gets there there needs to be more experimentation to encompass uh like like Vitalix is saying mitigating the weaknesses of human politics to try to diminish like the the social hierarchy games that are played within larger organizations like tit fortat games or uh me trying to protect my position because I have a decent cushy job and I want to only hire people who have a subset of my skills so I will always be relevant in the corporation so that I’m never hiring somebody who’s better than me like the whatever DAO goes into place has to mitigate humans trying to game the system and that’s a really hard problem because humans are very clever and how they can try to preserve their positions. >> Mhm. You should see how I get that keyboard from Best Buy without my wife knowing. >> Exactly. >> I mean, I feel what you’re saying. Uh it it um yeah, I did misread his words. He wasn’t trying to eliminate human politics. He’s trying to minimize the weakness of human politics, which is a lot of what you just mentioned. That’s just incredibly impossible of a task unless you want unless you want to be like, “Hey man, >> I can’t fix this incredibly complex problem completely, so I’m not going to make any effort whatsoever to push it in the right direction.” That’s what like you’re saying. >> No, that’s not what I’m saying. It’s not a seat belt problem. I think is like, you know, like, hey, people still die in cars, so why are we ch still trying to make them safe? Like, that’s that’s not what I’m saying. It’s not that stupid of an argument. It’s more of like I guess you want us to be um Vulcan then, right? Like the Vulcans ways of trying to do things that potentially remove the potential power of to insert assert their influence over the other others. Like when you build organizations, which means groups of people coming together to do specific things, the larger that group becomes, the more tendency there is for to exist within it. Remove the possibility for them to take over the system. So like even Vitalic goes to great lengths D saying that use ZK use AI because hopefully over the over the next few years they’re going to like if you look at what Elon is saying like it makes a lot of sense AIs need to be sources of truth. They can’t inject bias or do reflection of user input biases like it can’t it can’t like you need something that is the arbiter of truth. That’s what AI should be. >> If it ever will get to there, that’s another thing that’s debatable. But you can also create multi- aent systems where you have like checks and balances. I anyway, this is this goes beyond like there are people who are thinking about this D and this is their this is their their they wake up to think about these problems. >> Even from like a simple standpoint, like when looking at decision fatigue, >> like you can generate agents on behalf of stakeholders that help point them to the things they should be paying attention to and then summarize the gathered appropriate resources for them to make a decision quickly. >> That’s a reason >> to help make decisions faster with the relevant information for a given decision. >> Right? So like Deli was trying to help you clone yourself in terms of your way of thinking based on, you know, you feed it materials, your writings, your recordings, whatever. Like you can have a human clone of yourself or an AI clone of yourself. Like that would be essentially like a superpowered administrative assistant where you just ask, “Hey, give me a quick summary of what what I’m about to vote for. >> What would I air on?” >> So I was you guys talked about what um Pollik was saying about decision fatigue. It’s actually one of the things that I consult about and leadership. >> So it’s reasonably useful to see I can’t >> I was trying to I don’t know how to make >> right click on it and say open image in new tab and then blow that up. >> Ah share this tab >> and control and then scroll wheel. >> There we go. So I mean this is one of like I do a whole two weeks worth of workshops on this and it is about when you’re a leader you’ve got to be ahead of the time curve on when your team is going through these emotional states with any change right any change you try to make within the organization whether big or small people go through this like emotional change right here denial frustration depression experiment like you got to know when your team is here in depression but by the time they’re in depression you need to be up here and like interrogate else. Yeah. >> Okay. Sorry. You got to be on the far right, >> right? You got to be ahead of your team, right? Because they’re going to go through those things after you have already gone through them. >> Yeah. >> Right. Because you’ve got more information than they do. >> Yeah. Like there’s just a time delay on them understanding the problem. >> Yeah. Exactly. And so that’s what he’s talking about when it comes to decision fatigue is it takes about four weeks after something’s new before people are like, “It’s over.” Like, “Yeah, we got the win. I mean, yay. What do we >> I don’t know if that’s what he’s referring to as decision fatigue. I interpreted it differently based on >> what I know from anticipated >> and all the dows. Yeah, exactly. >> That’s what I’m saying. He means >> it’s like the the the shitty implementation of Dows that we currently have. Mhm. >> Yeah. >> Uh when even like the next generation where we didn’t ask everyone to vote on everything, we asked a council of people to vote on things and the individuals then staked their weight onto those council members so that it altered the distribution of weight from the council members. So you have a smaller group of people who are then making decisions uh about organizational change and their weight is dependent upon you know how people delegate their vote to them, right? >> Just just look at left. What happens is these individual council members end up having to go through an inordinate amount of >> for every given decision and they get tired because like they’re inundated by a bunch of different things all the time and they get tired because they’re like I can’t keep up of all with all the information required to make good decisions on all things. >> Not to mention some of it is pro bono work. They don’t get paid. So obviously it’s like a double whammy where you have to do a lot of work and you’re not getting compensated well. So is that is that a problem because they haven’t like streamlined the lines of decision- making that get to them? >> Yes, that’s exactly what it is. So that’s that’s the that’s the inefficiency of the organization part of DAO in my opinion. >> Yeah. like they they they’re not they’re not bringing together the right stakeholders for the for a given decision because like and within an organization you don’t want everyone opining on everything because >> more often than not most people don’t have anything useful to contribute to that decision. So like who cares what they think? Why should they even be involved with the concept of that decision? And like that’s that’s where the organization >> give a about you. >> So for any given just like that’s like we talked about this in the past where like we need to do it backwards like you organize first. You build out the structure of like who should be involved with what within this organization to get stuff done. You automate as much of that as you possibly can to make that part efficient and streamlined. This is what you see today in the organizations you work with. and then when appropriate decentralize the decisions that allow you to open up the stakeholders or like mitigate from human weakness in those decision-m processes. But like up like if you don’t do the first two parts to get there going to end up with these shitty things we have today which is a a bunch of people with a bank account trying to jockey on how that bank account gets spent and the bigger you make that the worse it is. The thing about it is though, it takes gentlemen of our vernacular to create that O in organization. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> It takes it takes maturity because remember we worked with someone who was immature not too long ago and it was like, “Hey man, did you get the thing done?” “Yeah, it was busting.” And it’s like, “No, that’s not what I’m asking you. I don’t know. I don’t I don’t care if it’s busting.” Okay. I need to know if it’s done and to a certain level. Hey man, the reporting that I asked you for, did you get that done? Uh, let me whip some up real quick. >> No cap. like looks like things are going looks like things are busting and it’s like no that’s not going to suffice right and so it’s like it just I think what is mainly is saying crypto needs to mature and we need to professionalize these things and we probably shouldn’t be afraid of adding some layers of legality with that professionalization but we’ve got to be just with that it can’t be like right was what’s going on right now where Coinbase put poured all this money in lobby ing into an influential crypto bill to go through and now it’s not in a it’s not in the shape that they intended. So now they’re trying to like cry uncle, right? They don’t get as much regulatory capture as they thought they did, right? They’re not going to make as much trillions of dollars as they thought they were. So now they’re backing out of like that’s there’s nothing just about that system. That’s the system we live in where like the corporations are like basically print enough money, make the rules, and then guarantee that you’re always getting a cut of every dollar that’s made. And it’s like >> that doesn’t help me. >> That that system doesn’t help me very much. >> Yeah, it doesn’t help a lot of people. So, yeah, I guess I stand firm with my definition, Corey, and that is I think that a welloiled Fortune50 company is a DAO. They are distributed, they are autonomous, and they are organized. >> They’re just not decentralized. And making would you agree that making that step from distributed to centralized is really hard and we don’t have >> the only way for them to get decentralized is if we take over another planet. >> But like that’s the thing is like some things need a decentralized context. Like in my opinion like global politics, any type of like nation to nation >> Yeah. >> issue is it should be a decentralized process. >> Yeah. We don’t have the tooling to help with that right now. >> And so like that’s the largest scale example I can think of where like this is a this is a real decentralized context because there is no global order. >> Yeah. >> If we were to build the tooling to help with that decentralization would we be responsible for what that tool could do? Ah it’s a throwback the previous one. >> It’s a throwback to last week. >> I guess the throwback to the last week is like we can’t we have to build things in which we don’t have control over them. So no. Okay. >> Like the only reason that’s going to work is because you can’t manipulate it. Only way only way you can’t manipulate it is if you don’t control it. >> Well, let’s pause for the cause real quick. For that one person that’s watching on Twitch right now, join the Discord. There you go. Pull out your phone because if you’re on Twitch, you’re watching on a desktop. Hopefully you are. It’s better on their phone. >> Yeah, people watch it from their phone. >> Okay. >> Much better on the computer though. >> Anyways, you’re likely on the computer. You might not be. I don’t know your life. scan this QR code, join the Discord. We’ll see it in real time and we’ll be like, “Hey, you know, thanks for joining. Here’s some TPP tokens.” I think I don’t know how our bot works quite honestly. >> Figure out how that bot to >> find information. I look for it and then >> I linked you. It’s in our TBP GitHub. It’s public >> GitHub. He just said per my last email. That’s what he said. >> Definitely. I just got I just got per my last email. hurt my last email, No, I’m kidding. Uh, I wish the QR code didn’t have that goofy ass Streamyard duck on it. >> Streamyard generated a QR code. They can do that. >> I No, I want it to be our >> You might be able to alter that. >> We’ll see. >> It doesn’t say that you can. Let me see. Edit. No, it doesn’t say that you can. But anyways, yeah, there’s the thing. You can join the Discord. We’ll see you come in right now. We’ll say, “Hey, you must be the one person listening right now.” Go to the website. >> Um, yeah. And go to the website, the Bitcoin podcast.com. >> It’s got all the links. >> It’s got all the shows. Not all, most of them. >> I’m working on that. >> Yeah. I I guess >> all the new shows. >> It’s It’s I think what makes it tough from crypto as well is that these corporations are trying to exist, but there’s so much money wrapped into them and the technology that they’re building that it always becomes a little bit of a um what’s the word I’m looking for? conflict of interest. Like for instance, like the Avalanche Labs is the corporation that helps develop things for Avalanche, the blockchain. And it’s like that’s a little muddy. That’s that’s a that’s a muddy water right there. That’s a muddy connection. You mean you just build Avalanche? And it’s like, no, no, no, no, no, no. Avalanche is its own distentralized thing that exists, but we control it. But we don’t. But we do, but we don’t. We can. And we most definitely do control it, but we also don’t. >> I mean, it’s also like and to paint like a modern analogy that people kind of understand a little better is like looking at co-ops. You look at like REI as a as an organization. >> I was just looking at a whole list of co-ops, >> you know, like co-ops are a good example of like, yeah, I’m a I’m a member of a co-op and it’s REI, so I get better discounts than you do because I’m participating in that. It’s like I’m a and then that gives me other benefits that I probably don’t use, but I could if I wanted to, if I cared, but I really just want to buy, you know, some outdoor gear for a little bit cheaper or some you know? Like that’s that’s a similar analogy of like having ownership in some organization. Actually, the same analogy, but people are kind of comfortable with that. They’re like, “Oh, that’s interesting. How’s that work? Is that better?” Like, I don’t know. Ask the people who work there. They seem to be happy. Not a bad It’s not a bad um >> I’m happy with my membership. I buy stuff there. >> You talking about Costco? >> REI? >> No. REI? Costco is not a car. >> Real estate investments. >> It’s a climbing place. It’s outdoor outdoor gear. >> You don’t hide. >> Oh, okay. >> Outdoor gear. Yeah. >> Y’all were literally about talking about like that. Okay. All right. I I just don’t know what it is. I’m sorry. >> Yeah. Yeah. It’s like Ace Ace Hardware is another >> Ace Hardware is also a co-op. >> Yeah, >> that’s probably why they’re sticking around. I I might go to Ace Hardware once every seven years. Like I I really don’t know. >> People own them love them. >> They used to go to Ace though. They kind of suck. I’m just going to be honest with you. >> They got good profit sharing. >> Well, they have different suck. Lowe’s sucks too in a lot of ways, but it also is good in a lot of ways. >> Have good profit sharing. Like the people who work there get a cut commenserate to their effort. cut of the juice. I like that. Those are good systems typically. Well, I guess like that was my definition of a Dow. I hope it wasn’t too skiy, but what would your definition of a Dow be, Jesse? >> No, I I would think along the lines of like a co-op. Like if if you’re thinking of practically speaking, not like some sort of idealized DAO. Um, yeah, I would I would take like inventory management. That’s something you could do and you could automate away. And then just have like, you know, like the way that Amazon warehouses have automated a lot of u tracking and moving of inventory within warehouses. You could do stuff like that to have a bunch of robots communicate with each other >> that needs automation so desperately. Amazon had such a head start on everybody. >> Mhm. >> Have you seen what they have now? They have like um they look like little skateboards and then they just go underneath pallets and then just Oh my god, they’re so cool, man. I’m actually doing a job that is going to be touch warehousing. So I’m going to get a lot of experience in that trying to trying to take a system that was built for it was built for made to order. It’s become made to stock and I have to help them go from that to a hybrid model. >> What’s the difference between made to order made to stock? Is it the second one is you’re preparing to pre-order volumes ahead of buys. >> One is just you’re making stuff to keep a stock in a warehouse so you can sell it. >> One is I put in an order and I want my pizza. >> Right? If you don’t >> if you don’t from the base level design your warehouses appropriately for that, >> you will suck and it will cost you lots of money, >> millions of dollars. conservatively designed for not current capacity but future looking capacity. >> Yeah. >> So, well, I mean, and Corey, did you give your definition of a DAO? >> Yeah, I walked through the whole damn thing. Each letter >> you did, >> bro. Okay. Well, I mean like I want a like something that could go in the dictionary, not like a like >> he wants a fortune cookie uh rehash of what you said >> in 10 words or less. >> It’s an organization that leverages decentralized infrastructure to run itself more efficiently. >> Okay, that was you. Well, good conversation. I know it goes against the grain of us having an extended conversation. Um, but for those of you that are going to watch us after we record it, please like and subscribe. Also, join the Discord. You can join the Discord by going to that QR code. This QR code is in our system, but I don’t know where that goes, but that QR code up there in the top right will get you into the Discord and we’ll see you come in. We’ll say, “Hey, man. Thanks for watching the show. We talk crypto, but we don’t talk crypto in the ways that are all you guys not watching YouTube crypto creators anymore. We’ve seen the stats. It’s dropping dramatically. People are tired of the same old crypto Price go up, number go up. Who’s making a thing that make number go up? We’re not that. We’re a breath of fresh air, right? A breath of really humidified fresh air. Um that’s good for your lungs. And uh that’s that’s what you get when you listen to the Bitcoin podcast or watch the Bitcoin podcast. Uh you can on Spotify or all the places. So we’re going to close this out unless you guys want to talk about anything else that interesting that happened in crypto. >> That works for me. All right guys, uh if you haven’t seen it, shout out to old long neck wide smile Zoe Sana. Avatar Fire and Ash is an excellent movie. I give it five out of five stars. And if you’re asking >> this weekend, >> giant blue alien would um >> I got nothing else. You guys got anything? >> Nope. >> We got nothing. >> Oh, all right. >> I got a I finished I think I Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We’re going to test D. I made the most dummy proof >> Archavist Desktop installer ever. >> Throw it up. >> You’re the litmus test. You’re the litmus. >> Yeah. We can expand this into like a >> I like that I can be you guys’ guinea pig for these things. >> Well, I was troubleshooting issues with them earlier. So, now we got a point where like, okay, people can use this. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Fixed a few GitHub link. I’m already on the bad side. >> Upload files. >> I’ll I’ll I’ll add it to the pilot website so it looks like a download Windows, you know. >> Can I share this? Is this sharable? >> Yeah, you can you can share that. Yeah. So, click on the .exe cuz I assume you’re on Windows, right? >> Yep. All right. >> So, click that >> and then run it. >> Open. >> This should be the easiest ever. If it doesn’t work, then I’m I’m going to go fix it. >> The first thing I got is Microsoft Defender Smart Screen prevented and unrecognized after Microsoft signed. It’s not signed yet. >> That’s fine. Run anyway. >> You’re trusting Jesse. But yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. You’re trusting me by coding. >> Jesse, I trust you. >> I just I just put a CD in the thing. See if you can get it. Okay. >> Oh, this is what I’m talking about. Buttons. >> Share screen. Share screen. >> Buttons. >> Share. Yeah, share screen. >> Share the experience. >> I got to share that. Let me I got to get rid of the Streamyard share real quick. Let me remove and let me share. >> That was what it was missing. Corey, the protocol needed buttons. >> Dude, dude, >> buttons work, man. >> Buttons, bro. >> There we go. >> Yep. I downloaded it. It’s uh it’s a PNG TVP episode summary. Let’s see. >> Do you know how much better this is than asking me to open my command line? Jesus Christ, dude. All right, let’s share. >> Open the picture. >> I see the little pin button. I like that. >> Oh my god, Jesse, this is already doing things to >> All right, so you need to go you need to go to peers. >> I don’t need to copy and paste the peer ID that he put in the Discord. >> I gave it to you alone. I don’t think I gave it to >> you just Oh, yeah, you did. So, put it in the chat then >> here. Let me just >> I’ll put the same C in in our chat, too. >> So, take that line D. Yeah. And then slap it in connect. And then, yeah, you can you can pull that because technically I have that CD now. >> Connected. Connected. >> You’re connected. There’s your pier. >> Now, go to files now. Go to files. Yeah. Yeah. And then you grab the C that Corey linked you. See that ZDV? Then slap it in there and hit download. God, it. >> There it is. >> There you go. There it is. So now you hit download. So I’m going to make this one one process instead of separate processes. I’m just gonna have you download or you you paste the C. I don’t even want a CD. I don’t even want to see CDs anymore. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So like I’m gonna have to implement a a messaging protocol. So, it auto six, but >> I don’t know where I saved that. I got to download again. >> You just click in and you can just open it. >> It went there. I don’t want it to go there. I want to go there. >> And then you can just open it up. Whatever it was, and then share screen. So, you can see, >> hey, it’s there. I got >> Look, you finally used codeex rebrand. >> It works so good. It works so good. And there’s buttons. Clip that. Clip that. It works so good. There’s buttons. Oh, now you got to do is make it like look cool. >> Yeah, I’m going to make it look cooler, but I need to streamline the UIUX a little bit more. >> All right. Now, you need to find Now, listen. Listen here, audience. I’m not being sexist or anything. You need to find a female out there who’s like fashionable, right? And let her use it and see if she likes it and see if it’s cool. And if she likes it, if she likes it, you’re on to something, my friend. Cuz women made Lululemon popular and Lululemon is terrible. I’ll say that out loud for anybody anybody to see. >> I thought that they had quality leggings. >> Anybody can make that All right. So, uh, this is dope. So, so that I’m connected to you, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. So, you can do you can go to sync. You see the sync button? >> You can do an add a whole watch folder. It tells you how sync works. So, >> Oh, so I can put a folder in there and anything you throw in there, >> it’ll automatically bring to me. add >> automatically bring to me or bring >> or sync to the >> correct. So that autosync process requires a messaging protocol to do notifications. So I I’m still missing that. So what I’m going to try and do is I’m trying to in I’m going to try to integrate Waku in this thing so I can use subtopics from Wacu. So I could do an end to one fan in for notification. Then I still need a quote unquote source of truth plane for updates. So I still need to implement that. But like this is the core of the peer-to-peer mode of Archavist. >> You need a sound, too. >> I’m gonna Yeah, I can I could add more But anyway, >> like actually Waku needs a sound, Cory. Let him know that they need a sound like a like a >> feel like he’s walking. You don’t want to get a sound every time a machine messages another machine. >> It’s pretty noisy. >> Okay. Well, archivist needs it needs a sound like like maybe it sounds like a vault but a soft vault opening and closing whenever you get a notification >> like a do that >> like it’s got to be a noise that like peaks people gets people like >> like a a like aim like AOL instant messenger kind >> yeah like hell yeah whenever I get that discord message >> you got dickpick like use really come on Um, sorry guys. That was pretty cool, man. I It needed buttons. It has buttons now. Like us normies can get involved. >> Got buttons. Yep. >> Um, >> and there’s so much more you can do. >> Remember, cuz I tried to get somebody to do codeex last year and they literally told me, “I do not feel safe. I’ve never even seen the command line and did not know this existed in my computer.” And I was like, >> “Yeah, a lot of the people at IFT have never ran any of the node protocols that are being developed internally. So like they all need buttons. >> I was It was about >> Yeah, buttons make everybody >> buttons. >> Yep. >> You wear wear a nice jacket with nice buttons. It makes the whole pop. The whole >> the whole spit that you’re wearing. Anyways guys, uh play the outro. >>