You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Thoughts on Social Scalability
Great thought!!
I think DAO (Decentralized Autonomous organizations) are socially scalable. We need decentralized organizations which can be more effective in charities, technological campanies, educational institutions and so on. I think there is more room for the decentralization of governance in many field in this open new world. Don't you think?
I'm not clear why decentralized governance is an improvement. I can see the advantage of permissionless participation though.
The quickest way to kill an initiative is to create a committee to "investigate". So I'm not sure why decentralized governance would actually achieve anything and be able to handle serious issues or disruptions. Social checks and balances can be manipulated, look at politics today.
Multiple parties doesn't really move along important issues and can actually be used to halt initiatives due to lack of majority vote. In fact, many security protocols are built on the collusion assumption in that it only takes one honest non colluding party to halt a multi party computation.
So why would decentralization help improve governance, when in fact it's used for the opposite?
Centralization helps new initiatives grow faster, for sure. But in the case where majority vote is vital to decide whether those proposed initiatives are worth perceiving, initiatives that has no majority vote are not worth perceiving. Decentralized governance makes all the people ( stakeholders, users) the owners of the company, but only decentralized, thus having the validation, by involvement of a large mass, but not their stupidity as one or one small group.
Stopping good initiatives because they came from other group is not anyone's interest.
Nonetheless, centralized governance is sane until we have the technological improvements to engineer stupidity-proof, more efficient governance models.