DAO

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The native altcoin for a decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem built on the Tron (TRX) blockchain, JUST (JST), surged by over 22% in one day amid the rollout of new mining rewards. JUST aims to provide all-in-one financial solutions to its users through Tron-based DeFi protocols. The price jump occurred as the project's lending platform, JustLend DAO, launched new mining rewards, offering additional rewards denominated in Tron's stablecoin USDD. Despite the recent increase, JST is still down more than 85% from its all-time high in April 2021. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

CointestMod

#Apecoin Con-Arguments Below is a Apecoin con-argument written by cryotosensei. > 1. ApeCoin was initially introduced to incentivise owners of the NFT collection Bored Ape Yacht Club released by YUGA Labs. Although its use cases have expanded to that of a form of currency in the Otherside (a metaverse project launched by YUGA Labs) and Benji Bananas (an Animoca Brands blockchain game), it appears that the success of $APE is largely tied to whether YUGA Labs will continue to do well and the degree of support it receives from users for its NFT projects like CryptoPunks and Bored Ape Yacht Club. In the event that other NFT projects shoot to prominence and wrestle away a significant portion of the market share from YUGA Labs, this could send $APE on a downward spiral. > 2. $APE is built on the Ethereum blockchain. While the Ethereum blockchain functions well and is reliable, its problems are well-documented: high congestion leading to high gas fees. At the point of writing, ETH gas fees are rather low due to the bear market, but they are unlikely to remain this low in the long run. In actual fact, the ApeCoin Decentralised Autonomous Organisation proposed for $APE to be migrated to other chains, but to no avail. Since even the ETH Merge won’t immediately lead to lower gas fees once completed, ApeCoin holders must keep sufficient ETH to account for the hefty gas fees. > 3. The allocation structure of $APE may not appeal to some retail investors. Although it has a substantial permanent supply of one billion tokens, only 62% of these tokens is channeled to the Ecosystem Fund. Even so, BAYC holders only get access to 150 million tokens. The remaining 38% is divided among three groups of stakeholders, with the percentage they are entitled to indicated in brackets: Yuga Labs and Charity (16%), Launch Contributors (14%), and BAYC Founders (8%). The rationale behind setting up an ApeCoin DAO to empower holders in governance polls is well-intentioned, but this begs the question: to which extent is an average $APE investor granted autonomy in the first place? ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Apecoin) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

* Related Cointest topics: [Ethereum](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_ethereum), [NFT](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_nft), [DAO](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_dao. * Related subreddits: r/apecoins, r/NFT, r/NFTsMarketplace, r/BoredApeYachtClub. * Sort comments as controversial first by [clicking here](/r/CryptoMarkets/comments/16w6sqj/apecoin_tops_shib_pepe_in_trading_volume_on_a/k2v02ly/?sort=controversial). Doesn't work on mobile.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The article discusses the shift from centralized finance (CeFi) to decentralized finance (DeFi) and how institutional investors can redefine their asset management approach. It highlights the risks associated with CeFi platforms, such as hacking and bankruptcy, and the lack of transparency and security. DeFi platforms offer higher transparency and security, allowing investors to retain custody of their digital assets. However, DeFi also faces challenges, such as fragmentation across multiple chains. Velvet Capital, a decentralized management platform, aims to combine the convenience of CeFi with the transparency and security of DeFi. It offers cross-chain asset management capabilities and an intuitive interface for institutional investors to build diversified DeFi portfolios. Velvet Capital also provides a marketplace feature for additional advice and plans to adopt decentralization through a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO). Overall, the article emphasizes the potential of DeFi to redefine asset management and mitigate the risks associated with CeFi. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

burnedmind999

Where's the DAO promising to make this happen? I'd invest in that happening on camera in a heartbeat

ersleid

Governance tokens are simply tokens that allow you to participate in the development of a project (such as a DAO or any group). In the case of moons, it allows you to participate in governing this subreddit; simply put, whenever there's a proposal in this sub to vote on, you have voting power equivalent to the moons that you hold. You have a say in how this sub develops, so to speak

loksfox

The problem is that for you to become a validator, you need 32 Eth and some organisations offer staking services like Lido and Rocketpool who are liquid staking provider. They are a DAO (decentralized organisation) that gives you token (stEth/rEth) when you stake with them. They let people stake through them. the ethereum developers are still looking at solutions and I trust them to find a suitable long term solution. In the meanwhile, just know that most of these entities are composed of multiple validators

0xSnib

Aha I forgot about this AIP Yeah this is not a good more for the DAO, or for Yuga assets in the long term

photog623

They're actually utilizing the DAO very well with clear direction as dictated by voting. I think It's gonna go big in defi world in future

MaximumStudent1839

Yes, being a bad investment is not a scam. But, before the main product/promise is delivered and you change the product’s narrative from being a means of production to a means of extraction is a scam. The DAO has its problems. But how is buying Yuga assets help to achieve the metaverse promise?

0xSnib

They’re trying to introduce sinks for it but without…games there’s nothing really to taper it to I didn’t even bother staking mine, could see it being diluted into the ground a mile away The only thing the DAO is good at at the moment is paying high salaries to working groups

huihui1407

A decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) is an emerging form of legal structure that has no central governing body and whose members share a common goal to act in the best interest of the entity. Popularized through cryptocurrency enthusiasts and blockchain technology, DAOs are used to make decisions in a bottom-up management approach. I found Q DAO Factory is the friendliest DAO. Just take you 5 minutes to create your own DAO

MaximumStudent1839

Curve DAO fiasco tells a very different story. The shitcoin looks decentralized on Etherscan with the founder’s account holding less than 2%. Then you realize the founder hold over 40% when shit starts happening and real info gets revealed. Also, what you are on about? These L2 have upgrades without having user to switch new protocols.

Comfortable_Idea_742

Once the bullrun returns, I predict that the metaverse will also pump. In order to protect their riches, consumers frequently pump privacy-related cryptos during market peaks. I see DAO projects like Q Blockchain performing well in 2025 and beyond, although it is still unclear how DAOs will be profitable. But they are the ones who can do it if anyone is in a position to.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Horizen has reached a key milestone in decentralized governance with the launch of the Horizen DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization). The DAO allows community members to participate in governance and decision-making for the project. With the Horizen native token, $ZEN, serving as the governance token, $ZEN holders can vote on improvement proposals and put forth their own proposals. The Horizen DAO aims to further decentralize decision-making and involve the community in the evolution of the network. Detailed information about the Horizen DAO can be found on the Horizen Governance page. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

pojut

In December 2021/January 2022 during the APY wars, I remember being in a DAO that staked a high 7 figures worth of stables and thinking how batshit insane that was. I cannot possibly imagine being able to sleep at night if I had that much outside of my custody.

PanFennel

Halfway through the post I was thinking, "maybe it's a marketing post for some DAO, then their smm is a genius". But, huh. I really hope that you will be able to withdraw, op!

loksfox

The problem is that for you to become a validator, you need 32 Eth and some organisation offer stacking services like Lido who is liquid stacking provider. They are a DAO (decentralized organisation) that gives you token (stEth) when you stake with them. They let people stake through them. While they do have 30% of the total Eth staked, they are not a single entity, further more, they introduced DVT to improve decentralization :

Maleficent_Sound_919

Back with the ETH DAO disaster a white hat hacker helped me retrieve my ETH all free of charge. If your still out there you are amazing!

Philbot_

Everyone has their own assessment of risks, but I feel that counterpart risks of using a Wrapped BTC token for Defi lending dapps are already acceptable - at least at a scale that isn't catastrophic for your finances should a counterparty risk event occur. 1) Self custody failure; you leak or lose your private keys. 2) Blockchain failure; the Bitcoin Blockchain or the smart contract blockchain you use for lending fails to be able to make transactions. 3) Dapp smart contract failure; the lending Dapp fails to properly process your supplied collateral and borrowed assets according to terms and actual market prices. (Subset of this risk is price oracle failure.) 4) Wrapped DAO failure; that the Wrapped BTC you're using for the lending Dapp cannot reconvert WBTC back into raw, on-chain BTC if you choose to do so. All of these risks are lowering with continued auditing of smart contracts, increased TVL and development, and network effects of widespread adoption. The counterparty risks of traditional finance are not zero. So, I think we agree it's a matter of time until most people feel that Defi counterparty risks are lower than tradfi. But it starts with learning by using a small scale. One of the beautiful things about Defi is that it works at almost any scale. Give it a try! Buy some WBTC, send it to a hot wallet on your Blockchain of choice, supply it to a lending Dapp, borrow USDC, and send it all the way back to fiat and spend at your grocery store. Once you've done that a few times, managing your LTV is as easy as paying your credit card bill every month.

pojut

I was in a DAO back in late 2021 that had a treasury with around $10 million in it, spread across a few different stables. A shift up to $1.01 or down to $.99 made a RIDICULOUS difference, to the point where they timed uses of the treasury with the natural changes in stables.

raymv1987

That would worry me. The masses wouldn't be great at these. Under a DAO my Magic would've picked Jabari Smith over Banchero

nonameattachedforme

Scary? That sounds legendary! Imagine a bunch of people using a DAO to crowdsource who to pick with their #1 round pick, etc. It would make the game so much more entertaining!

nonameattachedforme

The storm is definitely coming and the developments are already pretty exciting. There is already a project that is tokenizing the ownership of an airplane and creating a B2B marketplace. There is a DAO that is trying to buy an NBA franchise. This is the coolest stuff already and we've barely scratched the surface.

nomorebonks

Sorry for my loss on a project that my buy average is $4.50 and I never looked into because ETH maxis have tried their hardest to make sure no one looks into it? That has more use case already than ETH does and mainnet was only 2.5 years ago? Yeah my loss I guess. When ETH DAO's are controlled by ICP tech allowing them to be truly autonomous maybe you'll get it. ICP is the only project in this space offering actual blockchain utility web2 and web3 can utilize.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The Arbitrum Foundation has announced that 69 million ARB tokens, worth $57 million, that were not claimed by users have been transferred to the Arbitrum DAO treasury. The airdrop was announced in March 2022, and users had until September 2023 to claim their tokens. However, some users did not receive their tokens, and the unclaimed tokens have now been moved to the DAO treasury. The DAO treasury currently holds 3.6 billion ARB tokens. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Successful_Craft3076

"Arbitrum Foundation announced that 69 million ARB (worth $57 million), which has not been claimed by users to date, has been transferred to the Arbitrum DAO treasury." https://en.bitcoinsistemi.com/they-forgot-to-claim-airdrops-69-million-arb-left-to-the-foundation/

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ukraine DAO's "Co-producers" have been accused of misappropriating at least $500,000–$700,000 of funds. The project was backed by a Dubai-registered company called "Illuminart", which played on confusion between its name and that of Universal Studios' Universal Studios subsidiary Illumination. The company's business license has expired, and the project website has gone offline. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

marckolind

Yes, a DAO vote was recently being made, where it was decided to open source it. Its gonna be on the updated roadmap

Indianfanss

Unclaimed ARB airdrop of 69,448,385.46 ARB Tokens ($56.5 million) has been transferred back to the Arbitrum Foundation. Currently the Arbitrum Foundation: DAO Treasury has a total of 3.59 billion ARB, worth approximately $2.92 billion.😱

zappadoing

something like a DAO-hack

marckolind

They cant, to access the funds they need approval of the community, its a DAO

aminok

Three months ago I published a post voicing my concern that the Tornado Cash lawsuit against the US Treasury could fail, which would uphold the sanctions prohibiting Americans from calling the Tornado Cash smart contract logic to encrypt their Ethereum transactions: [The risk that a US judge rules against Tornado Cash plaintiffs](https://np.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/142yj1k/the_risk_that_a_us_judge_rules_against_tornado/) Last month, the first challenge did in fact fail, as a court rejected the plaintiff's motion to issue a summary judgment striking down the sanctions as exceeding OFAC's statutory authority: [Tornado Cash Sanctions Affirmed by Federal Court](https://decrypt.co/153118/tornado-cash-sanctions-affirmed-by-federal-court) The court's absurd reasoning was that a computer program that is 1. in the public domain on account of being open source, 2. running on a distributed ledger and 3. that—due to being immutable—is inherently not controlled by the Tornado Cash developers or the Tornado Cash DAO, is nonetheless property of said groups, and thus falls within OFAC's statutory authority to sanction. I think it's worth reposting my arguments on why a court is likely to side against Americans challenging the sanctions against use of Tornado Cash smart contract logic: \-- My 2 gwei: I believe there is a significant risk that a US judge will rule against the plaintiffs challenging the US Treasury's sanctions on the Tornado Cash protocol, even if their legal arguments are sound. This risk would emerge if the judge perceives that striking down the Tornado Cash sanctions could jeopardize national security. In 1963, Justice Arthur Goldberg wrote that the Constitution "is not a suicide pact". This sentiment results in a tendency of judges to lean towards rejecting certain arguments even if on questions of legal doctrine, they are correct. Nothing better exemplifies this than a law that, while unconstitutional and over-stepping statutory powers, is perceived to reduce the nuclear proliferation risks posed by a radical rogue state like North Korea. It's critically important that the judge presiding over this case understand that the sanctions are not essential for national security. There exist several alternative approaches available to the US government that are at least equally effective in addressing the money laundering risks associated with North Korea's utilization of Tornado Cash, while not resorting to a measure as blunt and unconstitutional as imposing OFAC sanctions that prohibit all Americans from using a decentralized internet protocol. For one, blockchain intelligence companies have highly sophisticated technologies and techniques that enable them to de-anonymize funds going through Tornado Cash, and these technologies and techniques can be utilized by the US Treasury to identify the illicit funds that use Tornado Cash, and impose targeted sanctions on them. For example, here is testimony from Chainalysis co-founder Jonathan Levin stating that his firm is able to track North Korean funds that pass through mixers like Tornado Cash: https://youtu.be/VcmIETdtZWw?t=250 A more far-reaching measure that is available to the US government is to require deposits to centralized exchanges that originate from Tornado Cash to include an attached zero-knowledge proof that the Tornado Cash funds were not linked to any of the North Korean hacks. Additional information on this approach can be found at https://poi.chainway.xyz. This would achieve everything the crude Tornado Cash sanctions achieve, without having to deny Americans at large of a right to financial privacy protocols. These alternative measures are likely to be more effective in reducing the money laundering risks posed by North Korea compared to the OFAC sanctions because they preserve a key strategy that protects cryptocurrency users from North Korean hackers—privacy. Without privacy, hackers can identify cryptocurrency users with significant crypto holdings and target them for social-engineering-based hacking operations, as demonstrated in the case mentioned in this tweet: https://twitter.com/thomasg_eth/status/1492663192404779013?s=20. The incessant torrent of hacking attempts on cryptocurrency users predates the invention of the Tornado Cash protocol and continues despite the implementation of Tornado Cash sanctions. Therefore, there is no evidence that the sanctions will slow down North Korea's cyber hacking efforts. Consequently, a compelling argument can be made that improving end-user security, rather than solely focusing on tracking and stopping the flow of illicit funds that result from compromised security, is a more effective approach to addressing money laundering from hackers like those from North Korea. The Tornado Cash sanctions present an opposite trade-off by compromising end-user security through reduced privacy while aiming to bolster efforts to track and stop the flow of illicit funds. The alternative measures outlined above achieve everything the Tornado Cash sanctions do with respect to stopping the flow of illicit funds that pass through Tornado Cash, while not depriving cryptocurrency users of privacy technology that can protect them from North Korea's hackers.

CointestMod

#DAO Con-Arguments Below is a DAO con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > DAOs appear to be a game changer, however, they are not without constraints. Here are some disadvantages of a DAO > > > **Security** > > The majority of DAOs center on the notion that everything would be handled by the smart contract code. DAOs undoubtedly provided trustless environments, however they were reliant on the reliability and accuracy of the smart contract code. Now, it's crucial to remember that every piece of code has flaws, and DAOs themselves sometimes use code that has them. As a result, the DAO's code may prove to be a major hindrance to future expansion. > > **Slows down the decision making process** > > It can be difficult to persuade everyone to vote on motions in a timely manner. Due to various time zones and investment demands, keeping DAO participants informed and interested might be difficult. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_dao) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#DAO Pro-Arguments Below is a DAO pro-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > A decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) is an organization built on rules encoded as a computer program that is frequently transparent, controlled by the organization's members, and uninfluenced by a central government. > > DAOs, in general, should be member-owned communities with no centralized leadership. The financial transaction records and program rules are kept on a blockchain. This type of business organization's precise legal status is unknown. > > # PROS: > > **An Autonomous Structure** > > The majority of traditional organizations and groups have a top-down structure that values decisions made at the top and frequently ignores the ideas of those at the bottom. DAOs, due to it's nature, can help solve the problem by allowing everyone to contribute an idea/option, which can then be voted on by the organization's members. > > **Everyone can participate** > > Tokens or NFTs that grant voting rights are used to coordinate governance. Membership in a DAO is restricted to those who have confirmed ownership of these governance tokens in a cryptocurrency wallet, and membership can be exchanged. Governance is carried out through a series of proposals that members vote on via the blockchain, and having more governance tokens often translates to having more voting power. As long as you have the necessary amount of tokens needed to have voting power then you have the right to vote within the organization. > > **Proposals are Thorough and Specific** > > The creation of a poll within a DAO is expensive more often than not and with that most members who plan to create one often times try to convey their ideas as specific as possible. No one would try to create non-sensical polls that do not contribute to the growth of the organization if they would know the cost behind it. > > **Everything is Transparent and Eternal** > > Everything that occurs within the DAO is permanently recorded on the blockchain. Members of the DAO have access to all decisions made since the organization's inception, with no findings of forgery or misinformation. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized\_autonomous\_organization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organization) > > [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\_id=3082055](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3082055) > > [https://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21699159-new-automated-investment-fund-has-attracted-stacks-digital-money-dao](https://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21699159-new-automated-investment-fund-has-attracted-stacks-digital-money-dao) > > [https://www.cryptoswede.com/the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-a-dao/](https://www.cryptoswede.com/the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-a-dao/) > > [https://ssrn.com/abstract=2580664](https://ssrn.com/abstract=2580664) > > [https://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21699159-new-automated-investment-fund-has-attracted-stacks-digital-money-dao](https://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21699159-new-automated-investment-fund-has-attracted-stacks-digital-money-dao) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_dao) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

DAO {{pros}} & {{cons}} with related info are in the collapsed comments below.

Zippyvinman

It is backed by the belief that it will always be backed by a non-corrupt source. Here is why: 1) gold, like BTC, is considered a commodity. It stores it’s value well and is backed by the knowledge that there will always be people wanting to buy it. 2) the network and miners have to abide by certain rules for transactions on the network. The transactions must abide by the rules (such as transactions must be signed by the private key of the asset holder). 3) along side #2, even in the event that a hostile takeover via 51% attack, the public ledger is still public, and the network would fork to the last point/state during which no fraudulent transactions were executed. Any fraudulent transactions that were signed without a private key are not allowed, meaning, it’s impossible for a 51% to spend your assets for you, as long as the attack is so big that the network agrees to fork before the point of the attack (see ETC/ETH2 - DAO hack). This means that as long as your recovery phrase is kept private, your funds are safe.

DigitalInvestments2

I think metaverse will pump too once the bullrun returns. Normally at the peak we see privacy cryptos pump as people try to protect their wealth. I see DAO projects like Q Blockchain doing well in 2025+ but it remains to be seen how DAOs can be successfully monetized. If anyone is in a position to do it though, it's them.

ComprehensiveRead161

A great read! Obviously I’d love to see another bull run. I was only around for 2021. I am fearful of the amount of negative sentiment there js around crypto these days. Was there as much skepticism before and between previous bull runs? DAO scams, NFT scams, rug pulls, all this became very prevalent in 2021. I wonder if it will effect new money coming in?

Specialist_Duck3

Is this a move for voting rights in the DAO?

MarcusStoic

Hi Daily! Here are some major news in Crypto today: 🌕 Binance and CEO, CZ, seek to dismiss the SEC lawsuit, citing overreach and accusing the regulator of distorting securities laws. 🌕 Coinbase may launch a token for Layer 2 network Base, with its legal chief seeing it as a future possibility despite initial reluctance. 🌕 Coinbase aimed to acquire FTX Europe post-bankruptcy to expand its derivatives, but the deal was dropped. Other firms also showed interest. 🌕 Bybit to suspend UK services from Oct due to new FCA rules, halting new accounts from Oct 1 and full services by Oct 8. 🌕 CoinShares is launching a hedge fund unit in the U.S. to offer qualified investors actively managed exposure to digital assets. 🌕 Bankrupt FTX sues ex-employees of its HK affiliate for $157M over alleged fraudulent withdrawals ahead of its bankruptcy filing. 🌕 Google Cloud's BigQuery now supports 11 more blockchains, enabling intricate on-chain queries and integration with various applications. 🌕 Dreamus debuts Avalanche NFT tickets in S. Korea for events like K-pop concerts via SK Planet's OK Cashbag app, curbing scalping issues. 🌕 Apecoin DAO to allocate $12.5M in ApeCoins to DAM for acquiring Yuga NFTs and launch $DAM token for governance and staking. 🌕 Circle renames USD Coin and Euro Coin stablecoins to USDC and EURC to streamline naming and avoid confusion.

infernal_celery

This is essentially the heart of the matter, and it’s why I thought this sub (which I think is still the biggest crypto community) would be an interesting place to discuss it. We definitely are seeing a lot of DAOs being set up as either a fundraising or a charitable vehicle to promote various ecosystem projects, but it’s definitely the case that the DAO officers I’ve met - often with the best of intentions - seem to want the DAO model but with protections IRL, and they are surprised when they are asked why they didn’t simply incorporate a private company or be clear and set up a trust from the beginning. Almost all of the time they want anonymity for token holders but to doxx themselves with some form of legal protection. We can actually make purposive trusts fit the more charitable-type DAO, but it raises the more philosophical discussion question.

Jess8844

For me taking out 2 Cooler Loans recently was very exciting. All the money available for the first week was borrowed in less than 30 minutes and I was one of the lucky ones to get the loans. There will be more available next week though so people can still get in but they have to wait a week. Olympus DAO is the project behind it.

igadjeed

Is the purpose of a DAO to be ex-juris? If so, the members of a DAO might have to live with being unable to sign contracts On the other side, by registering a DAO for the purpose of limited liability, or to be able to sign contracts, the DAO becomes a corporation, subject to the laws which govern corporations I've read DAO discussions which seem to see a DAO as an opportunity to raise funds by crowdfunding, selling securities outside the oversight of regulators. But these same people seek to register, as if begging to be prosecuted As the other comments in this thread point out, anonymity is the "Satoshi way" of avoiding liability, without registering a LL corp To the extent that some of them are identifiable individuals, not being anonymous has exposed current and recent past developers of the Bitcoin software to predatory lawsuits https://www.shlegal.com/insights/losing-the-keys-to-the-(bitcoin)-kingdom-tulip-trading-v-bitcoin

loksfox

The entire point of a DAO is to keep everything anonymous, it would be completely contradictory to have a public dao ran as typical company.

xylem_pholem

This move will convert DAO into Digitally Authorised Organisation

infernal_celery

I think this is where I’m leaning. The problem is where you want the DAO to have an effect in the physical world: DAOs can’t sign a legal contract, can’t own anything and so on. Venture Capital DAOs make little sense in this regard (obviously you can use smart contracts to dodge this but if the coding fails it’s totally the DAO’s problem if they don’t get their money back). Doesn’t affect purpose DAOs though

rastagordo420

I want to add some facts to take into consideration: 1. purpose of the DAO is very important 2. Where DAO operates 3. The level of decentralization of DAO It is not that easy and should be made case by case decision

Cryptosockies

imo the entire point of a DAO is to keep everything anonomys and give people voting piwers. it would be completely controdictary to have a public dao ran like a typical company

ersleid

>a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) that operates as an NFT project >as a result of internal politics and disagreements over spending A tale as old as time

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The Nouns DAO, a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) that operates as an NFT project, experienced a costly fork as a result of internal politics and disagreements over spending. The fork allowed dissenting members to split from the DAO, but it also attracted arbitrage traders who exploited the governance game for profit. The episode serves as a cautionary tale for DAOs and highlights the challenges of decentralized governance. The Nouns DAO lost over half of its $50 million treasury to disgruntled investors, resulting in a $27 million loss. The fork raises questions about how DAOs navigate dissenting opinions and the potential risks of decentralized money management. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Sky-876

What is Curve DAO? Rank 80 with +10% pump atm.

wayfarer8888

There's an EU legislation called MiCA that makes all stable coins at least temporarily illegal. I am unsure how DAI, MIM or FRAX kind of DAO coins are impacted, they cannot just open an office in an EU country but maybe they are out of scope. It seems MiCA is written is another legislation written by bureaucrats with very limited understanding how things really work. "Binance plans to delist stablecoins in Europe, citing MiCA compliance" https://cointelegraph.com/news/binance-delist-stablecoins-in-europe-mica-compliance

diornov

In the case of intangible goods like digital assets or services, the proof of delivery can be a bit different but is equally crucial. For instance, the seller could provide a cryptographic proof or a screenshot of the digital delivery as evidence. If the blockchain or other verifiable data confirms that the buyer has received the intangible good, then the buyer is accountable for releasing the funds. On the flip side, if there's no such confirmation, the seller's credibility is in question. Should a dispute arise, a Zenland agent can be invited to act as an unbiased arbitrator. It's crucial to understand that Zenland agents cannot access your chat or interact with the contract unless explicitly invited by either the buyer or the seller. The contract state must be changed to "Agent Invited" to allow an agent to step in. For more details on this process, you can refer to our documentation on how to [Invite an Agent](https://docs.zen.land/contract-actions/invite-an-agent). Currently, Zenland agents are in-house experts, but our long-term vision is to establish a DAO, creating an independent network of agents who specialize in dispute resolution. We are also in the process of setting up an insurance reserve to cover rare instances of fraud, which will be included in our future Zenland agent guidelines.

diornov

In a situation like this, proof of delivery becomes crucial. Just as PayPal would require, the seller must provide a tracking number as evidence of shipment. If the tracking information confirms the buyer received the package, then the buyer is accountable. Conversely, if there's no tracking number, the seller's credibility is in question. In rare cases where the package contains something other than what was agreed upon, the buyer must provide evidence, such as unboxing videos or photos. To resolve such disputes, a Zenland agent can be invited to step in as an unbiased arbitrator. It's important to note that Zenland agents can't read your chat or interact with the contract until they are explicitly invited by either the buyer or the seller. The contract state must be changed to "Agent Invited" for an agent to get involved. You can learn more about this process in our documentation: [Invite an Agent](https://docs.zen.land/contract-actions/invite-an-agent). Only then can the agent review the entire conversation between the buyer and seller to reach a fair conclusion. Currently, Zenland agents are in-house, but our ultimate goal is to establish a DAO and create an independent network of agents who specialize in dispute resolution. We're also working on an insurance reserve to cover rare instances of fraud, which will be included in our future Zenland agent guidelines. I hope this clarifies how we handle such situations. Feel free to ask more questions!

MaximumStudent1839

You fail to understand the major problem with DeFi tokens. It isn’t investors are detached from reality. It is the tokens are useless DAO token completely unconnected to the protocol or company’s growth. Imagine the company is growing and they sell you shares. But it turns out these shares don’t even get to share revenue or fees the protocol generates. When it comes to company’s direction, the founder basically have the full control of the DAO. So investors can’t even force the protocol to pay out fees if they wanted to.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The JPEX saga in Hong Kong continues to unfold as the number of victims rises and more suspects are arrested. So far, 2,086 individuals have been identified as victims of the fraudulent actions of the crypto exchange. The police have arrested three more people, including former lawyer and crypto influencer Joseph Lam, who is closely associated with the exchange. The total number of arrests now stands at 11, and the investigation is ongoing. The Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) had previously warned investors that JPEX was not licensed to operate a virtual asset trading platform, and complaints from investors about withdrawal issues and altered account balances were received. JPEX has blamed its liquidity crunch on third-party market makers and regulatory scrutiny. The exchange has also criticized the SFC's treatment and has decided to transform into a DAO to navigate the situation. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

ZephiraNET

ETH started with a 70million ETH premine,. then it was a mined protocol and then it turned into staking protocol.... its kinda sketch. from the beginning to the start. vitalik sold the 70mil premine in an ICO. and of course his friends and close people around him got ETH for free or for pennies. then the DAO hack happened in 2016 and a hacker got control of a big share of ETH coins. it was already decided that ETH was going to go proof of stake. so vitalik and frens forked to ETH. and the original ETH became ETHEREUM CLASSIC. (also stayed proof of work)

rongbac

L2s need a token because they have a DAO. the real problem is these DAO is not as decentralized as many people thing which lead to the case where opinion of delegator doesnt matter the team will just do what they want anyway

giddyup281

Any additional usecase is a plus. That said, the "DAO" still picks the cherries on top. And decides on who gets the fudge.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Balancer, an Ethereum-based automated market maker, experienced a website compromise due to a social engineering attack on its DNS service provider. The attack resulted in approximately $238,000 worth of cryptocurrency being stolen. Balancer's decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) quickly addressed the attack and regained control of the domain. The attacker used Angel Drainer phishing contracts and employed Border Gateway Protocol hijacking to exploit Balancer's website. The hacker has already bridged some of the stolen Ether to Bitcoin addresses before returning it to Ethereum. Balancer advises other projects using the same top-level domain to consider moving to a more secure registrar. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Social tokens, Web3, and decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) are three rapidly evolving technologies that are intersecting in new and exciting ways. Social tokens are cryptographic assets generated on blockchain networks that represent membership or affiliation with a particular community. Web3 refers to the next evolution of internet technology based on blockchain, decentralization, and token-based economics. DAOs are leaderless groups coordinated through code rather than hierarchical management. At the intersection of these technologies, there are powerful possibilities that have people excited about the future. Social tokens align incentives and cultivate engaged user bases around Web3 projects. Holding a social token can denote membership in a DAO or project community. Social tokens enable Web3 communities to develop bottom-up through user-generated content and voluntary contributions. They also allow for the creation of granular reputation systems and incentive programs for user acquisition. DAOs allow social token communities to formally organize around a shared mission and govern themselves democratically. They enable complex rules to be codified and automated for social token distributions and other financial decisions. DAOs unlock new models of collaboration, funding, and governance for social token communities. The combination of social tokens and DAO structures on Web3 networks enables new forms of decentralized social organization to emerge online. These decentralized communities are becoming societies in themselves that manage collective resources to achieve shared objectives. The intersection of social tokens, Web3, and DAOs presents alternatives to traditional institutions and opens up exciting opportunities to reimagine social institutions and economic participation in the coming decade. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

infested33

Has anyone of you ever worked for a DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization)? If yes what type of work did you perform?

Valdorff

The DAO's funding essentially comes from RPL inflation. Since it's RPL-denominated, that means its buying power depends on the price of RPL. Requiring it for the protocol creates a demand driver and thus supports the price of RPL (I think of it as "you stake X RPL to get a boost of Y to ETH yield"). By comparison, a pure governance token may or may not be valued.

Administrative_Shake

"The members of the DAO also receive substantial amounts of RPL each month" This is the red flag, isn't it? It's exit liquidity for the devs and their promoters (Bankless, Sassano?), funded by the node operators.

mattg1981

An update in the balance hack for those unaware: The Balancer DAO is actively addressing the current DNS attack and is working with all relevant parties to ensure the full recovery of the Balancer UI. In the meantime, please DO NOT interact with balancer.fi or app.balancer.fi until further notice. https://nitter.net/Balancer/status/1704402769535438928#m

Cryptolurker040

Balancer on X: >The balancer frontend is under an attack. The issue is currently under investigation. Please do NOT interact with the balancer UI until further notice! (11 hours ago >The Balancer DAO is actively addressing the current DNS attack and is working with all relevant parties to ensure the full recovery of the Balancer UI. In the meantime, please DO NOT interact with balancer.fi or app.balancer.fi until further notice. (3 hours ago)

Itslittlealexhorn

It's not true that not a lot of thought was put into this. The root of the problem is the financing of development. "Just use ETH as collateral and collect a fee". Yes, but (1) what would prevent someone from just forking and collecting the fee without having done any development? And (2) how would you ever decide on changes and improvements to the protocol? Ideally we'd have a lively open source community who would develop this together, but that's not going to happen. This is not a "for humanity" project, it's a "for profit" project and those will never be founded on volunteers sacrificing their free time. I'm not saying everything is fine. It's definitely not. Oracles being paid half a million for running a server is simply ridiculous. The DAO is only fake decentralized, the community doesn't have nearly as much influence as it should, and RPL will likely count as a security. But people acting like RPL is a scam and getting rug pulled are talking out of their ass.

johnfintech

> They could steal 6x that if they wished from Execution Layer. What prevents that? Trust. You plaster that nonsense everywhere. It's so disingenuous it's funny. No, what prevents it is loss of business. They're contractors. Get over it. I'm aware of how DAO governance works, thank you very much, and as I stated they are all anything but decentralized. And yet, Lido staking and security are not exposed to LDO nearly as much as RP staking and security are exposed to RPL. Insisting on your disdain for VC funding doesn't change that. Delegation is yet another concentration instrument, it's funny you're proud of it. AAVE has the famous Aavechan - thousands of delegates, sometimes enough for passing proposals outright. The reality? One guy yields most power and manipulates everyone's votes and opinions who follow like sheep more blindly than Trump supporters: see https://app.aave.com/governance/proposal/289/ and https://governance.aave.com/t/arfc-acquire-crv-with-treasury-usdt/14251

johnfintech

>Did you know that Lido NOs can steal all execution layer rewards to \~6x their income if they wish to (that's assuming the main flow gets cut off ofc)? Yes, says right there on [lido.fi/scorecard](https://lido.fi/scorecard) where pretty much every single risk is listed, scored and tracked. Did you ask yourself why Lido Node Operators don't do what you bombastically claim and aren't likely to, or how big of a problem it would actually be for stakers even if it did happen? Of course you did, but it's easier to suggest malice on your competitors' part instead. You already knew that in Lido rewards (as well as slashings) are socialized across all stETH holders. >The benefits stETH has are all some flavor of "centralization and trust make things cheap". The quoted statement is true, but the overall claim isn't, it's just disingenuous and ironic, to be polite. >I agree that ETH collateral is better "in every other way" but funding stuff. Just yknow... can't do anything without funding stuff. The realistic other option is VC money -- and hopefully we all understand VC money isn't free. "Why choose traditional funding options that allow us to shift risk while growing organically using a fee model, when we can create and crowdsale an unnecessary native to insiders, then inflate and control supply and distribution, base the entire security and tokenomics on its market value, because nothing could go wrong, while shitting on competitors and on traditional funding instruments?" Typical Rocketpool DAO member.

cyclicamp

DAO members could be paid in eth too

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ukraine DAO's "Co-producers" have been accused of misappropriating at least $500,000–$700,000 of funds. The project was backed by a Dubai-registered company called "Illuminart", which played on confusion between its name and that of Universal Studios' Universal Studios subsidiary Illumination. The company's business license has expired, and the project website has gone offline. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

TheCryptoBaron

Uh yeah. Collateralize with Eth instead of RPL and every problem is solved. Unfortunately that option doesn’t enrich the DAO members so they won’t do it

johnnyb0083

Seems like the DAO needs to readjust the tokenomics on the RPL token, I doubt it will happen though if they have a short-term focus.

R4ID

>Ripple is centralized company is centralized and not a DAO that is correct. if you however meant to say XRP, you're very incorrect and I'd challenge you to try and prove yourself as correct with sources/sound reasoning.

DwightFSchrute

I'm guessing most of the DAO will not be in control of customers, but of very few insiders

Seanb621

Fell for the DAO craze a few years go with all the cray returns, upwards of 1,000% ended up with an almost 100% loss lol

Reasonably_Bee

Anyone a member of a DAO?

Nisyth_

I thought I knew enough about DAI and Maker DAO, turns out I didn't. Thanks OP

Smiling_Jack_

Unpopular opinion: When it comes to stablecoins, you want the provider to be a highly regulated entity. We're not talking about a decentralized, crypto native asset here. We're talking about pegging a token to a centralized fiat currency, which mean collateral will invariably be fiat and fiat derivatives via TradFi. It is NOT a trustless system, even if a DAO has abstracted the fiat exposure. There is counterparty risk somewhere along the chain. And if that is the case, you don't want to rely on trust me bro guarantees.