WEBVTT - What’s the Deal with Decentralized Autonomous Organizations? 

0:00:15.396 --> 0:00:33.276
<v Speaker 1>Pushkin Pushkin from Pushkin Industries. This is Deep Background, the

0:00:33.316 --> 0:00:36.436
<v Speaker 1>show where we explored the stories behind the stories in

0:00:36.476 --> 0:00:41.276
<v Speaker 1>the news. Today's episode explores a fascinating story that combined

0:00:41.316 --> 0:00:44.316
<v Speaker 1>two interests that I have. You may have heard about it.

0:00:44.716 --> 0:00:48.116
<v Speaker 1>A few weeks ago, an original printed copy of the

0:00:48.196 --> 0:00:51.636
<v Speaker 1>draft Constitution of the United States from seventeen eighty seven

0:00:51.956 --> 0:00:55.636
<v Speaker 1>went up for sale at Southby's. The auction made national news,

0:00:55.876 --> 0:01:00.236
<v Speaker 1>but not for the reasons you might think. The actual

0:01:00.316 --> 0:01:03.436
<v Speaker 1>copy of the Constitution was not all that rare, though

0:01:03.436 --> 0:01:06.636
<v Speaker 1>there weren't very many that remained on the market. What

0:01:06.796 --> 0:01:10.356
<v Speaker 1>was newsworthy was that a group called the Constitution TAO,

0:01:10.756 --> 0:01:15.196
<v Speaker 1>or a decentralized autonomous organization, came together over social media

0:01:15.276 --> 0:01:19.676
<v Speaker 1>over a very very brief period of time to crowdfund

0:01:19.756 --> 0:01:23.236
<v Speaker 1>tens of millions of dollars for the specific purpose of

0:01:23.436 --> 0:01:27.876
<v Speaker 1>purchasing this copy of the Constitution at auction. Now, as

0:01:27.876 --> 0:01:31.156
<v Speaker 1>it turned out, the TAO did not win the auction,

0:01:31.476 --> 0:01:34.116
<v Speaker 1>but the whole event did a lot to raise public

0:01:34.156 --> 0:01:38.916
<v Speaker 1>consciousness about taos, which are an innovative new technology that

0:01:38.956 --> 0:01:43.716
<v Speaker 1>nobody can exactly decide about. Are they progressive? Are they progressive?

0:01:44.116 --> 0:01:48.556
<v Speaker 1>Are they libertarian? Are they anti racist? Mark Cuban was

0:01:48.636 --> 0:01:52.476
<v Speaker 1>quoted as calling them the ultimate combination of capitalism and progressivism.

0:01:52.676 --> 0:01:54.476
<v Speaker 1>And I will leave it to you to figure out

0:01:54.476 --> 0:01:57.516
<v Speaker 1>what that means. But I've been on a trajectory myself

0:01:57.596 --> 0:02:00.116
<v Speaker 1>of trying to learn more about Taos ever since my

0:02:00.156 --> 0:02:03.956
<v Speaker 1>conversation on this podcast with Vitalic Puderan, and I wanted

0:02:03.996 --> 0:02:06.996
<v Speaker 1>to speak to someone who was deeply involved and engaged

0:02:07.196 --> 0:02:10.596
<v Speaker 1>in the Tao world. Right now, I'm joined today by

0:02:10.796 --> 0:02:14.276
<v Speaker 1>Eric Vorhis. He's a tech entrepreneur who founded the bitcoin

0:02:14.356 --> 0:02:19.556
<v Speaker 1>company Coinipolt and later founded Shapeshift, which was a cryptocurrency exchange.

0:02:20.236 --> 0:02:24.116
<v Speaker 1>This past year, shape Shift announced it was switching from

0:02:24.156 --> 0:02:27.156
<v Speaker 1>a classic corporate style government structure with a board of

0:02:27.156 --> 0:02:32.596
<v Speaker 1>directors to a DOW based on decentralized decision making, and

0:02:32.876 --> 0:02:35.876
<v Speaker 1>Eric explained all that in a medium post that will

0:02:35.916 --> 0:02:39.436
<v Speaker 1>put in the show notes. I'll be talking Eric about dows,

0:02:39.476 --> 0:02:43.636
<v Speaker 1>what they are, how they function, and about the politics

0:02:43.996 --> 0:02:48.196
<v Speaker 1>or anti politics of the DOO movement. Eric, thank you

0:02:48.236 --> 0:02:54.236
<v Speaker 1>for being here. I'm really excited to talk about a

0:02:54.276 --> 0:02:57.156
<v Speaker 1>topic where my own learning curve is, let's say, at

0:02:57.156 --> 0:03:00.476
<v Speaker 1>the very steep part of the curve So let's just

0:03:00.596 --> 0:03:05.116
<v Speaker 1>go right into the question of dows decentralized autonomous organizations

0:03:05.116 --> 0:03:06.596
<v Speaker 1>to give you some sense of how new I am

0:03:06.636 --> 0:03:09.036
<v Speaker 1>to the topic. The first time I talked publicly about

0:03:09.036 --> 0:03:11.116
<v Speaker 1>the subject, I still wasn't clear whether it was supposed

0:03:11.116 --> 0:03:13.076
<v Speaker 1>to be pronounced dow or spelled out as dao, and

0:03:13.116 --> 0:03:15.236
<v Speaker 1>I was a little skeptical of the idea that DOO

0:03:15.316 --> 0:03:20.236
<v Speaker 1>sounded too much like a Eastern religious tradition. So talk

0:03:20.276 --> 0:03:23.356
<v Speaker 1>to me about doos starting with one oh one, and

0:03:23.396 --> 0:03:25.196
<v Speaker 1>then with any luck, we'll move up to the more

0:03:25.196 --> 0:03:28.516
<v Speaker 1>advanced level or the course of the conversation. Cool Well,

0:03:28.836 --> 0:03:30.396
<v Speaker 1>about a year and a half ago, I was probably

0:03:30.396 --> 0:03:33.636
<v Speaker 1>in the same place you were, so this is still

0:03:33.676 --> 0:03:39.596
<v Speaker 1>relatively new to me. Also, DOO stands for decentralized autonomous organization,

0:03:40.036 --> 0:03:43.076
<v Speaker 1>which is a lot of syllables, and essentially it's just

0:03:43.156 --> 0:03:47.756
<v Speaker 1>a new way for humans to organize towards some kind

0:03:47.756 --> 0:03:54.476
<v Speaker 1>of economic ends. So generally people organize toward economic ends

0:03:54.836 --> 0:03:57.636
<v Speaker 1>like a for profit corporation like an LLC or a

0:03:58.436 --> 0:04:01.036
<v Speaker 1>C corps or something like that, or through some kind

0:04:01.036 --> 0:04:05.036
<v Speaker 1>of nonprofit organization, and those are both very well known.

0:04:05.796 --> 0:04:09.236
<v Speaker 1>Think of a DOO as basically a new version of

0:04:09.356 --> 0:04:15.356
<v Speaker 1>economic organization, and the defining feature is that there's no center,

0:04:15.636 --> 0:04:21.796
<v Speaker 1>there's no central entity whatsoever. It's not registered anywhere, there's

0:04:21.836 --> 0:04:26.276
<v Speaker 1>no one who is the CEO of a DOO. And

0:04:27.316 --> 0:04:31.636
<v Speaker 1>it is found generally in the cryptocurrency world, but I

0:04:31.676 --> 0:04:37.196
<v Speaker 1>think it can expand eventually beyond that. So let's talk

0:04:37.236 --> 0:04:40.356
<v Speaker 1>about what are the agreements that turn a DOO into

0:04:40.356 --> 0:04:42.676
<v Speaker 1>a doao. If you and I wanted to create a

0:04:42.756 --> 0:04:46.836
<v Speaker 1>DOO to disseminate this episode of this podcast, what would

0:04:46.836 --> 0:04:49.796
<v Speaker 1>we want to do to do that. Yeah, So thinking

0:04:49.836 --> 0:04:52.076
<v Speaker 1>about it from the perspective of contracts, I think is

0:04:52.276 --> 0:04:54.716
<v Speaker 1>a good way to do it. The key difference here

0:04:54.836 --> 0:04:59.436
<v Speaker 1>is that instead of being paper contracts written in English,

0:05:00.236 --> 0:05:04.076
<v Speaker 1>signed by humans and enforced by the state, these are

0:05:04.156 --> 0:05:09.116
<v Speaker 1>contracts written in code, essentially what are called smart contract

0:05:09.916 --> 0:05:14.636
<v Speaker 1>which operate independently. They are not enshrined or protected by

0:05:14.676 --> 0:05:18.236
<v Speaker 1>the state in any way. They simply execute because the

0:05:18.276 --> 0:05:23.716
<v Speaker 1>code makes them execute. So they are much more immutable

0:05:24.036 --> 0:05:28.636
<v Speaker 1>than the normal contracts that would govern a corporation, and

0:05:28.676 --> 0:05:31.036
<v Speaker 1>they are subject to exactly how the code is written.

0:05:31.676 --> 0:05:37.316
<v Speaker 1>So generally in the cryptocurrency world, the locust is the treasury.

0:05:37.476 --> 0:05:40.836
<v Speaker 1>So you have like a treasury contract of a certain

0:05:40.876 --> 0:05:45.316
<v Speaker 1>digital asset, and let's say that contract is holding a

0:05:45.396 --> 0:05:50.916
<v Speaker 1>million dollars of ethereum cryptocurrency. That contract sits there and

0:05:51.196 --> 0:05:54.276
<v Speaker 1>executes certain rules. And so the simplest set would be

0:05:54.996 --> 0:05:59.276
<v Speaker 1>if fifty one percent of the holders of a certain

0:05:59.316 --> 0:06:03.716
<v Speaker 1>token vote to move money out of this treasury contract,

0:06:03.756 --> 0:06:05.876
<v Speaker 1>then it will move to where the voters say it

0:06:05.916 --> 0:06:11.276
<v Speaker 1>should move around. That in entire DAO can form, and

0:06:11.436 --> 0:06:14.396
<v Speaker 1>it doesn't use a bank account, it doesn't have a jurisdiction,

0:06:14.956 --> 0:06:18.076
<v Speaker 1>it's not, you know, subject to any particular country. It

0:06:18.156 --> 0:06:22.236
<v Speaker 1>just exists on the Internet as one or more self

0:06:22.236 --> 0:06:28.276
<v Speaker 1>executing smart contract sets of code. A terminological question before

0:06:28.276 --> 0:06:31.716
<v Speaker 1>we dive into the really fascinating I think already practical

0:06:31.716 --> 0:06:35.156
<v Speaker 1>and philosophical consequences of this way of doing things. You

0:06:35.276 --> 0:06:37.636
<v Speaker 1>spoke of it as a treasury contract, and then you

0:06:37.676 --> 0:06:40.756
<v Speaker 1>said that contract sits there. I take it that this

0:06:40.836 --> 0:06:43.956
<v Speaker 1>is a kind of term of art in taospeak. It's

0:06:43.956 --> 0:06:46.636
<v Speaker 1>that the fund sits there, the money sits there, or

0:06:46.676 --> 0:06:49.956
<v Speaker 1>the asset sits there, and that as it is referred

0:06:49.956 --> 0:06:52.916
<v Speaker 1>to as the treasury, or effectively as the treasure, or

0:06:52.956 --> 0:06:55.516
<v Speaker 1>as the treasury contract. Am I getting that right? Yeah?

0:06:55.636 --> 0:06:57.876
<v Speaker 1>Treasury is just kind of like a colloquial name given

0:06:57.916 --> 0:07:02.316
<v Speaker 1>to it. But it's a contract that holds cryptocurrency. So

0:07:02.516 --> 0:07:04.636
<v Speaker 1>some kind of digitalized makes it a contract. What makes

0:07:04.636 --> 0:07:06.716
<v Speaker 1>it a contract is that there's an encoded set of

0:07:06.836 --> 0:07:15.636
<v Speaker 1>rules that are connected inextricably to the reality of this holding. Correct. Yeah,

0:07:15.756 --> 0:07:18.196
<v Speaker 1>So think of it like a bank account. You know,

0:07:18.236 --> 0:07:20.956
<v Speaker 1>the bank account has a bunch of written and unwritten rules,

0:07:21.636 --> 0:07:23.356
<v Speaker 1>and if you have money in the bank account, the

0:07:23.436 --> 0:07:25.876
<v Speaker 1>money will leave the bank account if certain things are done,

0:07:26.076 --> 0:07:29.836
<v Speaker 1>like if the person who owns the bank account directs

0:07:29.876 --> 0:07:31.956
<v Speaker 1>money to be moved, and if X, y, and z

0:07:32.116 --> 0:07:35.516
<v Speaker 1>people at the bank approve of the transfer, the money

0:07:35.516 --> 0:07:38.436
<v Speaker 1>will move out of it. All of that is handled

0:07:38.516 --> 0:07:43.116
<v Speaker 1>and managed and overseen by humans on some layer. Smart

0:07:43.156 --> 0:07:48.676
<v Speaker 1>contracts are operating as code, and so computers can make

0:07:48.756 --> 0:07:52.516
<v Speaker 1>the money move on their own. No human has to

0:07:52.516 --> 0:07:55.676
<v Speaker 1>be involved whatsoever. And so instead of money being held

0:07:55.676 --> 0:07:58.916
<v Speaker 1>by a bank movable by humans, money is held in

0:07:58.956 --> 0:08:04.796
<v Speaker 1>a smart contract movable by code and machines. Let's talk

0:08:04.836 --> 0:08:10.636
<v Speaker 1>about change. So we've got your stylized example of a

0:08:10.716 --> 0:08:13.596
<v Speaker 1>fund of a million dollars worth of I think you

0:08:13.676 --> 0:08:18.116
<v Speaker 1>said ethereum sitting there. And there's a rule of decision

0:08:18.156 --> 0:08:21.476
<v Speaker 1>that's built into the code, which is that if fifty

0:08:21.476 --> 0:08:24.476
<v Speaker 1>one percent of say, the token holders who have a say,

0:08:25.636 --> 0:08:29.036
<v Speaker 1>choose to distribute the asset in a particular way, then

0:08:29.076 --> 0:08:33.116
<v Speaker 1>it happens. If you were to build in, as well

0:08:33.156 --> 0:08:37.076
<v Speaker 1>to that initial code, the possibility that fifty one of

0:08:37.116 --> 0:08:41.956
<v Speaker 1>the holders of the token could change the rules for distribution,

0:08:42.796 --> 0:08:46.436
<v Speaker 1>then you'd have a more open ended set of arrangements,

0:08:46.756 --> 0:08:49.676
<v Speaker 1>at least in principle. There's no reason you couldn't design

0:08:49.716 --> 0:08:54.476
<v Speaker 1>it that way, correct. Yeah, And actually, since fifty one

0:08:54.516 --> 0:08:56.476
<v Speaker 1>percent of the people can move the money out of

0:08:56.476 --> 0:08:59.476
<v Speaker 1>the contract, if fifty one percent of the people decide

0:08:59.516 --> 0:09:01.796
<v Speaker 1>that a change is needed, they just make a new

0:09:01.796 --> 0:09:04.316
<v Speaker 1>contract and move the money into that new one. So

0:09:04.356 --> 0:09:07.916
<v Speaker 1>the initial one doesn't even need to contemplate that kind

0:09:07.956 --> 0:09:10.516
<v Speaker 1>of change. Well, what it does need to contemplate, though,

0:09:10.556 --> 0:09:12.716
<v Speaker 1>is it needs a rule of decision. Right, it needs

0:09:12.756 --> 0:09:15.116
<v Speaker 1>to know that fifty one percent is the rule of decision.

0:09:15.156 --> 0:09:17.076
<v Speaker 1>You could also do it by any number of other

0:09:17.396 --> 0:09:19.316
<v Speaker 1>modes of governance. Right, you could have ten percent of

0:09:19.316 --> 0:09:22.196
<v Speaker 1>those who own a special token or just ten percent

0:09:22.276 --> 0:09:23.956
<v Speaker 1>of the people could put it out of existence. I mean,

0:09:23.956 --> 0:09:27.316
<v Speaker 1>there's nothing magic about the majority control. It's just whatever

0:09:27.356 --> 0:09:31.116
<v Speaker 1>you lock in the program, because that's what this is. Effectively,

0:09:31.116 --> 0:09:34.276
<v Speaker 1>it's a program. A set of programs will execute. Ye.

0:09:34.636 --> 0:09:39.756
<v Speaker 1>So if that's the case, then I'm curious about how

0:09:39.876 --> 0:09:42.916
<v Speaker 1>much thought goes into the process of choosing that rule

0:09:42.916 --> 0:09:45.356
<v Speaker 1>of decision. I would assume it's an enormous amount of thought,

0:09:45.596 --> 0:09:47.756
<v Speaker 1>because that's, as it were, the whole ball of wax.

0:09:47.796 --> 0:09:50.636
<v Speaker 1>If you talk about a smart contract, they will execute itself.

0:09:50.636 --> 0:09:55.596
<v Speaker 1>But actually it will execute itself unless that circumstances whereby

0:09:55.836 --> 0:09:58.796
<v Speaker 1>the rule of decision can change is executed, in which

0:09:58.836 --> 0:10:02.076
<v Speaker 1>case it won't execute itself. Yeah, and this is where

0:10:02.196 --> 0:10:06.236
<v Speaker 1>dows are all just experimenting with different models. So a

0:10:06.316 --> 0:10:08.076
<v Speaker 1>DOW can be very small, you know. It could be

0:10:08.116 --> 0:10:09.956
<v Speaker 1>like two or three p bull that have some kind

0:10:09.956 --> 0:10:13.196
<v Speaker 1>of smart contract that they all participate in. It could

0:10:13.196 --> 0:10:16.116
<v Speaker 1>be massive. It could be millions and millions of people

0:10:16.156 --> 0:10:21.116
<v Speaker 1>in controlling billions of dollars of economic assets. And the

0:10:21.236 --> 0:10:24.636
<v Speaker 1>rules can be simple, like a simple fifty one percent

0:10:24.836 --> 0:10:27.516
<v Speaker 1>moves the money, and that's the core. Nothing else is

0:10:27.556 --> 0:10:30.076
<v Speaker 1>written other than that single rule, or it could be

0:10:30.156 --> 0:10:33.196
<v Speaker 1>very elaborate with lots of interlocking contracts with different rules

0:10:33.636 --> 0:10:37.556
<v Speaker 1>and singular Dao organizations may change over time. They learn

0:10:38.036 --> 0:10:40.756
<v Speaker 1>how to govern themselves, they learn what works and what doesn't,

0:10:41.396 --> 0:10:45.036
<v Speaker 1>and so they evolve and adapt. The important point here

0:10:45.076 --> 0:10:48.796
<v Speaker 1>isn't what specific rules the Tao chooses. It's simply that

0:10:48.836 --> 0:10:53.796
<v Speaker 1>you now can have humans interact economically with no central

0:10:53.876 --> 0:10:56.956
<v Speaker 1>party being involved whatsoever. Well, let me ask you a

0:10:56.956 --> 0:10:59.756
<v Speaker 1>follow one question about that. Let's say you know again,

0:10:59.796 --> 0:11:01.876
<v Speaker 1>it's a simple dow You and I are the only participants,

0:11:01.916 --> 0:11:03.116
<v Speaker 1>or maybe there're three of us, so that we have

0:11:03.116 --> 0:11:06.356
<v Speaker 1>a fifty one percent option, and we write it so

0:11:06.396 --> 0:11:09.756
<v Speaker 1>that there's a majoritarian rule of decision. Then two of

0:11:09.836 --> 0:11:12.676
<v Speaker 1>us get together and vote within the system, saying we

0:11:12.716 --> 0:11:14.596
<v Speaker 1>want to change things and disburse the funds in some

0:11:14.676 --> 0:11:17.916
<v Speaker 1>different way. And in principle, that would seem to follow

0:11:17.916 --> 0:11:21.476
<v Speaker 1>the rules as written. But the person who is the

0:11:21.476 --> 0:11:24.516
<v Speaker 1>third person says, I think that somehow the system has

0:11:24.556 --> 0:11:29.196
<v Speaker 1>been hacked here, and in fact my vote was cast

0:11:29.276 --> 0:11:31.316
<v Speaker 1>let's say, without my knowing it. I didn't mean to

0:11:31.396 --> 0:11:35.636
<v Speaker 1>vote this way, but someone voted my share the program

0:11:35.716 --> 0:11:38.756
<v Speaker 1>doesn't know that. Presumably it's just going to execute. What

0:11:38.916 --> 0:11:43.276
<v Speaker 1>if any recourse does that person then have. I mean,

0:11:43.316 --> 0:11:45.716
<v Speaker 1>if there's no recourse to the state, then that person

0:11:45.836 --> 0:11:48.356
<v Speaker 1>is just out of luck. Game is over for that person.

0:11:48.756 --> 0:11:50.836
<v Speaker 1>If there is recourse to a state or a government,

0:11:51.476 --> 0:11:53.716
<v Speaker 1>or maybe to a broader set of users, that person

0:11:53.756 --> 0:11:57.796
<v Speaker 1>could appear in some form and say, hey, you know

0:11:58.156 --> 0:11:59.996
<v Speaker 1>this is supposed to only have happened if there's a

0:12:00.036 --> 0:12:02.316
<v Speaker 1>majority vote. There wasn't really majority vote. I was hacked.

0:12:02.356 --> 0:12:05.836
<v Speaker 1>I didn't mean to do this. Yeah, well, anyone familiar

0:12:05.836 --> 0:12:08.676
<v Speaker 1>with cryptocurrency systems, you know this won't sound alien too.

0:12:08.756 --> 0:12:13.196
<v Speaker 1>But the code executes, and that is the arbiter like,

0:12:13.316 --> 0:12:16.196
<v Speaker 1>that's what happens. So there is no recourse outside of

0:12:16.236 --> 0:12:18.716
<v Speaker 1>the code. If you make a mistake, or if the

0:12:18.756 --> 0:12:20.716
<v Speaker 1>code is written poorly, or if there's a bug or

0:12:20.956 --> 0:12:24.556
<v Speaker 1>anything that can happen, the code executes and then it's done.

0:12:25.116 --> 0:12:28.236
<v Speaker 1>So when writing these kind of contracts, obviously you have

0:12:28.276 --> 0:12:32.116
<v Speaker 1>to be very careful, and the more complicated they get,

0:12:32.156 --> 0:12:34.276
<v Speaker 1>the more likely it is that there will be errors

0:12:34.276 --> 0:12:37.516
<v Speaker 1>of some kind. You could, of course add complexity to

0:12:37.636 --> 0:12:41.076
<v Speaker 1>help mitigate this effect. You could say, any vote can

0:12:41.076 --> 0:12:43.756
<v Speaker 1>be reversed within a week if x, y and z

0:12:43.916 --> 0:12:46.916
<v Speaker 1>factors happen. So you can write any number of arbitrary

0:12:46.956 --> 0:12:50.276
<v Speaker 1>rules to these things. But yeah, once as they execute,

0:12:50.396 --> 0:12:53.476
<v Speaker 1>no government in the world can unwind a smart contract.

0:12:53.996 --> 0:12:56.596
<v Speaker 1>And this is super critical when it comes to something

0:12:56.636 --> 0:13:00.076
<v Speaker 1>like bitcoin, which is arguably the world's first daw even

0:13:00.076 --> 0:13:02.756
<v Speaker 1>though people didn't use that terminology for it, but it

0:13:02.836 --> 0:13:05.956
<v Speaker 1>happens throughout cryptocurrency and these smart contracts, they just do

0:13:05.996 --> 0:13:10.116
<v Speaker 1>what they are programmed to do. We'll be right back.

0:13:19.716 --> 0:13:23.876
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk about what are the advantages and uses of doaos,

0:13:23.916 --> 0:13:26.876
<v Speaker 1>at least at this stage, and what are the limitations

0:13:27.196 --> 0:13:29.356
<v Speaker 1>associate with it. I keep coming back to the question

0:13:29.356 --> 0:13:33.236
<v Speaker 1>of what an ordinary limited liability corporation does. So an

0:13:33.316 --> 0:13:37.516
<v Speaker 1>ordinary limited liability corporation has shares and has shareholders who

0:13:37.556 --> 0:13:41.236
<v Speaker 1>have paid in It has a governance structure, and typically

0:13:41.476 --> 0:13:44.396
<v Speaker 1>it's organized to do anything that would make a profit

0:13:44.436 --> 0:13:46.796
<v Speaker 1>for the shareholders. If it's for profit, they may have

0:13:46.836 --> 0:13:50.156
<v Speaker 1>a goal at the beginning, but typically the rules are

0:13:50.156 --> 0:13:53.116
<v Speaker 1>written so that they can have maximal flexibility and decision making,

0:13:53.316 --> 0:13:55.476
<v Speaker 1>and there's also rules of decision just like there would

0:13:55.476 --> 0:13:57.756
<v Speaker 1>be in a DOO in some sense, there could be

0:13:57.756 --> 0:14:00.116
<v Speaker 1>a majority rule in electing members of the board, and

0:14:00.156 --> 0:14:03.356
<v Speaker 1>then the board itself has the capacity to hire the

0:14:03.396 --> 0:14:05.276
<v Speaker 1>managers or the firm, and then the managers make the

0:14:05.316 --> 0:14:08.396
<v Speaker 1>decisions subject to supervision from the board. So it's got

0:14:08.396 --> 0:14:10.236
<v Speaker 1>a set of rule of decision in it as well.

0:14:11.676 --> 0:14:15.316
<v Speaker 1>So that has a lot of flexibility in It seems

0:14:15.356 --> 0:14:21.636
<v Speaker 1>your flexibility is constrained by what you've said upfront, right,

0:14:21.636 --> 0:14:25.836
<v Speaker 1>You've written that contract in and unless you have a

0:14:25.916 --> 0:14:27.716
<v Speaker 1>rule of decision that enables it to be changed with

0:14:27.756 --> 0:14:31.436
<v Speaker 1>an elaborate government structure attached, you sort of have to

0:14:31.476 --> 0:14:35.316
<v Speaker 1>do what you started with. Does that seem like a

0:14:35.316 --> 0:14:37.796
<v Speaker 1>fair concern? I see what you're saying, but I think

0:14:37.796 --> 0:14:40.516
<v Speaker 1>it's I think it's the opposite. The main benefits of

0:14:40.516 --> 0:14:45.516
<v Speaker 1>ADAO are the greater flexibility, not the greater constraint. To

0:14:45.556 --> 0:14:48.716
<v Speaker 1>give a very like clear demonstration of how much more

0:14:48.716 --> 0:14:55.156
<v Speaker 1>flexible ADAO is, any normal company that employees employees has

0:14:55.196 --> 0:14:58.516
<v Speaker 1>to follow, you know, all sorts of employment laws in

0:14:58.556 --> 0:15:02.436
<v Speaker 1>a specific jurisdiction. Those employment laws have nothing to do

0:15:02.636 --> 0:15:06.316
<v Speaker 1>with serving the customer. They have everything to do with

0:15:06.516 --> 0:15:10.436
<v Speaker 1>certain special interests. In the past, arguing for political reasons

0:15:10.996 --> 0:15:15.196
<v Speaker 1>that external rules should be imposed on the mutual work

0:15:15.236 --> 0:15:18.876
<v Speaker 1>between two people. A dow doesn't have to abide by that.

0:15:19.516 --> 0:15:21.636
<v Speaker 1>A doubt does not exist within a territory, and a

0:15:21.636 --> 0:15:25.236
<v Speaker 1>dow does not have employees as defined under law. So

0:15:25.276 --> 0:15:28.796
<v Speaker 1>a dow can pay a worker in some country to

0:15:28.836 --> 0:15:34.596
<v Speaker 1>do X, Y and Z task with zero concern about

0:15:35.396 --> 0:15:39.596
<v Speaker 1>the five hundred different you know, labor laws of any

0:15:39.676 --> 0:15:43.996
<v Speaker 1>arbitrary country. And that's this is a very important thing

0:15:43.996 --> 0:15:46.796
<v Speaker 1>you're saying, and I want to take it on head on,

0:15:47.396 --> 0:15:48.676
<v Speaker 1>and I want to do it, if it's okay with you,

0:15:48.716 --> 0:15:50.516
<v Speaker 1>in two parts. First, I just want to respond to

0:15:50.516 --> 0:15:52.356
<v Speaker 1>what you were saying about flexibility, and then I want

0:15:52.356 --> 0:15:55.036
<v Speaker 1>to go straight into the employment law and the more

0:15:55.116 --> 0:15:59.476
<v Speaker 1>deeply libertarian versus regulatory conceptions that one might have of that.

0:15:59.916 --> 0:16:01.596
<v Speaker 1>But before we get there, and I'm really excited to

0:16:01.596 --> 0:16:03.636
<v Speaker 1>get there, I just want to quickly do a clarification

0:16:03.756 --> 0:16:06.956
<v Speaker 1>on the flexibility point. Yeah. So you know, a group

0:16:06.956 --> 0:16:09.676
<v Speaker 1>of people got together and they very quickly created ADAO

0:16:09.796 --> 0:16:11.636
<v Speaker 1>to buy a copy of the Constitution that was up

0:16:11.676 --> 0:16:13.356
<v Speaker 1>for auction, and they all had to put in money

0:16:13.436 --> 0:16:16.036
<v Speaker 1>because you have to put your assets in advance or

0:16:16.116 --> 0:16:19.756
<v Speaker 1>create those assets in advance in a DAO and then

0:16:19.796 --> 0:16:21.956
<v Speaker 1>they didn't win. They didn't get the object because they

0:16:21.956 --> 0:16:24.516
<v Speaker 1>were outbid fair enough, and they need to have a

0:16:24.596 --> 0:16:26.516
<v Speaker 1>rule of decision of what to do about that money

0:16:26.556 --> 0:16:28.316
<v Speaker 1>after the fact, because the money was all in there,

0:16:28.316 --> 0:16:30.196
<v Speaker 1>it was set that the program was set up. So

0:16:30.316 --> 0:16:32.076
<v Speaker 1>if they won then auction, they would have bought the

0:16:32.156 --> 0:16:35.676
<v Speaker 1>constitution if they if the TAO then wanted to say,

0:16:36.236 --> 0:16:39.196
<v Speaker 1>we want to go into business now to do something

0:16:39.236 --> 0:16:41.596
<v Speaker 1>completely different. You know, we want to go into business

0:16:41.596 --> 0:16:45.396
<v Speaker 1>to promote I don't know, to promote the idea of doubts, right,

0:16:46.316 --> 0:16:47.996
<v Speaker 1>and we want to have all the elements that you

0:16:48.076 --> 0:16:49.956
<v Speaker 1>need to go into business that require more than just

0:16:50.116 --> 0:16:52.916
<v Speaker 1>paying people, like a whole business operation. To do it,

0:16:53.996 --> 0:16:56.436
<v Speaker 1>they would need to have a rule of decision that

0:16:56.596 --> 0:16:59.196
<v Speaker 1>enabled the majority of the members of the doubt to

0:16:59.316 --> 0:17:03.196
<v Speaker 1>enact what would be in effect rules of corporate governance. Right.

0:17:03.236 --> 0:17:05.116
<v Speaker 1>They would have to say, this is how we're going

0:17:05.156 --> 0:17:06.996
<v Speaker 1>to appoint our CEO, this is how we're going to

0:17:07.316 --> 0:17:09.436
<v Speaker 1>how we're going to supervise the CEO, this is how

0:17:09.756 --> 0:17:11.756
<v Speaker 1>the decision ers are going to proceed on a day

0:17:11.756 --> 0:17:13.796
<v Speaker 1>to day basis. Otherwise, they'd have to make ever, have

0:17:13.916 --> 0:17:16.756
<v Speaker 1>every single decision made by vote of the whole collective

0:17:16.756 --> 0:17:18.196
<v Speaker 1>the way sort of like a town meeting in New

0:17:18.196 --> 0:17:19.916
<v Speaker 1>England does it. And as anyone who has ever been

0:17:19.916 --> 0:17:22.516
<v Speaker 1>to one of those town meetings, no, it's wildly inefficient.

0:17:22.596 --> 0:17:24.996
<v Speaker 1>So that's why guess what I meant on the flexibility point.

0:17:24.996 --> 0:17:28.476
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I get that in principle, the DAO could

0:17:29.876 --> 0:17:32.916
<v Speaker 1>legal structures of the state provided just say we're not

0:17:32.996 --> 0:17:36.556
<v Speaker 1>we're now adopting rules of incorporation. But unless they reinvent

0:17:36.596 --> 0:17:39.316
<v Speaker 1>the wheel of the rules of incorporation, it seems all

0:17:39.356 --> 0:17:42.196
<v Speaker 1>everything they do they have to do by the same

0:17:42.276 --> 0:17:44.236
<v Speaker 1>rule decision they've adopted in from the beginning. If that's

0:17:44.276 --> 0:17:47.276
<v Speaker 1>fifty plus one, then they need to vote on everything

0:17:47.276 --> 0:17:50.156
<v Speaker 1>fifty percent plus one. Am I getting that right? Yeah?

0:17:50.316 --> 0:17:52.876
<v Speaker 1>So this is a super important point, and it was

0:17:52.916 --> 0:17:54.996
<v Speaker 1>one of the things that I was initially skeptical on

0:17:55.036 --> 0:17:58.436
<v Speaker 1>about DAOs is you know, if every decision of an

0:17:58.476 --> 0:18:00.196
<v Speaker 1>organization has to be voted on, it's going to be

0:18:00.236 --> 0:18:03.876
<v Speaker 1>a disaster for many reasons. DAWs generally get around this

0:18:04.116 --> 0:18:09.076
<v Speaker 1>by simply creating groups with delegated authority. So you create

0:18:09.236 --> 0:18:11.636
<v Speaker 1>this initial tao. It has a million dollars, and it

0:18:11.676 --> 0:18:13.516
<v Speaker 1>just has the simple rule that fifty one percent of

0:18:13.516 --> 0:18:16.836
<v Speaker 1>the token holders can move the money. The next vote

0:18:16.956 --> 0:18:20.556
<v Speaker 1>might be, Okay, we need marketing, so give one hundred

0:18:20.556 --> 0:18:24.076
<v Speaker 1>thousand dollars to this guy because he seems credible with marketing.

0:18:24.556 --> 0:18:27.276
<v Speaker 1>He gets one hundred thousand dollars. And then everything he

0:18:27.356 --> 0:18:30.996
<v Speaker 1>does for marketing is not up to a vote. It's

0:18:31.036 --> 0:18:33.476
<v Speaker 1>just up to him, so he has full autonomy over

0:18:33.516 --> 0:18:36.316
<v Speaker 1>his role. At some point he's going to want to

0:18:36.316 --> 0:18:38.516
<v Speaker 1>come back from our money, right, and so that's when

0:18:38.516 --> 0:18:40.556
<v Speaker 1>he needs to demonstrate, like, hey, here's what I did

0:18:40.596 --> 0:18:43.116
<v Speaker 1>for you as the DOAO, Here's how well I spent

0:18:43.156 --> 0:18:45.196
<v Speaker 1>all that hundred thousand dollars, and here are the results.

0:18:45.436 --> 0:18:47.236
<v Speaker 1>Give me more money and I'll keep doing this for you.

0:18:47.956 --> 0:18:50.476
<v Speaker 1>So in that case, you know, only one decision was

0:18:50.556 --> 0:18:52.596
<v Speaker 1>voted on, which was give one hundred thousand dollars to

0:18:53.476 --> 0:18:58.116
<v Speaker 1>this guy, and he has tons of flexibility. I don't

0:18:58.156 --> 0:19:00.676
<v Speaker 1>want to labor the point, but I do think that

0:19:00.796 --> 0:19:02.796
<v Speaker 1>in the real world of contracts, one of the things

0:19:02.836 --> 0:19:07.596
<v Speaker 1>that contracts are used for is repeated iteration by the

0:19:07.636 --> 0:19:10.556
<v Speaker 1>same players over a long period of time, with ongoing

0:19:10.636 --> 0:19:13.436
<v Speaker 1>negotiation and shifts in what the duties are. So let's

0:19:13.436 --> 0:19:16.156
<v Speaker 1>say I have a company, and I hire an ordinary company,

0:19:16.156 --> 0:19:17.956
<v Speaker 1>and I hire someone who does marketing, and I pay

0:19:17.996 --> 0:19:20.796
<v Speaker 1>the person monthly for a certain amount of work, or

0:19:20.796 --> 0:19:24.516
<v Speaker 1>by the job for a certain amount of work. Each month,

0:19:24.596 --> 0:19:26.516
<v Speaker 1>we check in with each other, or maybe even every day.

0:19:26.556 --> 0:19:27.996
<v Speaker 1>We check in with each other, and we see how

0:19:27.996 --> 0:19:29.676
<v Speaker 1>each of us is doing, and when the term of

0:19:29.716 --> 0:19:32.356
<v Speaker 1>the contract ends, we're capable of renegotiating the contract. In fact,

0:19:32.356 --> 0:19:33.556
<v Speaker 1>we don't even have to wait for the term of

0:19:33.556 --> 0:19:36.036
<v Speaker 1>the contract end. In the real world, people are constantly

0:19:36.036 --> 0:19:39.836
<v Speaker 1>renegotiating contracts all the time, based on their needs, based

0:19:39.836 --> 0:19:42.996
<v Speaker 1>on circumstances. And it does seem to me that that

0:19:43.156 --> 0:19:47.036
<v Speaker 1>iterative structure of engagement. I agree that in principle it

0:19:47.076 --> 0:19:49.676
<v Speaker 1>could be done. In a doubt, that seems correct to me.

0:19:50.316 --> 0:19:52.356
<v Speaker 1>But it seems like one of the great advantages of

0:19:52.556 --> 0:19:55.996
<v Speaker 1>ordinary corporate form of government is that the shareholders are saying,

0:19:55.996 --> 0:19:58.196
<v Speaker 1>we don't have the time to manage the firm in detail,

0:19:58.596 --> 0:20:00.876
<v Speaker 1>so we're going to delegate that management to people who

0:20:00.916 --> 0:20:03.356
<v Speaker 1>have the full time job of, among other things, talking

0:20:03.356 --> 0:20:05.476
<v Speaker 1>to the marketing guy who gets hired and making judgments

0:20:05.476 --> 0:20:08.796
<v Speaker 1>about that. And it seems like, again, unless you reinvent

0:20:08.876 --> 0:20:12.316
<v Speaker 1>that within a DOO, you lose that. Yeah, it's reinvented

0:20:12.316 --> 0:20:15.836
<v Speaker 1>within the DOO. The DOO can decide to hire someone

0:20:15.916 --> 0:20:19.236
<v Speaker 1>who acts sort of as a manager to oversee several

0:20:19.476 --> 0:20:22.516
<v Speaker 1>roles beneath them. So if the DOO organization wants to

0:20:22.516 --> 0:20:27.516
<v Speaker 1>do that, it absolutely can. There's no reason that can't work.

0:20:27.916 --> 0:20:29.716
<v Speaker 1>So let's go to the point that you made about

0:20:29.716 --> 0:20:32.876
<v Speaker 1>employment laws. And here what you said was to my mind,

0:20:32.956 --> 0:20:38.236
<v Speaker 1>very reminiscent of some of the early arguments for cryptocurrencies, namely,

0:20:38.956 --> 0:20:42.836
<v Speaker 1>you can avoid regulation. And I want to raise two

0:20:42.916 --> 0:20:45.156
<v Speaker 1>concerns about that. One whether it's actually true that you

0:20:45.196 --> 0:20:48.876
<v Speaker 1>can avoid regulation, and two whether you should avoid regulation

0:20:48.876 --> 0:20:51.516
<v Speaker 1>as a normative moral matter. Even if you could, Let's

0:20:51.516 --> 0:20:52.956
<v Speaker 1>say you say, we don't want to fill out. It's

0:20:53.076 --> 0:20:54.436
<v Speaker 1>one of the things that employers have to do, even

0:20:54.436 --> 0:20:56.876
<v Speaker 1>if they're hiring contractors, is they have to send them

0:20:57.156 --> 0:20:58.836
<v Speaker 1>at the end of the year at tax documents saying

0:20:58.876 --> 0:21:01.036
<v Speaker 1>how much money they were paid and go through this

0:21:01.036 --> 0:21:03.716
<v Speaker 1>whole procedure of doing so. Even if it's only minimal,

0:21:03.716 --> 0:21:05.396
<v Speaker 1>they still have to go through it. And you say, well,

0:21:05.476 --> 0:21:07.356
<v Speaker 1>this is a DOO. It's not under the jurisdiction of

0:21:07.356 --> 0:21:10.036
<v Speaker 1>any regulator of any states. It's not going to do that.

0:21:11.236 --> 0:21:15.196
<v Speaker 1>If the state then appears, it can say to the

0:21:15.236 --> 0:21:18.556
<v Speaker 1>employee you got paid, well, hey, you you were under

0:21:18.596 --> 0:21:20.796
<v Speaker 1>a duty to do this and you didn't pay your taxes,

0:21:20.836 --> 0:21:22.396
<v Speaker 1>And the DAO could say, well, we don't care, not

0:21:22.476 --> 0:21:25.356
<v Speaker 1>our problem. But then if the state turns to the

0:21:25.436 --> 0:21:28.836
<v Speaker 1>DAO and says, look, if you're going to operate in

0:21:28.876 --> 0:21:33.756
<v Speaker 1>the state of Delaware, we obligate you to follow our

0:21:34.156 --> 0:21:39.516
<v Speaker 1>employment laws, and we will sanction you by sanctioning the

0:21:39.556 --> 0:21:43.076
<v Speaker 1>people who are in our jurisdiction, who are within our jurisdiction,

0:21:43.836 --> 0:21:47.676
<v Speaker 1>who are participants in the DAO. And if you say,

0:21:48.076 --> 0:21:49.436
<v Speaker 1>and this is going to be easier for the government

0:21:49.476 --> 0:21:51.036
<v Speaker 1>of China than for the government of Delaware, but it's

0:21:51.036 --> 0:21:54.636
<v Speaker 1>in principle possibly even in Delaware, if the TAO effectively says,

0:21:54.676 --> 0:21:56.116
<v Speaker 1>I mean, the DOO can't speak. But if the DAO

0:21:56.116 --> 0:21:59.356
<v Speaker 1>effectively says, sorry, we're not subject to your regulation, the

0:21:59.396 --> 0:22:03.396
<v Speaker 1>hell with you. You know, we're libertarians. The state's ultimate

0:22:03.396 --> 0:22:06.076
<v Speaker 1>sanction is to say it's unlawful for people in our

0:22:06.156 --> 0:22:09.436
<v Speaker 1>jurisdiction to own or participate in dao in the same

0:22:09.476 --> 0:22:12.236
<v Speaker 1>way that some countries have already done with some cryptocurrencies,

0:22:12.516 --> 0:22:14.916
<v Speaker 1>and then people could hide from the law, they could

0:22:15.116 --> 0:22:18.836
<v Speaker 1>unlawfully trade in crypto or unlawfully participate in the tao,

0:22:19.036 --> 0:22:20.876
<v Speaker 1>and then it becomes just the ordinary count and mouse

0:22:20.876 --> 0:22:25.556
<v Speaker 1>game of any unlawful activity. So in those senses, isn't

0:22:25.556 --> 0:22:28.636
<v Speaker 1>it the case that you really can only avoid regulation

0:22:28.756 --> 0:22:32.396
<v Speaker 1>insofar as the state entities where the human beings who

0:22:32.436 --> 0:22:38.036
<v Speaker 1>participate live chooses to allow the dao to remain unregulated. Yeah,

0:22:38.156 --> 0:22:42.516
<v Speaker 1>fascinating topic. So what you've really done in a doao

0:22:42.756 --> 0:22:46.876
<v Speaker 1>is you've removed the corporate entity from the equation entirely.

0:22:47.756 --> 0:22:49.916
<v Speaker 1>So instead of having a bunch of individuals and then

0:22:49.956 --> 0:22:53.116
<v Speaker 1>a corporate entity, which is where all regulation is applied

0:22:53.116 --> 0:22:55.876
<v Speaker 1>at a corporate level, that entity is gone. There is

0:22:55.876 --> 0:23:01.716
<v Speaker 1>no entity. A state can obviously enforce whatever coercion it

0:23:01.876 --> 0:23:07.196
<v Speaker 1>wants against individuals within its territory. And that's true regardless

0:23:07.236 --> 0:23:10.716
<v Speaker 1>of a DOO. But let's say Delaware becomes totally tyrannical

0:23:10.956 --> 0:23:14.356
<v Speaker 1>and says, you know, we don't like all the all

0:23:14.396 --> 0:23:17.676
<v Speaker 1>the freedom going on here. We will make it illegal

0:23:17.956 --> 0:23:20.636
<v Speaker 1>to participate in a dow. How that would be worded

0:23:20.716 --> 0:23:23.276
<v Speaker 1>legally would be very interesting, and obviously it would be

0:23:23.316 --> 0:23:27.516
<v Speaker 1>immediately a First Amendment issue. But even if they succeeded,

0:23:28.076 --> 0:23:30.196
<v Speaker 1>then okay, the people that were part of the DOAO

0:23:30.276 --> 0:23:33.636
<v Speaker 1>in Delaware end up selling their tokens because they can't

0:23:33.676 --> 0:23:38.556
<v Speaker 1>participate anymore, and the DOO morphs into the jurisdictions where

0:23:38.556 --> 0:23:42.636
<v Speaker 1>it can work. Right. So, unlike a corporation, which if

0:23:42.956 --> 0:23:45.076
<v Speaker 1>it's in Delaware and Delaware shuts it down, it's in

0:23:45.156 --> 0:23:46.916
<v Speaker 1>big trouble and it would take a lot of work

0:23:46.916 --> 0:23:50.756
<v Speaker 1>and effort to pull the roots out into redomicile somewhere.

0:23:51.636 --> 0:23:54.276
<v Speaker 1>A doo is very fluid. It's like trying to regulate,

0:23:54.476 --> 0:23:57.916
<v Speaker 1>you know, the movement of air or water, and for

0:23:57.956 --> 0:24:01.996
<v Speaker 1>that reason, it's a it's an entirely different beast. Eric.

0:24:02.036 --> 0:24:04.996
<v Speaker 1>That metaphor of airrow water really nicely tease up the

0:24:05.476 --> 0:24:09.596
<v Speaker 1>should we question, because the reason we, I mean, the

0:24:09.636 --> 0:24:11.916
<v Speaker 1>truth is we can regulate air and we can regulate water,

0:24:11.996 --> 0:24:14.276
<v Speaker 1>and we try to or at least we try to

0:24:14.276 --> 0:24:16.476
<v Speaker 1>regulate human interactions with them. But the reason that it's

0:24:16.516 --> 0:24:18.556
<v Speaker 1>hard to do that is that those are naturally occurring

0:24:18.716 --> 0:24:22.716
<v Speaker 1>entities that don't in their very nature subject themselves easily

0:24:22.756 --> 0:24:26.476
<v Speaker 1>to jurisdiction. Employment relations are different from that there are

0:24:26.556 --> 0:24:31.756
<v Speaker 1>human interactions between people, and states are interactions between people

0:24:31.756 --> 0:24:35.636
<v Speaker 1>and exist to regulate relations between people. Well, you described

0:24:35.716 --> 0:24:38.356
<v Speaker 1>employment laws, I think essentially what you're saying was that

0:24:38.396 --> 0:24:42.956
<v Speaker 1>they're the result of special interests lobbying for different forms

0:24:42.996 --> 0:24:45.676
<v Speaker 1>of regulation at past times. And that's absolutely the way

0:24:45.716 --> 0:24:48.116
<v Speaker 1>some people would describe employment laws, the way some economists

0:24:48.196 --> 0:24:50.956
<v Speaker 1>might describe it. But another way to describe employment law,

0:24:50.996 --> 0:24:54.316
<v Speaker 1>of the way say legislators would describe it, or unions,

0:24:54.956 --> 0:24:59.636
<v Speaker 1>is that they're the product of complex social negotiation between

0:24:59.756 --> 0:25:05.636
<v Speaker 1>people in society, making moral judgments and political judgments about

0:25:05.676 --> 0:25:09.396
<v Speaker 1>how much people need to live, about whether this social

0:25:09.436 --> 0:25:12.476
<v Speaker 1>conflict between unions and management that you almost burned down

0:25:12.516 --> 0:25:14.636
<v Speaker 1>Europe and the United States in the nineteen and twentieth

0:25:14.636 --> 0:25:18.236
<v Speaker 1>centuries should be regulated by some set of mechanisms. That

0:25:18.316 --> 0:25:20.596
<v Speaker 1>they are products of social forces, for sure, I think

0:25:20.636 --> 0:25:23.876
<v Speaker 1>everyone would concede. But many people think that employment law,

0:25:23.956 --> 0:25:27.996
<v Speaker 1>like other law, is a desirable set of forms of

0:25:28.076 --> 0:25:31.356
<v Speaker 1>regulation of human conduct. And if you believed all that,

0:25:31.396 --> 0:25:32.836
<v Speaker 1>I'm not saying that you have to or that one

0:25:32.876 --> 0:25:35.436
<v Speaker 1>has to. But if someone believed all that, would they

0:25:35.476 --> 0:25:38.916
<v Speaker 1>be right in thinking that taos are very very bad things.

0:25:39.076 --> 0:25:43.116
<v Speaker 1>I mean, if they exist to evade regulation, then they

0:25:43.156 --> 0:25:47.476
<v Speaker 1>exist to evade to the extent that they're able relations that,

0:25:47.516 --> 0:25:50.516
<v Speaker 1>at least in adjust in democratic society, have been adopted

0:25:50.516 --> 0:25:53.396
<v Speaker 1>by everybody in the hopes of making everybody better off,

0:25:53.396 --> 0:25:56.716
<v Speaker 1>and ironically, that have been adopted by democratic procedures, which

0:25:56.716 --> 0:25:59.316
<v Speaker 1>are the kinds of democratic procedures that the Tao talks

0:25:59.356 --> 0:26:03.396
<v Speaker 1>about using. So should my listeners who who like the

0:26:03.476 --> 0:26:07.156
<v Speaker 1>rule of law be turned off of taos? Exactly at

0:26:07.156 --> 0:26:11.716
<v Speaker 1>this point in the conversation, I like the rule of law.

0:26:12.396 --> 0:26:14.236
<v Speaker 1>I just think that there's a lot of laws that

0:26:14.316 --> 0:26:20.316
<v Speaker 1>are coercive and unethical. And the reason to be opposed

0:26:20.316 --> 0:26:23.596
<v Speaker 1>to taos is if you didn't like the idea that

0:26:23.676 --> 0:26:29.116
<v Speaker 1>two adults could just consensually interact with each other. Anyone

0:26:29.156 --> 0:26:33.236
<v Speaker 1>who's opposed to consensual interaction between adults is not going

0:26:33.316 --> 0:26:35.716
<v Speaker 1>to like taos because it allows them to do that.

0:26:35.996 --> 0:26:37.356
<v Speaker 1>You know, an economic pow do you have to be?

0:26:37.436 --> 0:26:38.756
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I guess I'm asking is how much of

0:26:38.756 --> 0:26:41.076
<v Speaker 1>a libertarian do you have to be? To like taos

0:26:41.156 --> 0:26:45.796
<v Speaker 1>because could one be a non libertarian dow lover or

0:26:46.036 --> 0:26:48.756
<v Speaker 1>is it that you have to basically be a libertarian

0:26:49.356 --> 0:26:55.996
<v Speaker 1>to love a doo. Doos are like pristine equality in

0:26:56.356 --> 0:27:00.956
<v Speaker 1>relationships between people. There is no corporate hierarchy, there is

0:27:00.996 --> 0:27:05.796
<v Speaker 1>no boss. It is simply a format on which any

0:27:05.836 --> 0:27:10.516
<v Speaker 1>two individuals or more can come together and opt in

0:27:11.236 --> 0:27:14.236
<v Speaker 1>to trade with each other on terms agreeable to both.

0:27:14.956 --> 0:27:20.156
<v Speaker 1>That's it. A lot of people are uncomfortable allowing to

0:27:20.516 --> 0:27:24.356
<v Speaker 1>adults to consensually agree with one another, and for those

0:27:24.356 --> 0:27:26.756
<v Speaker 1>people probably not going to like anything that increases the

0:27:26.796 --> 0:27:30.676
<v Speaker 1>ability for human adults to just like interact freely. You know,

0:27:30.796 --> 0:27:35.276
<v Speaker 1>dows are not asking anyone's permission for anything, and if

0:27:35.316 --> 0:27:37.596
<v Speaker 1>you don't like the DOO, you shouldn't be involved in it.

0:27:37.996 --> 0:27:41.876
<v Speaker 1>The DOAO is only by definition, going to include participants

0:27:41.916 --> 0:27:46.836
<v Speaker 1>that willingly wanted to interact with that organization. So Eric,

0:27:46.916 --> 0:27:49.116
<v Speaker 1>let me just be clear again about why I'm asking this.

0:27:49.196 --> 0:27:50.996
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I think I'm actually really interested in the

0:27:51.036 --> 0:27:52.996
<v Speaker 1>moral questions, but I think that's not the thing that's

0:27:52.996 --> 0:27:56.156
<v Speaker 1>most valuable to listeners. What's most valuable is people are

0:27:56.156 --> 0:27:58.036
<v Speaker 1>trying to figure out I think many people are trying

0:27:58.076 --> 0:28:00.756
<v Speaker 1>to figure out how serious or taos, how long will

0:28:00.756 --> 0:28:04.556
<v Speaker 1>they last, what kinds of capacities do they have to

0:28:04.596 --> 0:28:07.956
<v Speaker 1>the extent that doos are dependent upon. If they are

0:28:07.996 --> 0:28:11.836
<v Speaker 1>dependent upon that kind of a theory, no boss, no master,

0:28:12.316 --> 0:28:16.356
<v Speaker 1>they run the risk of being regulated in exactly the

0:28:16.356 --> 0:28:19.436
<v Speaker 1>way that everything else in society is regulated. Right, So,

0:28:19.796 --> 0:28:22.796
<v Speaker 1>democratic theory says that in democratic society there are no bosses,

0:28:22.836 --> 0:28:26.156
<v Speaker 1>no masters. And yet within democratic societies, by a whole

0:28:26.436 --> 0:28:31.156
<v Speaker 1>set of processes, vast economic inequalities emerge, those generate property

0:28:31.156 --> 0:28:35.316
<v Speaker 1>and equalities, and then via contract, we get bosses, and

0:28:35.356 --> 0:28:37.556
<v Speaker 1>we might even get masters and slaves if they enter

0:28:37.596 --> 0:28:40.516
<v Speaker 1>into those relationships by contract, And in principle, you know,

0:28:40.636 --> 0:28:42.956
<v Speaker 1>through if you think of an indentured servitude contract, which

0:28:42.996 --> 0:28:46.316
<v Speaker 1>was a very common form of contract in early America,

0:28:46.436 --> 0:28:48.196
<v Speaker 1>you get something that looks a heck of a lot

0:28:48.236 --> 0:28:53.956
<v Speaker 1>like slavery, just by voluntary contracting. So that's why the

0:28:53.996 --> 0:28:57.556
<v Speaker 1>great majority of well all governments that have ever existed

0:28:57.796 --> 0:29:02.516
<v Speaker 1>have regulated in ways that are in commensurate with genuine libertarianism.

0:29:02.556 --> 0:29:04.476
<v Speaker 1>Now again, I'm not saying that to make a philosophical

0:29:04.556 --> 0:29:08.356
<v Speaker 1>argument against libertarianism. I'm saying it because if the DAO

0:29:08.556 --> 0:29:11.436
<v Speaker 1>depends on that libertarian theory, then a lot of us

0:29:11.436 --> 0:29:15.356
<v Speaker 1>think that as a predictive matter, it's way more likely

0:29:15.476 --> 0:29:18.716
<v Speaker 1>the taos will in fact be subject to radical regulation

0:29:18.916 --> 0:29:22.396
<v Speaker 1>and therefore won't be able to achieve they're somewhat utopian purposes.

0:29:22.876 --> 0:29:25.316
<v Speaker 1>Then if you told me no, as a lot of

0:29:25.316 --> 0:29:27.436
<v Speaker 1>people are saying in crypto, look, there's nothing wrong with

0:29:27.476 --> 0:29:30.396
<v Speaker 1>crypto being regulated. Sure, crypto can be regulated. You know,

0:29:30.436 --> 0:29:32.516
<v Speaker 1>at the beginning people said, well, what's great about cryptos

0:29:32.516 --> 0:29:36.036
<v Speaker 1>It will evade all regulation. And now as crypto's getting

0:29:36.036 --> 0:29:38.996
<v Speaker 1>bigger and bigger and more and more successful, lots of

0:29:39.036 --> 0:29:41.276
<v Speaker 1>advocates of crypto say, it's not a problem for crypto

0:29:41.316 --> 0:29:43.476
<v Speaker 1>can be regulated. We can we can manage that regulation.

0:29:43.516 --> 0:29:46.596
<v Speaker 1>And crypto's got all kinds of other valuable functions other

0:29:46.636 --> 0:29:48.996
<v Speaker 1>than the evasion of regulation. So I guess what I'm

0:29:48.996 --> 0:29:52.196
<v Speaker 1>trying to figure out is is that where are DAWs

0:29:52.276 --> 0:29:54.396
<v Speaker 1>different in some way or is it like crypto where

0:29:54.436 --> 0:29:56.356
<v Speaker 1>of course there's still lots of crypto people who would

0:29:56.396 --> 0:29:59.476
<v Speaker 1>like no regulation to exist, but lots of advocates of

0:29:59.476 --> 0:30:02.436
<v Speaker 1>crypto have sort of accepted the reality of future regulation.

0:30:03.516 --> 0:30:09.116
<v Speaker 1>So both in cryptocurrency and in DAOs, you are established

0:30:09.556 --> 0:30:15.356
<v Speaker 1>a layer of human society that is beyond politics. And

0:30:15.676 --> 0:30:17.836
<v Speaker 1>this is a weird thing to say and to hear,

0:30:17.916 --> 0:30:22.196
<v Speaker 1>because it's not really existed before a smart contract, you

0:30:22.316 --> 0:30:27.636
<v Speaker 1>cannot regulate it. Or, to be more precise, politicians can

0:30:27.716 --> 0:30:31.236
<v Speaker 1>write whatever rules they want, and the smart contract is

0:30:31.636 --> 0:30:34.476
<v Speaker 1>oblivious to them. It will execute according to the code,

0:30:35.156 --> 0:30:38.996
<v Speaker 1>no matter the rules that politicians write about it. In

0:30:39.036 --> 0:30:42.076
<v Speaker 1>the same way that if if I write rules about

0:30:42.076 --> 0:30:46.396
<v Speaker 1>how the dust on the moon should settle, it doesn't matter.

0:30:46.716 --> 0:30:48.956
<v Speaker 1>The dust on the moon shall settle according to the

0:30:49.036 --> 0:30:53.956
<v Speaker 1>laws of physics, and the rules within a cryptocurrency protocol

0:30:54.316 --> 0:30:57.116
<v Speaker 1>will execute according to the rules of the code the

0:30:57.236 --> 0:31:00.196
<v Speaker 1>code is. This is just a clarifying question, not an

0:31:00.236 --> 0:31:03.676
<v Speaker 1>argument question. But on the clarification side, isn't it the

0:31:03.676 --> 0:31:06.156
<v Speaker 1>case that there has to be a distributed network of

0:31:06.196 --> 0:31:10.716
<v Speaker 1>computers on which the code runs, unlike the laws of physics,

0:31:10.716 --> 0:31:12.516
<v Speaker 1>which I mean, they need some substrate. We need to

0:31:12.516 --> 0:31:15.756
<v Speaker 1>live in the universe as it's presently constituted. But if tomorrow,

0:31:16.556 --> 0:31:19.436
<v Speaker 1>you know, all computers in the world went down, or

0:31:19.476 --> 0:31:22.396
<v Speaker 1>if all states in the world that were capable of

0:31:22.436 --> 0:31:26.396
<v Speaker 1>hosting big enough servers to run a global network regulated

0:31:26.436 --> 0:31:30.436
<v Speaker 1>and shut down these smart contracts, they would stop, right.

0:31:30.476 --> 0:31:34.556
<v Speaker 1>I mean they're dependent on distributed computing, right, correct, and

0:31:34.996 --> 0:31:37.916
<v Speaker 1>certainly not quite like the laws of physics, not quite

0:31:38.076 --> 0:31:42.436
<v Speaker 1>in that. Yeah, they do have prerequisite technology that exists.

0:31:42.556 --> 0:31:46.236
<v Speaker 1>But if the argument against cryptocurrencies functioning, or against you know,

0:31:46.316 --> 0:31:50.076
<v Speaker 1>smart contracts and DAW's functioning, is that maybe all computers

0:31:50.076 --> 0:31:52.596
<v Speaker 1>in the world will shut down, we're already talking about

0:31:52.636 --> 0:31:55.356
<v Speaker 1>some kind of horrible dystopia in which, you know, most

0:31:55.396 --> 0:31:58.436
<v Speaker 1>of humanity is dying from starvation. Anyway, I didn't mean that.

0:31:58.476 --> 0:32:01.476
<v Speaker 1>I meant what if all states where there are enough

0:32:01.596 --> 0:32:08.156
<v Speaker 1>big server farms to host distribution insisted on regulation or

0:32:08.196 --> 0:32:10.956
<v Speaker 1>where or in a world where all states regulated their

0:32:10.956 --> 0:32:15.836
<v Speaker 1>citizens sufficiently to bar them from engaging in the conduct

0:32:15.836 --> 0:32:18.476
<v Speaker 1>that is required to keep the thing running. Yeah, I mean,

0:32:18.676 --> 0:32:21.836
<v Speaker 1>you know, most states have made it illegal to consume

0:32:22.276 --> 0:32:25.356
<v Speaker 1>certain kinds of narcotics, and yet those narcotics are everywhere.

0:32:25.716 --> 0:32:29.156
<v Speaker 1>So so what but that's not Yeah, but that really

0:32:29.196 --> 0:32:30.956
<v Speaker 1>doesn't seem analogous to a lot of physics. That just

0:32:30.956 --> 0:32:34.556
<v Speaker 1>seems like governments are incapable of complete enforcement. Well, what's

0:32:34.556 --> 0:32:37.156
<v Speaker 1>analogous to the physics is that the code will execute

0:32:37.156 --> 0:32:40.516
<v Speaker 1>if the system is turned on. And you can debate

0:32:40.556 --> 0:32:42.716
<v Speaker 1>about whether a government can turn the system off or not,

0:32:42.796 --> 0:32:47.836
<v Speaker 1>and that's a fascinating discussion, but practically speaking, these networks

0:32:47.836 --> 0:32:51.316
<v Speaker 1>cannot be turned off, or more specifically, the ones that

0:32:51.356 --> 0:32:53.756
<v Speaker 1>are the most robust are the furthest away from being

0:32:53.796 --> 0:32:56.876
<v Speaker 1>able to be turned off. You know, Bitcoin cannot be

0:32:56.916 --> 0:32:59.716
<v Speaker 1>turned off at this point. Ethereum cannot be turned off.

0:33:00.436 --> 0:33:03.316
<v Speaker 1>If you start a new crypto platform tomorrow and it

0:33:03.316 --> 0:33:05.396
<v Speaker 1>has it's just running on your own computer or like

0:33:05.476 --> 0:33:08.036
<v Speaker 1>you and your three friends, obviously that one's going to

0:33:08.076 --> 0:33:11.236
<v Speaker 1>be a little more fragile and susceptible to some kind

0:33:11.276 --> 0:33:14.996
<v Speaker 1>of intervention. Eric, tell me, what are some advantages and

0:33:15.116 --> 0:33:20.156
<v Speaker 1>benefits of taos that are distinct from being able to

0:33:20.196 --> 0:33:24.276
<v Speaker 1>evade existing regulations. So, yeah, it's not I don't want

0:33:24.356 --> 0:33:26.196
<v Speaker 1>this to come across as like the point is to

0:33:26.276 --> 0:33:32.316
<v Speaker 1>evade regulations. The point here is that you remove frictions

0:33:32.356 --> 0:33:35.916
<v Speaker 1>which have been built up by society, which are arguably

0:33:35.956 --> 0:33:38.836
<v Speaker 1>harming the purpose of what many organizations try to do.

0:33:39.676 --> 0:33:42.236
<v Speaker 1>If you're a you know, if you're a for profit business,

0:33:43.556 --> 0:33:46.716
<v Speaker 1>You're really there to build some kind of product or service,

0:33:46.996 --> 0:33:52.156
<v Speaker 1>serve customers, and earn a positive return on that. So

0:33:52.196 --> 0:33:55.076
<v Speaker 1>you should care a lot about how happy the customer is.

0:33:55.436 --> 0:33:58.036
<v Speaker 1>You should care a lot about how good your product

0:33:58.116 --> 0:34:00.756
<v Speaker 1>is and how resilient it is. These kind of things

0:34:00.796 --> 0:34:03.316
<v Speaker 1>are at the core of any business, and any one

0:34:03.396 --> 0:34:05.756
<v Speaker 1>of your listeners who's ever run a company, you know,

0:34:05.756 --> 0:34:09.516
<v Speaker 1>at any management or executive level, will know that so

0:34:09.636 --> 0:34:12.716
<v Speaker 1>much happens in a corporation which is not at all

0:34:12.756 --> 0:34:16.036
<v Speaker 1>about serving the customer or about making the product good.

0:34:16.916 --> 0:34:20.356
<v Speaker 1>It's about all this other like cruft that has built up,

0:34:20.916 --> 0:34:25.676
<v Speaker 1>some of it regulatory, some of it just habitual. Some

0:34:25.756 --> 0:34:27.596
<v Speaker 1>of it has to do with like you know, IP

0:34:27.836 --> 0:34:30.516
<v Speaker 1>law and that kind of thing. There is a whole

0:34:30.556 --> 0:34:35.156
<v Speaker 1>world of friction that is built into corporations today, and

0:34:35.236 --> 0:34:38.316
<v Speaker 1>all of that disappears when you're in the doo world.

0:34:38.756 --> 0:34:41.116
<v Speaker 1>And this does not mean that dows are utopian. They

0:34:41.756 --> 0:34:45.076
<v Speaker 1>have other problems, right, They're not perfect. They introduce new

0:34:45.156 --> 0:34:48.076
<v Speaker 1>new issues that a centralized corporation may not suffer from.

0:34:48.876 --> 0:34:54.996
<v Speaker 1>But having lived through building a centralized corporation and being

0:34:55.076 --> 0:34:58.076
<v Speaker 1>in the midst right now of transferring this into a doo.

0:34:58.356 --> 0:35:01.476
<v Speaker 1>Speaking of my own company, Shapeshift, I have just seen

0:35:02.156 --> 0:35:04.596
<v Speaker 1>the degree to which we can focus our time, attention,

0:35:04.596 --> 0:35:07.116
<v Speaker 1>and resources on serving the customer and building the product

0:35:07.836 --> 0:35:12.516
<v Speaker 1>has increased dramatically, and that is I think fundamentally highly

0:35:12.556 --> 0:35:16.116
<v Speaker 1>valuable to all of society. I want to close by

0:35:16.156 --> 0:35:21.036
<v Speaker 1>asking you about the egalitarian sort of aspirations here that

0:35:21.076 --> 0:35:23.516
<v Speaker 1>you've mentioned a few times, specifically in the context of

0:35:23.516 --> 0:35:25.836
<v Speaker 1>your company. So, in preparation for our interviewer, I read

0:35:25.836 --> 0:35:29.396
<v Speaker 1>you're fascinating, fascinating medium post about how you were going

0:35:29.436 --> 0:35:33.516
<v Speaker 1>to go about transforming shape Shift into a DOO. I

0:35:33.516 --> 0:35:35.756
<v Speaker 1>guess you must have had some unconscious expectation of that,

0:35:35.796 --> 0:35:40.036
<v Speaker 1>given the name of the company with shape Shift. But

0:35:40.036 --> 0:35:42.676
<v Speaker 1>but you say somewhere towards the end of the post,

0:35:42.956 --> 0:35:45.916
<v Speaker 1>listen full disclosure. I'm going to be the largest holder

0:35:45.956 --> 0:35:49.396
<v Speaker 1>of this new currency, I think at five percent of

0:35:49.476 --> 0:35:53.156
<v Speaker 1>the total unlocking over some period of time. Others who

0:35:53.196 --> 0:35:55.596
<v Speaker 1>are your co founders or your close associates will also

0:35:55.676 --> 0:36:00.516
<v Speaker 1>have larger blocks. So coming right in the DOW has

0:36:00.596 --> 0:36:05.116
<v Speaker 1>some features that other corporations might have, namely that some people,

0:36:05.636 --> 0:36:09.476
<v Speaker 1>just from the get go have more say in how

0:36:10.196 --> 0:36:14.476
<v Speaker 1>the entity is conducted than others, And it sounded like

0:36:14.556 --> 0:36:16.156
<v Speaker 1>from what I read, at least in your case, that

0:36:16.156 --> 0:36:19.316
<v Speaker 1>didn't give you more than five percent of the voting rights.

0:36:19.316 --> 0:36:21.676
<v Speaker 1>You just had five percent of the voting rights alongside

0:36:21.716 --> 0:36:24.156
<v Speaker 1>five percent of the currency. But one could imagine people

0:36:24.276 --> 0:36:27.836
<v Speaker 1>organizing DAWs where there were differential voting rights for different

0:36:27.916 --> 0:36:31.396
<v Speaker 1>kinds of ownership. You could have a governance token that

0:36:31.796 --> 0:36:33.876
<v Speaker 1>was set up more like shareholder voting, so you could

0:36:33.876 --> 0:36:38.556
<v Speaker 1>have different classes of governance tokens. Why wouldn't we expect,

0:36:38.636 --> 0:36:42.116
<v Speaker 1>and in fact, why wouldn't eleborate libertarian welcome the emergence

0:36:42.156 --> 0:36:46.276
<v Speaker 1>of radically non egalitarian structures in the now world, where

0:36:46.316 --> 0:36:47.956
<v Speaker 1>it wouldn't be that everyone would have the same say,

0:36:48.316 --> 0:36:52.076
<v Speaker 1>Some people would have much greater say than others, and

0:36:52.676 --> 0:36:54.516
<v Speaker 1>it would be consensual in the same sense that any

0:36:54.516 --> 0:36:57.396
<v Speaker 1>economic relationship is consensual. Right. I need a job, but

0:36:57.476 --> 0:37:00.156
<v Speaker 1>I can negotiate at arm's length with Uber. But I'm

0:37:00.156 --> 0:37:01.636
<v Speaker 1>not going to get very far if I say to Uber,

0:37:01.676 --> 0:37:02.796
<v Speaker 1>you know what, if you want me to drive, you

0:37:02.796 --> 0:37:04.796
<v Speaker 1>have to pay me a lot more than everybody else

0:37:04.836 --> 0:37:06.636
<v Speaker 1>gets paid. Right, I don't have a lot of negotiating

0:37:06.676 --> 0:37:09.076
<v Speaker 1>power in that situation. So why wouldn't we just get

0:37:09.116 --> 0:37:12.156
<v Speaker 1>at the re emergence of exactly the same kinds of

0:37:12.796 --> 0:37:17.076
<v Speaker 1>societal inequalities here that we get in the real world

0:37:17.796 --> 0:37:19.756
<v Speaker 1>over time. And I guess maybe there'd be nothing wrong

0:37:19.796 --> 0:37:21.196
<v Speaker 1>with that from your perspective either. I don't mean to

0:37:21.196 --> 0:37:23.236
<v Speaker 1>say that would be a bad thing. Yeah, I think

0:37:23.276 --> 0:37:27.276
<v Speaker 1>there's a lot of kinds of inequality that are not wrong. Right.

0:37:27.356 --> 0:37:30.756
<v Speaker 1>So an obvious example, if two people are hanging out

0:37:30.756 --> 0:37:32.636
<v Speaker 1>and one guy sits on the couch doing nothing, and

0:37:32.676 --> 0:37:34.916
<v Speaker 1>the other person goes out and does something productive, that

0:37:34.956 --> 0:37:36.756
<v Speaker 1>person is going to end up with something more than

0:37:36.796 --> 0:37:38.876
<v Speaker 1>the one sitting on a couch, right, And this is

0:37:38.996 --> 0:37:41.356
<v Speaker 1>a very simplistic example, but I think most people would

0:37:41.356 --> 0:37:45.156
<v Speaker 1>agree in that in that example, the outcome being unequal

0:37:45.276 --> 0:37:49.556
<v Speaker 1>is not an ethical problem. If you imposed something to

0:37:50.036 --> 0:37:52.996
<v Speaker 1>cause the outcome to be equal, even despite that difference

0:37:53.036 --> 0:37:56.396
<v Speaker 1>in their input, that would arguably be unethical. So I

0:37:56.436 --> 0:38:02.196
<v Speaker 1>have to be careful about this inequality perspective. Certainly, doaos

0:38:02.316 --> 0:38:06.316
<v Speaker 1>won't suddenly make everyone economically equal. What they do, however,

0:38:06.476 --> 0:38:09.676
<v Speaker 1>is they give everyone the same set of rules. The

0:38:09.756 --> 0:38:14.116
<v Speaker 1>rules can't be changed by you know, like bias. So

0:38:14.236 --> 0:38:17.076
<v Speaker 1>here's a good example in the Shapeshift dow. A lot

0:38:17.076 --> 0:38:18.796
<v Speaker 1>of the people that contribute to it and are part

0:38:18.796 --> 0:38:22.076
<v Speaker 1>of it are pseudonymous. I don't know. I've never seen them,

0:38:22.196 --> 0:38:23.436
<v Speaker 1>I don't know who they are, I don't know what

0:38:23.516 --> 0:38:25.316
<v Speaker 1>country they're in. I don't know if it's a male

0:38:25.396 --> 0:38:28.476
<v Speaker 1>or a female, and it doesn't matter. They're just an identity,

0:38:28.676 --> 0:38:31.356
<v Speaker 1>a pseudonym on the Internet, and they're based on their merit.

0:38:31.396 --> 0:38:34.116
<v Speaker 1>Their contribution is based on their merit. So a lot

0:38:34.156 --> 0:38:36.996
<v Speaker 1>of inequities that you see in a corporate setting that

0:38:37.116 --> 0:38:40.156
<v Speaker 1>people rightly point out as wrong, you know, certain biases

0:38:40.236 --> 0:38:44.036
<v Speaker 1>or something, you know, racism for example, there's no racism

0:38:44.036 --> 0:38:47.196
<v Speaker 1>in Adao, right because anyone can take whatever identity they want.

0:38:47.276 --> 0:38:50.116
<v Speaker 1>They can assume full pseudonymity. They can be public about

0:38:50.116 --> 0:38:52.796
<v Speaker 1>who they are, what they look like, their background, or

0:38:52.876 --> 0:38:55.316
<v Speaker 1>they can keep it all private. Coming from a position

0:38:55.316 --> 0:38:57.956
<v Speaker 1>where you care about equality for the right reasons, that

0:38:58.036 --> 0:39:00.516
<v Speaker 1>should be very encouraging. Someone should look at that and

0:39:00.556 --> 0:39:03.076
<v Speaker 1>be like cool. You know. Finally, there's a system of

0:39:03.076 --> 0:39:06.236
<v Speaker 1>economic organization that removes a lot of these biases, and

0:39:06.316 --> 0:39:08.636
<v Speaker 1>it doesn't remove them through some kind of government diktat.

0:39:09.116 --> 0:39:12.076
<v Speaker 1>It removes them through a new a new method of

0:39:12.116 --> 0:39:16.436
<v Speaker 1>interaction between people. Yeah, I mean, I think I hear

0:39:16.476 --> 0:39:19.516
<v Speaker 1>the appeal of that for sure. At the same time,

0:39:19.796 --> 0:39:21.516
<v Speaker 1>although the doo is not a human, the people who

0:39:21.556 --> 0:39:23.756
<v Speaker 1>make the dour humans and the people who invest in

0:39:23.756 --> 0:39:26.596
<v Speaker 1>the dower humans, then the outputs are also going to

0:39:26.636 --> 0:39:30.516
<v Speaker 1>reflect inequality. And that doesn't mean that the process is racist.

0:39:31.076 --> 0:39:35.556
<v Speaker 1>It just means that the process replicates the inequalities which

0:39:35.556 --> 0:39:38.916
<v Speaker 1>we already have in a society that has historically been

0:39:38.956 --> 0:39:42.676
<v Speaker 1>inflected by racism. So it's hard to and it's not

0:39:42.716 --> 0:39:45.716
<v Speaker 1>that dowers are unique in this problem that it's that

0:39:46.076 --> 0:39:49.556
<v Speaker 1>you can't always escape the results of the past just

0:39:49.556 --> 0:39:52.396
<v Speaker 1>by entering into a new domain. Yeah. Yeah, doos don't

0:39:52.476 --> 0:39:59.196
<v Speaker 1>solve history, but neither does anything else, right, So what

0:39:59.236 --> 0:40:02.876
<v Speaker 1>are we comparing it against? What dows do is allow

0:40:02.916 --> 0:40:07.396
<v Speaker 1>people to have transparent economic organization with no center, and

0:40:07.516 --> 0:40:11.636
<v Speaker 1>that is a fundamental new primitive of humanity. DAOs did

0:40:11.636 --> 0:40:15.356
<v Speaker 1>not force anyone to do anything. They're purely voluntary for

0:40:15.396 --> 0:40:19.516
<v Speaker 1>people who care about results and interacting with other people

0:40:19.556 --> 0:40:23.356
<v Speaker 1>toward productive ends, and doing it in an open, equitable

0:40:23.396 --> 0:40:27.476
<v Speaker 1>way in which the rules are clear, open source. This

0:40:27.556 --> 0:40:31.356
<v Speaker 1>is something really beautiful, but it doesn't solve world poverty.

0:40:31.436 --> 0:40:34.596
<v Speaker 1>It doesn't solve all iniquities of the past, but neither

0:40:34.636 --> 0:40:38.036
<v Speaker 1>does a centralized corporation, and certainly neither does a government. Well,

0:40:38.076 --> 0:40:39.876
<v Speaker 1>I think on another occasion it would be fun to

0:40:40.316 --> 0:40:42.196
<v Speaker 1>talk about the empirical side of this, and we might

0:40:42.236 --> 0:40:44.716
<v Speaker 1>not see exactly eye to eye, but what I want

0:40:44.716 --> 0:40:47.916
<v Speaker 1>to say is, thank you for a really helpful walk

0:40:47.996 --> 0:40:51.236
<v Speaker 1>through of the basic principles and some of the philosophical

0:40:51.276 --> 0:40:55.156
<v Speaker 1>consequences of the dao structure. I learned a lot, and

0:40:55.196 --> 0:40:58.396
<v Speaker 1>I very much enjoyed the conversation, and I'm super grateful too.

0:40:58.396 --> 0:41:00.316
<v Speaker 1>Thank you so much for your time. Thanks. Yeah, this

0:41:00.396 --> 0:41:04.436
<v Speaker 1>was really good. Happy to be on the show. We'll

0:41:04.476 --> 0:41:17.676
<v Speaker 1>be right back. I was really fascinated by this conversation

0:41:17.716 --> 0:41:19.996
<v Speaker 1>with Eric Vorhees, and I really am grateful to him

0:41:20.036 --> 0:41:22.396
<v Speaker 1>for sharing it with me. On the one hand, he

0:41:22.436 --> 0:41:25.356
<v Speaker 1>really helped me understand some of the basic structure of

0:41:25.356 --> 0:41:27.756
<v Speaker 1>what a tao is and how it functions, and I

0:41:27.796 --> 0:41:30.476
<v Speaker 1>hope that his explanations were of value to you listeners

0:41:30.676 --> 0:41:34.516
<v Speaker 1>as well. I remain interested in trying to figure out

0:41:34.916 --> 0:41:38.276
<v Speaker 1>for what taos are good and for what taos may

0:41:38.316 --> 0:41:40.916
<v Speaker 1>not be good. I am fascinated by the question of

0:41:40.956 --> 0:41:44.876
<v Speaker 1>whether they are more or less efficient than traditionally existing corporations,

0:41:44.996 --> 0:41:47.476
<v Speaker 1>and whether they are more or less flexible than those corporations.

0:41:47.996 --> 0:41:49.916
<v Speaker 1>The other theme that came out very strongly in this

0:41:49.996 --> 0:41:54.156
<v Speaker 1>conversation was the question of whether taos ultimately are connected

0:41:54.356 --> 0:42:00.036
<v Speaker 1>to a libertarian ideal of evading governmental regulation. Eric seems

0:42:00.076 --> 0:42:04.236
<v Speaker 1>to think fairly strongly that they are. It's not that

0:42:04.276 --> 0:42:06.596
<v Speaker 1>he's saying that the only advantages of taos are its

0:42:06.596 --> 0:42:09.556
<v Speaker 1>ability to avoid regulation, but he is saying that what

0:42:09.756 --> 0:42:13.116
<v Speaker 1>makes a doo worthwhile distinctive, unique and original, and to

0:42:13.196 --> 0:42:16.756
<v Speaker 1>his mind, attractive, is its capacity to array people in

0:42:16.916 --> 0:42:21.036
<v Speaker 1>freely entered into contracts free of what he calls government coercion,

0:42:21.316 --> 0:42:24.676
<v Speaker 1>but I and others would think of as governmental regulation.

0:42:25.756 --> 0:42:28.116
<v Speaker 1>I was reminded of the fact that in the crypto

0:42:28.196 --> 0:42:31.756
<v Speaker 1>world as well, many of the early innovators were very,

0:42:31.916 --> 0:42:35.116
<v Speaker 1>very focused on the libertarian and I would say, to

0:42:35.156 --> 0:42:38.756
<v Speaker 1>some degree utopian aspects of the idea of currencies that

0:42:38.796 --> 0:42:42.876
<v Speaker 1>could operate outside of governments and outside of states. My

0:42:42.916 --> 0:42:45.236
<v Speaker 1>own view is that there may be many benefits to

0:42:45.316 --> 0:42:48.116
<v Speaker 1>taos that have nothing to do with its capacity or

0:42:48.236 --> 0:42:51.596
<v Speaker 1>lack of capacity to evade regulation. I promised to continue

0:42:51.636 --> 0:42:56.156
<v Speaker 1>to explore this issue in future episodes until the next

0:42:56.196 --> 0:42:59.636
<v Speaker 1>time I speak to you. Breathe Deep, think, deep plots,

0:43:00.036 --> 0:43:03.996
<v Speaker 1>and with the holidays upon us, definitely have some fun.

0:43:05.676 --> 0:43:08.796
<v Speaker 1>If you're a regular listener, you know I love communicating

0:43:08.836 --> 0:43:12.076
<v Speaker 1>with you here on Deep Background. I also really want

0:43:12.116 --> 0:43:15.076
<v Speaker 1>that communication to run both ways. I want to know

0:43:15.156 --> 0:43:17.596
<v Speaker 1>what you think are the most important stories of the

0:43:17.676 --> 0:43:19.836
<v Speaker 1>moment and what kinds of guests do you think you

0:43:19.876 --> 0:43:23.036
<v Speaker 1>would be useful to hear from. More so, I'm opening

0:43:23.076 --> 0:43:26.596
<v Speaker 1>a new channel of communication. To access it, just go

0:43:26.676 --> 0:43:30.076
<v Speaker 1>to my website Noah Dashfelman dot com. You can sign

0:43:30.156 --> 0:43:33.316
<v Speaker 1>up from my newsletter and you can tell me exactly

0:43:33.356 --> 0:43:36.756
<v Speaker 1>what's on your mind, something that would be really valuable

0:43:36.796 --> 0:43:41.556
<v Speaker 1>to me and I hope to you too. Deep Background

0:43:41.636 --> 0:43:44.596
<v Speaker 1>is brought to you by Pushkin Industries. Our producer is

0:43:44.636 --> 0:43:48.476
<v Speaker 1>mo La Board, our engineer is Bentaliday, and our showrunner

0:43:48.556 --> 0:43:53.356
<v Speaker 1>is Sophie Crane mckibbon. Editorial support from noahm Osband. Theme

0:43:53.436 --> 0:43:57.236
<v Speaker 1>music by Luis Gara at Pushkin. Thanks to Mia Lobell,

0:43:57.556 --> 0:44:02.796
<v Speaker 1>Julia Barton, Lydia Jean Cott, Heather Faine, Carlie mcgliori, Maggie Taylor,

0:44:02.916 --> 0:44:06.036
<v Speaker 1>Eric Sandler, and Jacob Weisberg. You can find me on

0:44:06.076 --> 0:44:09.036
<v Speaker 1>Twitter at Noah R. Feldman. I also write a column

0:44:09.156 --> 0:44:11.876
<v Speaker 1>or Bloomberg Opinion, which you can find at Bloomberg dot

0:44:11.876 --> 0:44:16.716
<v Speaker 1>com slash Feldman. To discover Bloomberg's original slate of podcasts,

0:44:16.916 --> 0:44:20.836
<v Speaker 1>go to Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts, and if you

0:44:20.916 --> 0:44:23.436
<v Speaker 1>liked what you heard today, please write a review or

0:44:23.516 --> 0:44:26.356
<v Speaker 1>tell a friend. This is deep background