Author: Tia, Techub News

"The reason is that I feel that the current products are not decentralized enough, because a product is always designed by someone, and when it is formed, it already embodies the centralized idea of someone or a team. Intent is a good carrier. When everyone has the same intent, or when the same intent appears collectively, there may be a certain degree of emergence, that is, the birth of a certain need, idea, or potential product."

I have come into contact with some DAOs, which are usually initiated by one person or a group of people with a vision as the main goal, and the decentralized part usually only appears when appointing positions, that is, determining positions through voting. In addition, DAOs have almost no profit-making ability, and funding usually comes from the founder, other investors, or allocations from other projects. However, as a decentralized organization, the role of the founder naturally does not integrate with DAOs, and DAOs should be the product of collective wisdom, not initiated by one person. And in the process of operation, a crucial link—finance comes from a group of people. This is not a good phenomenon. First, DAOs cannot allow investors to completely disregard profitability and just work for the sake of it. Second, due to the influence of funds, it is difficult to say that the subsequent development path of DAOs is not influenced by contributors.

But the emergence of "intent" may reverse this situation. If the biological world relies on pheromones for information transmission, then intent is a good tool for information transmission in human society, and this tool should be much better than the "price" of today's information transmission methods. Intent can emerge as thoughts, and then evolve into a vision. Anoma's Intent Machine allows users to express preferences and intent, creating a soil for groups with common intent and preferences to create together. So perhaps we can also build products or create together based on a group's intent.

As for the financing issue, I think we can explore the views of a broader group on this intent or preference by using meme tokens, so that meme tokens are not just a preference expression based solely on price. It can gauge the market's view of this intent and bring capital inflows and a certain degree of marketing for the next "creation."

The remaining issue is about governance. Compared to the popular hotspots such as DeFi, chain abstraction, and DA, decentralized governance and DAOs have not been so attention-grabbing. Many people underestimate the importance of governance. People often say, in blockchain, we trust. Yes, we have indeed eliminated the need for trust through code and smart contracts, but what a series of code represents is actually a series of rules. Without achieving decentralized governance, web3 will eventually return to the cycle of web2.

The benefits and drawbacks of leaders are very obvious. The process of natural evolution without a leader based on intent is collective progress, slow but steady. When someone with a significantly higher level of thinking appears in the collective, letting him lead everyone will indeed be much faster. But there are also many drawbacks, especially when collective wisdom lags far behind individual wisdom, which means that collective wisdom is easily deceived at this stage, especially when another equally wise but malicious person appears. Following is not a good way; the collective needs to gradually develop its own wisdom.

This is my personal political inclination, of course, when we think from the perspective of a company, it is another matter. Because this involves competition, which is the main characteristic of distinguishing whether it is a public good. Public goods are anti-competitive. From this perspective, it is also possible to promote the construction of an anti-competitive society. But this area still needs further research to see if there is a better answer. Or we can leave it as an open option for the group to choose on their own.

In what form governance should take, how the governance medium should be set, whether it should be in the form of NFTs or tokens, whether economic value should be assigned to it, or whether its purity should be maintained, and how the weight of the vote should be chosen, all of these require a large amount of systematic research.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。