5 ms·

Democratic Autonomous Organizations -- which are corporations whose law is created not by human organizations; the law for ricardian contracts is instead define

Democratic Autonomous Organizations -- which are corporations whose law is created not by human organizations; the law for ricardian contracts is instead defined by a relationship between trustless consensus and formally verifiable logic. See the og tao here: http://chriseth.github.io/browser-solidity/?gist=192371538cf5e43e6dab#gist=192371538cf5e43e6dab http://chriseth.github.io/browser-solidity/?gist=192371538cf... and read about the $50 million tao debacle on wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_DAO_(organization) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_DAO_(organization) more about ricardian contracts on ethereum here: http://iang.org/papers/intersection_ricardian_smart.html http://iang.org/papers/intersection_ricardian_smart.html

erikpukinskis 9y ago
Why was the DAO abandoned? It seems like someone could just fix the bug, and run the sale again, expecting a lower valuation. The idea is still good, right? A bug shouldn't end the whole project.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  The idea was that code-as-contract was clear, unambiguous to all participants, and obviated the need for human intervention to enforce correctly.
  - candiodari 9y ago
    You forget to tell what happened after that. Someone someone found contract terms (relating to starting a new sub-entity to the DAO) that favored them, started transferring the eth to themselves using this method (they "probably" gained the ability to dictate how the eth would be spent after an initial period, which plenty of people are desperate to point out isn't the same as owning it). And then ... Humans intervened to have the terms enforced "correctly" (this was regarded as a hack). They even rolled back quite a few normal transactions that had nothing to do with the attack (because just like all other central banks, the ethereum company cannot risk/be bothered to figure out what transactions are about and come up with a solution that affected just the hack and nothing else) I imagine this will happen again, and again, and again. This is very clear to anyone who's done the least bit of law : humans cannot be trusted (not even by themselves) to write rules and then uphold them "under any circumstances". We must have governments and a legal system to prevent disaster. The easy tricks I see work is that humans can loan eth from others, then have multiple accounts, only one of which is subject to confiscation. Double collateralizing (pledging the same asset for multiple loans, then disappearing with the loans, recently popular in China). http://www.coindesk.com/understanding-dao-hack-journalists/ http://www.coindesk.com/understanding-dao-hack-journalists/
    - RexetBlell 9y ago
      Just for the record, no transactions were rolled back. A special one time transaction was generated that moved all the ether from the Dao contact to a withdrawal contract, from which all investors could get their ether back. Majority of the users upgraded their clients to be on the chain with this special transaction. The rest of the people (~15%) remained on the original chain without the special transaction, that chain is now called "Ethereum Classic".
      - candiodari 9y ago
        The DAO was unwound, including everything it had done. If that's your idea of "no transactions rolled back", I submit that that's exactly the sort of distinction without a difference I was talking about. This would be akin to solving a bank heist by simply rolling back all transactions involving that bank, including 2nd and 3rd degree transactions to before the heist. So if some person sold a house to a buyer with a mortgage from the bank close enough to the bank heist, and then went out and bought a bottle of champagne to celebrate with the buyer, the bartender would wake up the next day to find the payment for the bottle missing, and the house would be unsold, just so the investors in the bank would be guaranteed the money they invested to be loaned out. I mean I understand. This simple and automatically enforced contracts is every loaner and landlord's wet dream. They get that the rules are stacked against the tenants. They can rob tenants blind using this game. They don't realize that they cannot play this game against the banks, the millionaires and/or billionaires of our little planet, and they don't know any other game to make money.
- RexetBlell 9y ago
  There are many teams building projects similar to the DAO right now (except much more thought out), for example https://www.reddit.com/r/MakerDAO/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MakerDAO/. In the future, we will definitely see more DAOs - read this article if you're interested https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/05/06/daos-dacs-das-and-more-an-incomplete-terminology-guide/ https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/05/06/daos-dacs-das-and-more-... The original DAO was just a preview and it was too early when the whole Ethereum ecosystem was young (and still is, it's less than 2 years old).
SkyMarshal 9y ago
That's "Decentralized Autonomous Organization". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organ...

erikpukinskis 9y ago

Why was the DAO abandoned? It seems like someone could just fix the bug, and run the sale again, expecting a lower valuation. The idea is still good, right? A bug shouldn't end the whole project.

dragonwriter 9y ago
The idea was that code-as-contract was clear, unambiguous to all participants, and obviated the need for human intervention to enforce correctly.
- candiodari 9y ago
  You forget to tell what happened after that. Someone someone found contract terms (relating to starting a new sub-entity to the DAO) that favored them, started transferring the eth to themselves using this method (they "probably" gained the ability to dictate how the eth would be spent after an initial period, which plenty of people are desperate to point out isn't the same as owning it). And then ... Humans intervened to have the terms enforced "correctly" (this was regarded as a hack). They even rolled back quite a few normal transactions that had nothing to do with the attack (because just like all other central banks, the ethereum company cannot risk/be bothered to figure out what transactions are about and come up with a solution that affected just the hack and nothing else) I imagine this will happen again, and again, and again. This is very clear to anyone who's done the least bit of law : humans cannot be trusted (not even by themselves) to write rules and then uphold them "under any circumstances". We must have governments and a legal system to prevent disaster. The easy tricks I see work is that humans can loan eth from others, then have multiple accounts, only one of which is subject to confiscation. Double collateralizing (pledging the same asset for multiple loans, then disappearing with the loans, recently popular in China). http://www.coindesk.com/understanding-dao-hack-journalists/ http://www.coindesk.com/understanding-dao-hack-journalists/
  - RexetBlell 9y ago
    Just for the record, no transactions were rolled back. A special one time transaction was generated that moved all the ether from the Dao contact to a withdrawal contract, from which all investors could get their ether back. Majority of the users upgraded their clients to be on the chain with this special transaction. The rest of the people (~15%) remained on the original chain without the special transaction, that chain is now called "Ethereum Classic".
    - candiodari 9y ago
      The DAO was unwound, including everything it had done. If that's your idea of "no transactions rolled back", I submit that that's exactly the sort of distinction without a difference I was talking about. This would be akin to solving a bank heist by simply rolling back all transactions involving that bank, including 2nd and 3rd degree transactions to before the heist. So if some person sold a house to a buyer with a mortgage from the bank close enough to the bank heist, and then went out and bought a bottle of champagne to celebrate with the buyer, the bartender would wake up the next day to find the payment for the bottle missing, and the house would be unsold, just so the investors in the bank would be guaranteed the money they invested to be loaned out. I mean I understand. This simple and automatically enforced contracts is every loaner and landlord's wet dream. They get that the rules are stacked against the tenants. They can rob tenants blind using this game. They don't realize that they cannot play this game against the banks, the millionaires and/or billionaires of our little planet, and they don't know any other game to make money.
RexetBlell 9y ago
There are many teams building projects similar to the DAO right now (except much more thought out), for example https://www.reddit.com/r/MakerDAO/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MakerDAO/. In the future, we will definitely see more DAOs - read this article if you're interested https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/05/06/daos-dacs-das-and-more-an-incomplete-terminology-guide/ https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/05/06/daos-dacs-das-and-more-... The original DAO was just a preview and it was too early when the whole Ethereum ecosystem was young (and still is, it's less than 2 years old).

SkyMarshal 9y ago

That's "Decentralized Autonomous Organization". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organ...