3 ms·

1. I’m concerned with who won this. The game was stacked for the opponent of the DAO who had all of the information. Maybe it’s tinfoil hat but I think there wa

1. I’m concerned with who won this. The game was stacked for the opponent of the DAO who had all of the information. Maybe it’s tinfoil hat but I think there was an ideological battle at hand - the preservation of centralization vs decentralization. Worst yet the DAO lost due to an inherent value it represents: transparency. 2. Some people were speculating at the 10% drop in ETH was some sort of manipulation to depress the buying power. After reading this, it feels like the liquidation of the DAO’s ETH might have caused that... probably bot momentum. I don’t know crypto markets that well.

piva00 5y ago
> 1. I’m concerned with who won this. The game was stacked for the opponent of the DAO who had all of the information. Maybe it’s tinfoil hat but I think there was an ideological battle at hand - the preservation of centralization vs decentralization. Worst yet the DAO lost due to an inherent value it represents: transparency. There is nothing maliciously being done against a DAO here. It was an auction, the stupidest thing a bidder at an auction can do is announce their maximum bid limit way before an auction take place. That's what happened here, it is a given in any auction that you will either be outbidded if your maximum bid is known or you will be pushed to spend it all, it's a pretty simple game theory setup.
- provablynothing 5y ago
  malicious isn’t what is happening here. Ideological. You are saying it’s “simple game theory.” Which I’m highlighting is WHY it was important that someone won this knowing there was a stockpile of 40million dollars that the DAO represented. They knew the price they had to pay was over double the estimate. We could argue someone was just really passionate about the constitution or my point... they felt like the DAO winning this was part of greater ideological battle. The meme in crypto is its “probably nothing”

piva00 5y ago

> 1. I’m concerned with who won this. The game was stacked for the opponent of the DAO who had all of the information. Maybe it’s tinfoil hat but I think there was an ideological battle at hand - the preservation of centralization vs decentralization. Worst yet the DAO lost due to an inherent value it represents: transparency. There is nothing maliciously being done against a DAO here. It was an auction, the stupidest thing a bidder at an auction can do is announce their maximum bid limit way before an auction take place. That's what happened here, it is a given in any auction that you will either be outbidded if your maximum bid is known or you will be pushed to spend it all, it's a pretty simple game theory setup.

provablynothing 5y ago
malicious isn’t what is happening here. Ideological. You are saying it’s “simple game theory.” Which I’m highlighting is WHY it was important that someone won this knowing there was a stockpile of 40million dollars that the DAO represented. They knew the price they had to pay was over double the estimate. We could argue someone was just really passionate about the constitution or my point... they felt like the DAO winning this was part of greater ideological battle. The meme in crypto is its “probably nothing”