Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Take TheDAO for example. The operating agreement and equity distribution is codified on the ethereum blockchain. "Who leads the company" is a global set of public key holders that can direct the contract in real time.

Now, this isn't to say an investment is safe because it's accountable and transparent -- but the mechanics that govern the organization is now something that can be put on autopilot without human intervention.

The only thing that reduces risk is proper due diligence. Relying on the SEC would be a mistake and I expect this market to be filled by some kind of prediction market (see augur).



Given what actually happened with the DAO, I'm not sure that's a good example.


Some people aren't capable of reasoning in principle. I'm not appealing to them.


If the facts are out of line with the theory, it's not the facts that are flawed.


> Now, this isn't to say an investment is safe because it's accountable and transparent

Troll somewhere else bro. You add nothing to the discussion. Write a fortune cookie or something.


The problem with the DAO is that despite the theory, it was not "accountable and transparent".


It seems you're willfully conflating an implementation with the theory. The success or failures of the DAO has no bearing on the idea of digitizing and decentralizing financial services.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: