Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Mark Copenhaver's avatar

The general solution you propose has been, in one form or another, implemented many times. As far back as we have historical records we have records of groups which:

* are outside the entrenched power structure

* have shared interests

* discover their interests can better be protected by pooling resources

* evolve a control structure which allows leverage of the the pooled resources

Their stories are many and varied, as are their levels of success. Some went on to become the entrenched power. Some were quickly crushed and disbanded. Many, maybe most, found some success early only to be be eroded from the inside.

I've been following DAOs for a long time. Like you and the ideas you reference, I see that the technologies of blockchain and ubiquitous internet give us an opportunity to create influential structures untethered to geography and difficult to control by the self-delineating autonomy of nation states (where the real power still resides). The potential is awesome, but the visionaries see only why they will succeed and never why they will fail.

You mentioned, almost in passing, that there would "dedicated account" and "community leaders". Yes these are necessary. You mentioned transparency and governance, again required elements. But this is where all the visionaries have stopped, and never, I mean n-e-v-e-r, actually solved the real problem.

There is an assumption among all crypto/DAO proponents that all you need is democratization and transparency and the governance will sort itself out. This is like a religious belief in that it is, in their minds, the final answer, and that no amount of actual evidence from the real world will sway their belief.

As soon as you create common resources, influence, and roles with authority, you create an irresistible conflict of interest which will either corrupt the role holder(s) or attract ruthless people to assume those roles. Once there is enough power and influence in the roles, the roles themselves will resist any further bounding. This means that if you don't solve the conflict of interest problem prior to anyone assuming a leadership role, you've sown the seeds of the groups demise.

I think your ideas are fantastic, and I don't see them limited to digital nomads, though your reasons why digital nomads are a great candidate are valid. What I don't see is a solution to the age-old problem of how we pool resources and influence without putting someone into a position which where their personal interest is not aligned with the groups interest.

Expand full comment
Kaila Krayewski's avatar

This is an incredibly insightful and well thought out vision! But I can't help but wonder if the global elite would ever allow this to happen. Seems to me it doesn't serve their purposes of keeping us isolated, distracted and sick. It would need to serve their purposes or there would need to be a major disruption to the balance of power.

Expand full comment
34 more comments...

No posts