The DAO is a Decentralized Autonomous Organization

The DAO is a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (“DAO”) - more specifically, it is a new breed of human organization never before attempted. The DAO is borne from immutable, unstoppable, and irrefutable computer code, operated entirely by its members, and fueled using ETH which Creates DAO tokens. Several aspects of this structure make it revolutionary:
https://daohub.org/about.html

The DAO is an investment vehicle governed by a program,directed by investors’ votes, to seek out and fund proposals. Implemented as a smart contract on the Ethereum blockchain,
https://daowiki.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DAO/The+DAO

Duniterians, if you agree, we can create a DAO Duniter , get funded by Ether to create a free currency.

On vit une époque formidable …

C’est un point de vue … voici le mien concernant Ethereum, et par ricochet tout projet basé sur celui-ci.

Par contre, l’aspect Turing complet est effectivement très intéressant.

Pour ton travail, je suppose que tu acceptes les euro, pourquoi n’accepterais-tu pas des Ether pour faire un travail que tu fais bénévolement ?

Tu as encore beaucoup à apprendre sur la liberté de choix de sa monnaie et la relativité des valeurs.

Oui, je n’en suis qu’à “La philosophie de la liberté” de Rudolp Steiner
http://anthroposophie.doc.pagesperso-orange.fr/pdf/PhiloLib_RS_GC_1923.pdf
1923, j’ai une petite centaine d’année de retard.

the link is broken.

There are several problem with DAO.

First of all, not everybody can vote, only the “investors” who mine eth coins, but mining coins is not considered as a symmetry over time. They claim they have democracy, but it is not a democracy what they have, it is an investor-o-cracy.

And then, they vote only yes or no, there is no ranking vote or vote with numbers.

1 « J'aime »

Il aurait été dommage de passer à côté de ça

“Au printemps des fleurs,
en automne la lune,
en été une brise fraîche,
en hiver la neige.
Si votre esprit n’est pas encombré d’un inutile fatras,
La vie merveilleuse s’ouvre devant vous.”
(Mumon Ekai , 13ème siècle)

Democracy is like freedom, it is a concept with different meaning for different cultural groups of individuals. Even a word like “argent” may have different meanings. For @Galuel and researchers in economy, it is a metal, for @ZKelper and the majority of French people it is what we use every day to buy a loaf of bread.

The reverse is the correct. Some people deliberately give different meaning to the words, because they dont want people to reach an agreement.

This is a common flaw among almost all contemporary languages. They hande the words as if they were simple sounds, and they do not care about their etymology.

So if you want to go against that destructive stream of the babel tower, search the etymology of the word Democracy. And you will understand what Democracy is.

So do you mean the first definition given to the “democracy” word is the only truth? Why new men could not give another definition?

It is wrong to give diferent definitions to the same word. This is the root of all misunderstanding, this is the curse of the babel tower. Words must be defined strictly as a result of their etymology. If you want to create another meaning, create another word.

This applies to all words, and to all contemporary languages. Due to the language deficiency, the brain of people is used to hear the words as if they were sounds. And this is a very bad habit. Very few languages are etymologicaly correct, meaning that inside the word is hidden its own meaning and definition. For example ancient greek is etymologically correct, maybe german language also it is a little bit.

So the language that is not etymologically compliant, creates a brain deficiency by imposing the people to hear the words as sounds instead of meanings, and as a result people cannot understand each other.

That’s your point of view, I agree with the fact it should be preferred to create new words to avoid misunderstanding.

But when you say:

Then you are in contradiction with the relativity principle, you do not accept it fully, which makes me doubt about the reason why you would use libre currencies (because reading you, I understand you agree with libre currencies concept of Universal Dividend).

Because why would you agree with the fact « people are free to say what is value and what is not » but would not agree with the fact « people are free to say what is the meaning of a word and what is not »?

These are essentially the same things.

So people are free to say « butter » to speak about bananas. Of course this will introduce misunderstanding to the people thinking about this:

but it will be very clear to those associating butter with this:

or, maybe, you did not meant « people must » but « people should ». But then, you would have made the exact example of what I am trying to explain: you are free to use word for different meanings!

You still dont understand, because your brain is get used to deal with words as sounds.

In a etymologicallly correct language, it is impossible for one person to name the butter banana, and the other person to name the banana as butter. Banana and butter are not sounds, they have etymology, they include their meaning into the very word, so everybody agree what a banana and what a buttter is and how people must sound the banana and the butter meanings.

The language that is not etymologically compliant, creates a brain deficiency by imposing the people to hear the words as sounds instead of meanings, and as a result people can not understand each other. Unfortunatelly you speak that kind of language, thats why it seams reasonable to you for someone to name the banana as butter, and another to name them the reverse.

But how do you define etymology now, if you think that the word “etymology” has to be defined by its “etymology” ?

1 « J'aime »

Etymology is an ancient greek word, and of course has etymology.

It derives from etymos and logos. The original meaning in ancienτ greek is: the first (true and authentic) meaning of the word.

Etymos means real, authentic. Logos means the word.

And now, please define Logos. I mean, with the etymological greek word of course :slight_smile:

Yes, but ancient greeks chose this words, etymos and logos, based on their sounds, not their etymology (because obviously this word didn’t exist before it was created). So they were free to choose these words.

And probably that some words meaning “etymology” existed before the greeks too. But greeks chose a new sound to describe the concept behind it. Because they were free to do so :wink:

Logos derives from lego, which means I speak., and lego derives from gather something together. Lecture for example (which is not greek but latin) also derives from lego.

I am not an expert in that field, but this is the meaning of an etymologially correct language. With a very few inital meanings, and a smart syntax, to create all the rest words.

I am not an expert in that field, but this the meaning of an etymologically correct language. With very few inital meanings-sounds, and a smart syntax, to create all the rest words. And above all get used to hear words as meanings and not as sounds, which is a brain function.