Regarding DACs: I think a sponsor of an initiative implementing DACs serves as an antisignal for confidence in the project’s potential for success, thereby indicating lack of confidence in the proposal’s compellingness, plus (theoretically at least) a project which would succeed with DACs would be highly likely to be crowdfunded anyways, and combine that with a risk of having a vague resemblance to lay people with Ponzi schemes, and it may explain the current lack of popularity of DACs, despite having been known and easily feasible for >20 years
I guess I hope I’m wrong about this, more public coordination would always be nice. There’s always the classic joke about the economist walking with a friend, when his friend points out a $20 bill on the ground. “Your eyes must deceive you! If it was actually there, someone else would have picked it up!”
Regarding DACs: I think a sponsor of an initiative implementing DACs serves as an antisignal for confidence in the project’s potential for success, thereby indicating lack of confidence in the proposal’s compellingness, plus (theoretically at least) a project which would succeed with DACs would be highly likely to be crowdfunded anyways, and combine that with a risk of having a vague resemblance to lay people with Ponzi schemes, and it may explain the current lack of popularity of DACs, despite having been known and easily feasible for >20 years
I guess I hope I’m wrong about this, more public coordination would always be nice. There’s always the classic joke about the economist walking with a friend, when his friend points out a $20 bill on the ground. “Your eyes must deceive you! If it was actually there, someone else would have picked it up!”