
My First Aragon App: Voting Supercharged with DAOstack’s Holographic Consensus - bpierre
https://blog.aragon.one/first-aragon-app-holographic-consensus-part-1/
======
vorpalhex
> If a proposal is boosted, the total voting token supply doesn’t matter at
> all, only the tokens involved in the vote are counted. That is, if merely
> three tokens out of a total supply of 1000 were involved in the vote, and
> two support the proposal—66% support—that’s enough to approve the proposal!
> So, stakers are not only betting on which proposals will eventually be
> supported and signaling voters towards them, but they are actually
> catalyzing the decision making process dramatically.

TLDR, a small amount of voters can basically hijack quorums by throwing tokens
at the problem.

Also, what is with these "decentralized networks" which seem to have amazing
amounts of money to throw at vaguely described problems, but can't seem to
actually indicate where their money comes from or how they intend to profit?
Aragon is yet another "we'll give you large sums of money if you use our
platform" without clearly indicating the why or how of where the money comes
from, and how they intend to profit.

~~~
Lucadg
They did an ICO if I'm not mistaken

------
ghostbrainalpha
Can anyone give simplified explanation for what "Holographic Consensus" means?

Or have a link to an easier to understand resource?

~~~
vorpalhex
> Almost by definition a proper solution to this problem should allow for
> decisions in a DAO to be made locally —i.e. with limited attention and
> voting power, as long as these decisions are ensured to be in line with the
> global opinion of the DAO. We’ve coined² this peculiar situation holographic
> consensus, being reminiscent of a hologram where every little piece of the
> picture actually contains the information of the entire image. In this
> article I’m presenting the holographic consensus (HC) solution for scalable,
> resilient and decentralized governance, describing its basics and how it is
> enabled. In the next post of this series I’ll continue with a more detailed
> prescription of a HC protocol, and will discuss its scalability and
> resilience properties.

[https://medium.com/daostack/holographic-consensus-
part-1-116...](https://medium.com/daostack/holographic-consensus-
part-1-116a73ba1e1c)

A "DAO" is a "decentralized autonomous organization". The term isn't defined
further than that.

In plain english, if I understand this, the idea is for a voting algorithm
that allows a random or semi-random subset of an organization (a DAO) to make
decisions for the group as a whole, so that not every member has to vote on
every decision - like a kind of fancy algorithmic working group.

~~~
ghostbrainalpha
So it sounds like voting in this system would be similar to jury duty. Except
better because the voters aren't selected at random and the algorithm makes
sure they are the most representative possible group.

------
n0sis
Upstaking sounds dangerously close to derivatives IMO, unless I'm
understanding this all wrong, and derivatives were a big part of the global
financial crisis

~~~
moron4hire
There is nothing particularly wrong with derivatives. They were just the
vehicle used to commit a massive fraud on retirement funds. Like a truck full
of boxed goods being shipped to a store, where the people packing the trucks
were filling them with garbage (and occasionally drugs) and fronting the door
with "real" product, then paying the inspectors to not even look in the back
of the truck.

