Once you open the box on deeply understanding control/ownership you can never put the lid back on. It’s why I rarely use the term governance anymore. There were many excuses in the past, now, not only is it very feasible to decentralise control pragmatically and flexibly, but regulations are even beginning to demand it. The cake eating 🎂 is coming to an end especially if you want to have it to.

Traditional VC has been remarkably durable as a mechanism, partly because the alternatives mostly weren't real alternatives. What's changed recently is that a few primitives have matured enough to actually combine: - continuous clearing auctions for primary price discovery - futarchy for treasury decisions, priced rather than voted on - zktls for programmable participation gates - borg-style legal wrappers that make onchain decisions binding offchain Umia put all four in one stack. 🚀

We asked @VitalikButerin why he frames Ethereum's broader mission as building "sanctuary technologies" rather than open source or decentralization. His take: "We're in a less peaceful and less safe world than we were 10 or 15 years ago. 10 or 15 years ago, you were worried about banks getting bailouts and dollars inflating. 15 years later, the risk that the dollar is gonna go crazy is way more credible ... and there's much worse things happening to people than just having your currency inflated." "There is a vision of safety we're competing with. Basically, let's trust the uncle in the sky, and the uncle in the sky is going to figure everything out for us in exchange for taking away all of our privacy and all of our agency." "We want to be safe and at the same time empowered. We want something that continues to keep us in control and at the center in a way where we have agency." @sodofi_ @binji_x

Yes and this is what Templ was built for: Templ guarantees that the selected governance method is the sole thing that controls the treasury. Real governance controls the treasury transparently and programmatically. No smoke and mirrors!

listen guys, I know it's a bitter pill I know many of you (like me) got interested in crypto because of DAOs etc. "governance" is largely a word used by scammers. most don't know they're scammers. they think they are doing something good and innovative. next time you see something about governance, switch "governs" or "governance" for "control". if it still works (eg. "tokenholders GOVERN the treasury"--->"tokenholders CONTROL the treasury" and they literally do, because no one can spend the treasury unless tokenholders agree with an onchain state change), then great... ....if it doesn't work (eg, tokenholders actually just do a snapshot and someone else obeys them, so tokenholders "GOVERN" it but don't "CONTROL" it), then "governance" is being used to scam (again, often inadvertently) just think this way, and you will be far better off and not waste your attention nick szabo used to follow me. then he blocked me because I talked positively about "governance". he was right, took me getting older and more years in crypto to see it.

"if a token provides onchain value, it’s a network token. If a token provides offchain value, it’s not a network token and likely remains subject to securities laws" in a nutshell, why I think many projects will still want dual token/equity post-CLARITY

My podcasts are 2 hour deep dives with experts agreeing that we need rules for crypto … while explaining the legal layer of emerging tech. Episode on CLARITY coming Monday. It will include @NYcryptolawyer and a few others (hoping @SH_Brennan, @iampaulgrewal and @milesjennings), plus snippets from my convos with @BillHughesDC, @thatgerald & more.

argot was spun out of ethereum foundation with a mandate to maintain ethereum's core programming languages and developer tooling. then it immediately begins to launder research as if it was core infrastructure maintenance. if you read their blog, they spend a lot of resources on fe, a language that has been "emerging" for over 5 years. they have long plans for fe, while the language itself has seen zero adoption and zero production use. their long term goal is "non-trivial contracts in production-like setting". meanwhile vyper is actual production infrastructure. it secures real protocols, with real users and tvl, and real audit surface. curve, lido, yearn, frax, velodrome all use vyper. yet vyper lives grant-to-grant, while argot started with a $16.6m check, about as much as ethereum started with. argot doesn't disclose how much time and energy it spends on the fe fantasy versus solidity, sourcify, hevm, or other genuinely core tooling. but clearly this pet project abuses and stretches the mandate. even though it's a programming language, by no serious measure it's "core". it should spin out and try to survive and prove demand independently. production compiler maintenance should get baseline funding before speculative language incubation gets considererd. vyper is in good shape today despite the ecosystem, not because of it. and it still does not sit right with me that resources keep getting misallocated away from the compiler people actually use. ethereum keeps saying "public goods", then funds the toy compiler like infrastructure and makes the production compiler pass the hat. that is not stewardship.

they never go public unless they can dump on you in an irrational frenzy only VCs and sovereign wealth funds get the fair prices & so it goes, on and on, growing the permanent underclass time to move capital markets onchain & disrupt all of it

If you show token, people will ask 'HOW MUCH?' and it will never be enough. The protocol that was the 100xer, the 1000xer is suddenly the 2x dog. But if you have NO token, you can say you're pre-token! You're a potential pure play...

U.S. Congress is officially more cypherpunk than most of you on here the new CLARITY Act is better than ever on respecting 'decentralization' (loosely speaking) & gets rid of the 'we didn't promise anything so now we're unregulated' loophole many of us were worried about it replaces the corporate style 'common control' test with 'coordinated control', which in theory will be a harder standard to meet (up to the SEC to ultimately define it, but the criteria it must consider are quite robust).. corpochains will struggle to meet this standard...this doesn't mean they're illegal but it will mean sales of the token by insiders etc. are much more regulated and more disclosure is required L2s will have to make sure their security councils are quite narrowly scoped