We are about to experience an age of unprecedented censorship and surveillance and some people are applauding it because they have the forethought of a sea urchin.

For the unaware, DAICOs were a model proposed by Vitalik as the evolution of ICOs to fix the relentless rug problem. The idea being that instead of money raised being fully unlocked to teams (amplifying chance of rug), the team periodically seeks consent from the token holders to access the treasury. They never quite kicked off because of regulatory concerns mostly (and DAOs being hard). “Too much like a company,” or something. Still, I always thought it was the obvious end state for decentralised capital formation. It’s effectively, do an ICO but conditionally unlock the raised funds based on team performance. The @MetaDAOProject version here swaps out token voting for conditional token futarchy. You effectively predict whether the price of the project’s token will be higher or lower if the proposal passes or fails. In other words, “if the project gets this money will it make the token perform better”. If the YES tokens trade better then the proposal passes. A smart addition to this is that from the outset the teams get an allowance from the treasury by default meaning we don’t have futarchy markets for ordering post it notes. Very happy to see DAO landscape evolving like this (finally). Hope this does well. We need more.