Decentralized autonomous organization of the intelligent home according to the principle of the immune system

Dilger, Werner

doi:10.1109/icsmc.1997.625775

Cited by 24 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Organisation theory has abundant literature on decentralised organisations of several kinds (Shubik, 1962;Beckhard, 1966;Freeland & Baker, 1975). Yet, the first references to actual Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) only emerged in the 1990s to describe multi-agent systems in an internet-of-things (IoT) environment (Dilger, 1997) or nonviolent decentralised action in the counter-globalisation social movement (Schneider, 2014).…”

Section: Origin and Evolution Of The Termmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralized Autonomous Organization

Hassan¹,

Filippi²

2021

Internet Policy Review

181

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Origin and Evolution Of The Termmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralized Autonomous Organization

Hassan¹,

Filippi²

2021

Internet Policy Review

181

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aragon 7 is by far the largest DAO platform, with currently 1700 DAOs collectively managing $900M. Aragon aims to extend the use of DAOs as a free and open-source technology to allow the creation and management of decentralized organizations [34] under different forms including companies, cooperatives, nonprofits, or open-source projects.…”

Section: Aragonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A "hard fork" is a more radical change, which requires all the network to follow the new rules, making the blocks following the old rules invalid. 7 https://aragon.org/ 8 https://help.aragon.org/article/4-about-aragon 9 https://hack.aragon.org/ In this article, we will focus on the Vote app, since voting is the main action in most DAOs. Furthermore, the default Aragon voting app is one of the most used apps in Aragon DAOs 10 .…”

Section: Aragonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This new phenomenon can be followed on the Internet, particularly, through 'grey literature' including technical reports, blogs, social media posts, etc. Research literature has covered it mostly with theoretical works [4,6,7], although some empirical works have been slowly emerging. We can highlight qualitative research such as an ethnographic account of the first popular DAO [8], a comprehensive study understanding the imaginaries behind DAOs [9], or a content analysis of grey literature on three popular DAOs to understand how are they governed [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A comparative analysis of the platforms for decentralized autonomous organizations in the Ethereum blockchain

Faqir-Rhazoui

Arroyo

Hassan

2021

J Internet Serv Appl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blockchain technology has enabled a new kind of distributed systems. Beyond its early applications in Finance, it has also allowed the emergence of novel new ways of governance and coordination. The most relevant of these are the so-called Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs). DAOs typically implement decision-making systems to make it possible for their online community to reach agreements. As a result of these agreements, the DAO operates automatically by executing the appropriate portion of code on the blockchain network (e.g., hire people, delivers payments, invests in financial products, etc). In the last few years, several platforms such as Aragon, DAOstack and DAOhaus, have emerged to facilitate the creation of DAOs. As a result, hundreds of these new organizations have appeared, with their communities interacting mediated by blockchain. However, the literature has yet to appropriately explore empirically this phenomena. In this paper, we aim to shed light on the current state of the DAO ecosystem. We review the three main platforms nowadays (Aragon, DAOstack, DAOhaus) which facilitate the creation and management of DAOs. Thus, we introduce their main differences, and compare them using quantitative metrics. For such comparison, we retrieve data from both the main Ethereum network (mainnet) and a parallel Ethereum network (xDai). We analyze data from 72,320 users and 2,353 DAO communities in order to study the three ecosystems across four dimensions: growth, activity, voting system and funds. Our results show that there are notable differences among the DAO platforms in terms of growth and activity, and also in terms of voting results. Still, we consider that our work is only a first step and that further research is needed to better understand these communities, and evaluate their level of accomplishment in reaching decentralized governance.

show abstract

“…It was set up by a group of people to run a crowdfunding organization that was operated entirely using smart contracts. The idea of decentralized autonomous organizations have been around for some time (Dilger, 1997). Ideally, it is a legally incorporated entity that runs as a business but is fully automated.…”

Section: Current Issues and Risks With Smart Contractsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smart contracts: will Fintech be the catalyst for the next global financial crisis?

Duran

Griffin

2020

JFRC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to examine the risks associated with smart contracts, a disruptive financial technology (FinTech) innovation, and assesses how in the future they could threaten the integrity of the global financial system. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative approach is used to identify risk factors related to the use of new financial innovations, by examining how over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives contributed to the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) which occurred during 2007 and 2008. Based on this analysis, the potential for similar concerns with smart contracts are evaluated, drawing on the failure of The DAO on the Ethereum blockchain, which involved the loss of over $60m of digital currency. Findings Extensive use of bilateral agreements, complexity and lack of standardization, lack of transparency, misuse and speed of contagion were factors that contributed to the GFC that could also become material concerns for smart contract technology as its adoption grows. These concerns, combined with other contextual factors, such as the risk of defects in smart contracts and cyberattacks, could lead to potential destabilization of the broader financial system. Practical implications The paper’s findings provide insights to help make the design, management and monitoring of smart contract technology more robust. They also provide guidance for key stakeholders on proactive steps that can be taken with smart contract technology to avoid repeating the types of oversights that contributed to the GFC. Originality/value This paper draws attention to the risks associated with the adoption of disruptive FinTech. It also suggests steps that regulators and other key stakeholders can take to help mitigate those risks.

show abstract

Decentralized autonomous organization of the intelligent home according to the principle of the immune system

Cited by 24 publications

References 1 publication

Decentralized Autonomous Organization

Decentralized Autonomous Organization

A comparative analysis of the platforms for decentralized autonomous organizations in the Ethereum blockchain

Smart contracts: will Fintech be the catalyst for the next global financial crisis?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About