DAO as a member of United Nations through e-Residency or equivalent

[seki]

I know of many people straggling with domestic regulations about crypto currency assets in general.

I believe Estonian e-residency is a practical tactics for the people applicable.

Why don't we unite with them on that program with the DAO to become a member of UN in the future near?

German and Japanese early connection around slock.it, some of founders and myself, may suggest some common pain among the nations in the three countries, as opponents in the beginning, and we know of several other nations trying to get there for their identities.

Within my domestic region, assets in Galapagos Japan is a play ground of hedge funds targeting imported oil dependent corporate Japan now. Since the Prime Minister of Japan is already e-residence, hope that also relief the financial attack.

Let's say this is a "Aha moment" on me, and probably common to the decentralized DAO community having non-land based institute as a member of UN already.

I believe remaining days for the DAO creations is enough to get some support from e-residency, it's not limited to that period though.

[TheDeafMute]

It's interesting.. but a can of worms without legal counsel

[seki]

It's intra-country matter and a little bit different from laws governing each country.

The legal counsel for intra-countries should be countries themselves concerned forming group like EU or UN, and the rule set is treaty.
I'm not sure how DAO related discussions will proceed these places, but we can have the "Palestine Liberation Organization" like approach into UN, as they have "observer status".

So within current framework of the DAO, we can hire some agency lobbying the DAO into UN through a proposal, possibly with some Estonian agency.

[mfitze]

I am wondering why anyone would want a highly decentralized autonomous organization like the DAO to be associated in any way with a highly centralized, globalist organization like the United Nations. To me, the ethos are incompatible.

[seki]

Yes, these committees are often not flat, like UN has three or more centralize layers. They also have to be decentralized and autonomous as much, and that's why it help DAO stable, safe, sustainable and expand.

[mfitze]

I think you are missing my point. All the United Nations does is seek more power for itself by imposing its will on nations, organizations, and individuals. It is radically top-down and dictatorial. The DAO is fundamentally decentralized and democratic (I hope). I do not see any benefit to the DAO from associating with the UN, but I do see many potential dangers including a loss of autonomy for the DAO.

[Myronli27]

I think what Seki should have said is that the UN should be modeled after the DAO. We all know that the UN is disfunctional at present and needs to be remodeled. The power held by the security council doesnt help matters and in fact it hinders the organization the most. I have come to believe that making the UN more decentralized would make it much more efficient and democratic and it would help it meet its funding needs better compared to the current system by pulling funds from all over the world.
The fact that our so called representatives are appointed, though by leaders that have been or are supposed to be elected, doesnt help either. We have a situation whereby many nations whose leaders are not really elected are appointing representatives yet these do not reflect the will of the people. Would it not be nice if all of us as international citizens had an actual voice in the UN in the form of one vote one man/woman? This way many atrocities could be prevented. Through consensus, wars would be less likely, there would be a trully international pool from which funding research to tackle health issues and poverty can be got. And one of the best things about decentralization is that after consensus has been reached, the funds would go straight to where they are intended to go and this really reduces corruption. If I was incharge of reforming the UN, I would throw out the Security Council and its veto power and seriously consider decentralization. I am sure that the veto would not be necessary as the system will be able to check its self.

[mfitze]

Now you're talking!

[seki]

Thank you all. I know of thousand people at least sharing the same idea at any of one that I think brilliant, but I'm always failed to point that myself.

Would it not be nice if all of us as international citizens had an actual voice in the UN in the form of one vote one man/woman?

We have voting system (design) already in the DAO. Why not make them unite, not just splitting for own bucks?

I'm not affiliated with any of Estonians, but attended a domestic release event of a book about the program in Tokyo, and know some contacts. I'm sure they welcome any of the voices like these from the DAO.

[sco]

What's the value here in inviting a violence based monopoly (UN or other Government orgs) to collaborate / model after a DAO? I see no value statement in the OPs post.

Perhaps to get ahead / control of regulation?

[seki]

Whatever we need for the DAO though votes, like open or remote consensus based lobbying.

We do have better design, methodology and governance than UN or whatever, showing that we don't have any people left uncomfortable with it inside.

I'm not a diplomatic nerds, but other than armed forces, UN has charity and environmental affairs, which we're able to replace or represent part of them through the DAO, and I also want to lock the all destructive weapons forever!

LOCK IT !

[Myronli27]

The fact that the UN is a "violence based monopoly" as you have put it is exactly why it needs to be remodeled after the DAO. Decentralizing it would take away this monopoly and place it int he hands of the masses and give a vote to way more people. And yes, it will help in the control and enforcement of regulations as well as to get ahead. Plus, I would like to believe that the more people involved in the decision making of the organization through the DAO the less violent it is likely to be but I may be wrong. Also, as Seki noted, the United Nations does alot of humanitarian work and its functions like the World Health Organization and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees would benefit a lot from a decentralized system in their quest to make the World a better place.

[Myronli27]

Yes. We have the voting system in the DAO. I am a diplomatic nerd and believe me when I say that you cannot just combine the two systems that is the UN and the DAO as they are currently and you think that it will work. It is bound to be a big failure because:

1) There are so many special interests right now in the UN that would not even consider the DAO. There will be a lot of resistance if the idea to just join the 2 was placed on the table because many are benefitting from the system.

2) The veto power of the UN security council will completely negate the whole idea. The only thing you will achieve by combining the two now is a better voting system but as long as the veto power remains, the system will still be controlled by the few and you will not have changed anything.

3) The current structure of the UN is not compatible with the DAO and it really isnot intended to achieve the same goals as the DAO. Yes, it is meant to bring about cooperation but in the UN system that collaboration is meant to be spear headed by the few. THe DAO is decentralised and everyone has a say in what the results will be. In the UN, only the Security Council, the victors of WW2, control the outcome and with their veto can decide or fail to change things.

With the few reasons I have given you clearly see that if the UN is to ever be decentalised it has to undergo some serious change. It must be first remodeled or else it is a losing battle.
And lastly, I am not talking about everyone making profit from the UN if it functions as the DAO. NO, quite the opposite. My idea is that as a citizen of the World, that should entitle you to one vote in a much more decentralized UN system. Its not about making profit at all but bringing about change. However, the system needs to raise money to meet its goals like improving health care and reducing poverty so a decentralized system in my view would be much better at raising these funds for the organization than the current system where only a few nations provide any significant funding for the UN.

[seki]

@Myronli27 Sure. I'm also a nerd with many faces, and thanks for your insights.

I know of veto power of the security council in general, and once when I heard some tried to join, I thought it's a joke and waste of tax.

Observer is what we try first as DAO as organization, or becoming bidding system provider as a computer service company, which provides the most efficient.

Also an overall type of design chart with a "bus" structure connected with lose coupling, that I saw Estonian pitch, or its governance will be a good model.

Looks like they have several already, and how we can utilize them might be our points for the small step advancement.

We may try to decentrlize some small subsystem in it. How about that?

Bitnations and Estonia togethere already here.

[Myronli27]

Ya. That makes sense..starting with a small pilot system is most definitely a good idea. There are endless opportunities with this. Its an awesome time to be alive. I am closely following the Estonian pilot project an I pray that its successful beyond anyones dreams

[TheDeafMute]

The U.N. though.. doesn't work like a democracy

[seki]

DAO built in a small piece of service structure with its IT service providers forms DAO democracy, (charity management for example) will gradually constrain other services not to allow mechanism other than DAO (or decentralized autonomous framework) .

It would be well accepted in both sides of the world shown in a famous talk at TEDx by Charles Hoskinson

[Myronli27]

The UN doesnot work like a democracy but is intended to work like one. The UN is complicated. The General Assembly is democratic in that eacn member has one vote that goes to passing resolutions. So does the Security Council (SC). However the the problem comes with the SC. In the SC, member can vote on issues however any one member can veto the result of that vote and this is where the problem lies. Thats why I said that it needs to be restructured because if it ever functions like the DAO it will have to be democratic.

[seki]

Probably, we should concentrate what and how we can provide any small piece of services into UN from The DAO.

Can't we imagine any statistical data on sharing economy, which fascinate some countries to unite to up-vote voices into UN?

[sco]

My point is- why centralize a decentralized function. The DAO is a vehicle to drive ideas into action, via intelligent allocation of resources. Each idea spawns & becomes it's own Decentralize Autonomous Org & does it's own thing.

The UN is more of a centralized planning org, which says- "our ideas are greater than yours & if you don't follow our ideas, well kill you." Not sure why we need central planning- i personally (this is opinion) see The DAO as "parents" which spawn "children" with the goal that they become Autonomous & do wonderful things. Not sure why managing & pre-planning their entire life is necessary.