Order:
  1. Open Problems in DAOs: Political Science and Philosophy.Eliza R. Oak, Woojin Lim, Danielle Allen & Helene Landemore - 2023 - Arxiv.
    Decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) are a new, rapidly-growing class of organizations governed by smart contracts. Here we describe how researchers can contribute to the emerging science of DAOs and other digitally-constituted organizations. From granular privacy primitives to mechanism designs to model laws, we identify high-impact problems in the DAO ecosystem where existing gaps might be tackled through a new data set or by applying tools and ideas from existing research fields such as political science, computer science, economics, law, and organizational (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Ethics of Decentralized Social Technologies: Lessons from Web3, the Fediverse, and Beyond.Danielle Allen, Woojin Lim, Eli Frankel, Joshua Simons, Divya Siddarth & Glen Weyl - 2023 - Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Ethics.
    This paper argues that the plethora of experiments with decentralized social technologies (DSTs)—clusters of which are sometimes called “the Web 3.0 ecosystem” or “the Fediverse”—have brought us to a constitutional moment. These technologies enable radical innovations in social, economic, and political institutions and practices, with the potential to support transformative approaches to political economy. They demand governance innovation. The paper develops a framework of prudent vigilance for making ethical choices in this space that help to both grasp positive opportunities for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  37
    A Roadmap for Governing AI: Technology Governance and Power Sharing Liberalism.Danielle Allen, Sarah Hubbard, Woojin Lim, Allison Stanger, Shlomit Wagman & Kinney Zalesne - 2024 - Harvard Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation.
    This paper aims to provide a roadmap to AI governance. In contrast to the reigning paradigms, we argue that AI governance should not be merely a reactive, punitive, status-quo-defending enterprise, but rather the expression of an expansive, proactive vision for technology—to advance human flourishing. Advancing human flourishing in turn requires democratic/political stability and economic empowerment. Our overarching point is that answering questions of how we should govern this emerging technology is a chance not merely to categorize and manage narrow risk (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark