Subscribe to ElCoco.eth🌪🪶🦇🔊🚀| ElCoco.lens🌿
Subscribe to ElCoco.eth🌪🪶🦇🔊🚀| ElCoco.lens🌿
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
ElCoco.eth🌪🪶🦇🔊🚀| ElCoco.lens🌿Ukraine Farmer DAO
The goal of this DAO is to get money into the pockets of Ukrainian farmers who need the help. Our thesis is that this is more long-term viable if we structure it as an investment opportunity as opposed to a charity. In other words, we want to allow people to invest in fellow humans similar to how we invest in companies today, but in a decentralized way that optimizes for speed. The challenge is structuring this so that investors are paid back and the project isn’t taken advantage of by people...
ElCoco.eth🌪🪶🦇🔊🚀| ElCoco.lens🌿People Like Me
(Light Paper) In this world, communities exist on a continuum between those forced on us and those we opt into. Forced communities (like the town you were raised in) are beneficial in that they teach us how to interact with people we may not agree with, but they can also be stifling. To find communities of like-minded people, we used to have to move to cities, but now the internet has allowed us access to so many more people. We can search for subreddits that interest us and meet like-minded ...
ElCoco.eth🌪🪶🦇🔊🚀| ElCoco.lens🌿Ukraine Farmer DAO
The goal of this DAO is to get money into the pockets of Ukrainian farmers who need the help. Our thesis is that this is more long-term viable if we structure it as an investment opportunity as opposed to a charity. In other words, we want to allow people to invest in fellow humans similar to how we invest in companies today, but in a decentralized way that optimizes for speed. The challenge is structuring this so that investors are paid back and the project isn’t taken advantage of by people...
ElCoco.eth🌪🪶🦇🔊🚀| ElCoco.lens🌿People Like Me
(Light Paper) In this world, communities exist on a continuum between those forced on us and those we opt into. Forced communities (like the town you were raised in) are beneficial in that they teach us how to interact with people we may not agree with, but they can also be stifling. To find communities of like-minded people, we used to have to move to cities, but now the internet has allowed us access to so many more people. We can search for subreddits that interest us and meet like-minded ...
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
(A half-baked idea)
In certain ways, we live in a golden age of science. We have never known so much, and the speed of discovery just seems to be increasing. It is helpful, however, to step back sometimes and re-examine the forest for the trees. It is my observation that there are several major issues that need to be addressed.
The first is that science has become a huge self-perpetuating echo chamber, reinforced by scientific cliques and the fact that big industry (pharma, food, chemical, etc) heavily influence what studies are published and what subjects are funded. Studies that focus on complex systems (nutrition, the relationships between microbiomes and ecosystem health, and the role of biodiversity in food production to name just three) are actively suppressed in favor of reductionist studies that offer the hope of discovering a individual chemicals that might be patented and marketed for a profit. The result is that we end up with mono-crop farms that require tons of chemicals that end up poisoning our oceans and confused consumers who buy billions of dollars worth of useless vitamins when just eating a healthy diet can give them the health benefits they so desperately seek.
The other issue is that scientific papers are written in ways that the average person cannot hope to understand. They must be translated, often by journalists who don’t understand the subject matter as well as the scientists, and often by corporations who cherry pick stats to benefit their bottom lines.
What PubSci DAO would be is an organization that incentivizes scientific studies which benefit the public good, written in ways that the average human can understand.
To succeed, it would require three things:
Studies that meet the approval of the scientific community
Studies that regular people can understand
Money
Money will be generated by regular consumers who are interested in public goods science and want to buy a membership. Based on the millions of books sold like How Not to Die and Anti-Cancer, and all of the money that pours into self-help nutrition magazines and the like, there are obviously plenty of people who are eager to pay for help sifting through the mountains of contradictory evidence pointing them in all different directions. Having a science-based journal that hashes these points out, away from the influence of big corporations, will be a breath of fresh air to many people.
We will start out with a group of peer reviewers who have already published and reviewed in the top science journals and who have an interest in this kind of science. These scientists exist (Colin Campbell comes to mind). These scientists can expand their pool of peer reviewers to include new scientists by a ⅔ vote. Peer reviewers typically don’t get paid, but this is a bridge we could cross later if necessary.
Any scientist may submit a study to be considered by PubSci DAO for publishing. DAO members will each receive monthly tokens to dole out coordinape-style based on the studies they decide are the most impactful and understandable. Membership funds will be doled out to the authors who wrote the studies based on these token allocations by members. Any article which receives the approval of 3 peer reviewers on the PubSci panel will have their compensation boosted quadratically. In this way, a writer is greatly rewarded for A) writing a study that average readers can understand, B) conducting the study in a scientifically-sound manner, and C) writing a study that the public believes it can benefit from.
As someone who, due to a close family member with cancer, has read mountains of scientific studies and books and talked to leading scientists and integrative oncologists, I know these are major problems that need addressing. PubSci DAO is one solution that I think could make a dent.
(A half-baked idea)
In certain ways, we live in a golden age of science. We have never known so much, and the speed of discovery just seems to be increasing. It is helpful, however, to step back sometimes and re-examine the forest for the trees. It is my observation that there are several major issues that need to be addressed.
The first is that science has become a huge self-perpetuating echo chamber, reinforced by scientific cliques and the fact that big industry (pharma, food, chemical, etc) heavily influence what studies are published and what subjects are funded. Studies that focus on complex systems (nutrition, the relationships between microbiomes and ecosystem health, and the role of biodiversity in food production to name just three) are actively suppressed in favor of reductionist studies that offer the hope of discovering a individual chemicals that might be patented and marketed for a profit. The result is that we end up with mono-crop farms that require tons of chemicals that end up poisoning our oceans and confused consumers who buy billions of dollars worth of useless vitamins when just eating a healthy diet can give them the health benefits they so desperately seek.
The other issue is that scientific papers are written in ways that the average person cannot hope to understand. They must be translated, often by journalists who don’t understand the subject matter as well as the scientists, and often by corporations who cherry pick stats to benefit their bottom lines.
What PubSci DAO would be is an organization that incentivizes scientific studies which benefit the public good, written in ways that the average human can understand.
To succeed, it would require three things:
Studies that meet the approval of the scientific community
Studies that regular people can understand
Money
Money will be generated by regular consumers who are interested in public goods science and want to buy a membership. Based on the millions of books sold like How Not to Die and Anti-Cancer, and all of the money that pours into self-help nutrition magazines and the like, there are obviously plenty of people who are eager to pay for help sifting through the mountains of contradictory evidence pointing them in all different directions. Having a science-based journal that hashes these points out, away from the influence of big corporations, will be a breath of fresh air to many people.
We will start out with a group of peer reviewers who have already published and reviewed in the top science journals and who have an interest in this kind of science. These scientists exist (Colin Campbell comes to mind). These scientists can expand their pool of peer reviewers to include new scientists by a ⅔ vote. Peer reviewers typically don’t get paid, but this is a bridge we could cross later if necessary.
Any scientist may submit a study to be considered by PubSci DAO for publishing. DAO members will each receive monthly tokens to dole out coordinape-style based on the studies they decide are the most impactful and understandable. Membership funds will be doled out to the authors who wrote the studies based on these token allocations by members. Any article which receives the approval of 3 peer reviewers on the PubSci panel will have their compensation boosted quadratically. In this way, a writer is greatly rewarded for A) writing a study that average readers can understand, B) conducting the study in a scientifically-sound manner, and C) writing a study that the public believes it can benefit from.
As someone who, due to a close family member with cancer, has read mountains of scientific studies and books and talked to leading scientists and integrative oncologists, I know these are major problems that need addressing. PubSci DAO is one solution that I think could make a dent.
No activity yet