My submission to DAO Heat’s writing contest. Epoch 0 - The Rise of DAO Culture.

https://twitter.com/banklessDAO/status/1491087173835231234?s=20&t=1lmYKyNuoUPUgwjE_XESlA

Decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) are a function of culture and not the other way around. Culture is old, DAOs are new. Both terms are overused, probably.

When talking about big and amorphous terms, working definitions provide the grounding and scaffolding upon and around which meaningful discussion takes place. Within the context of organizations, working definitions are especially important because they enable the consensus building necessary for development. After all, how can a group of individuals unite, coordinate, and progress if they can't agree upon what exactly it is they're talking about?

A commonly cited definition of culture was put forward by British anthropologist Edward Taylor in his 1871 Primitive Culture Volume 1:

"that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society."

Damn. That's a lot. But it makes sense because culture is a lot, which is why it's notoriously hard to define. 

DAO can also be hard to define, but for different reasons. Unlike culture, which is fluid and changes shapes, DAO is hard to define because it's not yet clear exactly what shape it is. Hard definitions of DAO do exist, however. Wyoming's Bill-38, signed into law in April 2022, summarizes a DAO as:

"a limited liability company with special provisions allowing the company to be algorithmically run or managed (in whole or in part) through smart contracts executed by computers."

Damn. That's specific. But it makes sense because the law is in the business of defining things specifically.

This act of defining "decentralized autonomous organization" is important because it is a cultural expression. It represents a dynamic cultural function (law) wherein humans (stewards of culture) debate and agree upon some working definition (consensus building) in order to some thing (progress).

A similar process happens in DAOs everyday. Humans (community stewards) propose ideas, discuss and debate them, make a decision (build consensus) then execute (progress). To do this, DAOs leverage tools and platforms like Ethereum, Discord, Notion, and Snapshot. As humans interact through these tools, DAO artifacts emerge -- apps, NFTs, proposals, on-chain voting, etc. Indeed, these are a DAO’s cultural artifacts.

This begs a question, what function does culture play outside of human organizations? Can culture exist where humans do not? For example, does Chernobyl today, in its abandoned state, have culture? Can DAOs maintain autonomy independent of humans? If so, do these DAOs have culture? For example, if a DAO consists of self-executing, self-monitoring, and self-healing smart contracts with the need for human maintenance, does that DAO have culture?

So, when I hear, "the rise of DAO culture", I think. I think about "gm", "hi frens", and "wagmi". I think about DAOs being a new, tech-enabled take on and old, human tradition of cooperation. I think about a proliferation of organization, consensus building, and decision making that is managed mostly through algorithmically-powered, digital mediums. I think about what an exciting time to be a creature of culture and a doer of DAOs.

My submission to DAO Heat’s writing contest. Epoch 0 - The Rise of DAO Culture.

https://twitter.com/banklessDAO/status/1491087173835231234?s=20&t=1lmYKyNuoUPUgwjE_XESlA

Decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) are a function of culture and not the other way around. Culture is old, DAOs are new. Both terms are overused, probably.

When talking about big and amorphous terms, working definitions provide the grounding and scaffolding upon and around which meaningful discussion takes place. Within the context of organizations, working definitions are especially important because they enable the consensus building necessary for development. After all, how can a group of individuals unite, coordinate, and progress if they can't agree upon what exactly it is they're talking about?

A commonly cited definition of culture was put forward by British anthropologist Edward Taylor in his 1871 Primitive Culture Volume 1:

"that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society."

Damn. That's a lot. But it makes sense because culture is a lot, which is why it's notoriously hard to define. 

DAO can also be hard to define, but for different reasons. Unlike culture, which is fluid and changes shapes, DAO is hard to define because it's not yet clear exactly what shape it is. Hard definitions of DAO do exist, however. Wyoming's Bill-38, signed into law in April 2022, summarizes a DAO as:

"a limited liability company with special provisions allowing the company to be algorithmically run or managed (in whole or in part) through smart contracts executed by computers."

Damn. That's specific. But it makes sense because the law is in the business of defining things specifically.

This act of defining "decentralized autonomous organization" is important because it is a cultural expression. It represents a dynamic cultural function (law) wherein humans (stewards of culture) debate and agree upon some working definition (consensus building) in order to some thing (progress).

A similar process happens in DAOs everyday. Humans (community stewards) propose ideas, discuss and debate them, make a decision (build consensus) then execute (progress). To do this, DAOs leverage tools and platforms like Ethereum, Discord, Notion, and Snapshot. As humans interact through these tools, DAO artifacts emerge -- apps, NFTs, proposals, on-chain voting, etc. Indeed, these are a DAO’s cultural artifacts.

This begs a question, what function does culture play outside of human organizations? Can culture exist where humans do not? For example, does Chernobyl today, in its abandoned state, have culture? Can DAOs maintain autonomy independent of humans? If so, do these DAOs have culture? For example, if a DAO consists of self-executing, self-monitoring, and self-healing smart contracts with the need for human maintenance, does that DAO have culture?

So, when I hear, "the rise of DAO culture", I think. I think about "gm", "hi frens", and "wagmi". I think about DAOs being a new, tech-enabled take on and old, human tradition of cooperation. I think about a proliferation of organization, consensus building, and decision making that is managed mostly through algorithmically-powered, digital mediums. I think about what an exciting time to be a creature of culture and a doer of DAOs.