Rohit MalekarBlockchain for Public Goods - A Prequel to the Book Greenpilled
IntroductionI wrote this article an attempt for a prequel to the book Greenpilled. The book by Kevin Owocki is “designed to teach the ethos & game theoretic concepts behind regenerative cryptoeconomics to the next generation of dreamers, builders, and internet citizens”. If you are new to Web3 and Crypto, I hope this article serves as a stepping stone to then deep dive into the vision Greenpilled has to offer to sustain and thrive our public goods.What is broken?Our public goods are withering...
Rohit MalekarThe Power of "Politics of Artifacts" for Public Goods in Web3
Prof. Winner's 1980 paper "Do artifacts have politics?" asserts that tech artifacts are not neutral but reinforce certain values, interests, and power relations in society. The paper outlines several examples to drive the point home.Tech is not neutralBridges over parkways on Long Island were once constructed with low clearance to intentionally prevent racial minorities and low-income groups who used public transport from accessing parkways for recreation and commuting. Many grotesque co...
Rohit MalekarCurve Bonded Crowdfunding with Impact DAOs
NEED: What is the problem to be solved?Transforming siloed strengths into repeatable success for Impact DAOsContext:Impact DAOs are communities with positive externalities rooted in collective action for a shared cause³. They amplify their impact by stacking on each other and derive compounding effects from the mutual collaboration to build a regenerative economy.Challenge:While no two Impact DAOs are the same, their shared DNA leads to similar organizational challenges such as:finding value-...
Building a digital studio. Learning public goods. Trusted Seed member at Commons Stack.
Rohit MalekarBlockchain for Public Goods - A Prequel to the Book Greenpilled
IntroductionI wrote this article an attempt for a prequel to the book Greenpilled. The book by Kevin Owocki is “designed to teach the ethos & game theoretic concepts behind regenerative cryptoeconomics to the next generation of dreamers, builders, and internet citizens”. If you are new to Web3 and Crypto, I hope this article serves as a stepping stone to then deep dive into the vision Greenpilled has to offer to sustain and thrive our public goods.What is broken?Our public goods are withering...
Rohit MalekarThe Power of "Politics of Artifacts" for Public Goods in Web3
Prof. Winner's 1980 paper "Do artifacts have politics?" asserts that tech artifacts are not neutral but reinforce certain values, interests, and power relations in society. The paper outlines several examples to drive the point home.Tech is not neutralBridges over parkways on Long Island were once constructed with low clearance to intentionally prevent racial minorities and low-income groups who used public transport from accessing parkways for recreation and commuting. Many grotesque co...
Rohit MalekarCurve Bonded Crowdfunding with Impact DAOs
NEED: What is the problem to be solved?Transforming siloed strengths into repeatable success for Impact DAOsContext:Impact DAOs are communities with positive externalities rooted in collective action for a shared cause³. They amplify their impact by stacking on each other and derive compounding effects from the mutual collaboration to build a regenerative economy.Challenge:While no two Impact DAOs are the same, their shared DNA leads to similar organizational challenges such as:finding value-...
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Building a digital studio. Learning public goods. Trusted Seed member at Commons Stack.
Subscribe to Rohit Malekar
Subscribe to Rohit Malekar
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
I am convinced Web 3.0-driven decentralized communities will be fairer in more ways than any social platform of yesteryears. However, I also think that when you confer the tools to the individual to be at par with a sovereign, along with our best, our worst will amplify too.
The potential of most communities, online or otherwise, will remain unexploited until we fix a few bugs in our behaviors.
We seldom know how to disagree with people we admire or seek common ground with those we don't.
We put those on a pedestal who conform to our worldview. We destroy others with the slightest differences. It's us who desire the world to be black and white when instead it is so colorful.
One of the baggage of modern ways of consuming information is the risk of being caught in a bubble of like-minded networks. I would pay money for a curation service that monitors my existing behavior for content consumption and serves me literature that has contrary perspectives but I haven't found one.
Communities of the Web 3.0 era will bring voices with shared interests together and evenly distribute gains from the pursuit with the creators and builders of the community. On the flip side, I fear it will also add to the number of bubbles we chose to be cozy within.
Today, the onus for proverbially "crossing the aisle" to hear an opinion different than ours is still on the individual. Most sources of online engagement have created distant bubbles of like-minded groups that rarely reconcile. Web 3.0 may further accelerate this.
Critical thinking requires one to praise a worthy foe and criticize a hero when needed. But when we let go of our reasoning, allow our political (or pick any field) leaders to pander to our emotions, and break our ethical standards, we fail our systems.
Tech can't fix this.
The gradual loss of unbiased, critical, and objective thinking in human minds will be the likeliest cause of our misery, much before climate change or any other armageddon. I just hope Web 3.0 doesn't aid it. That would be a pity for such an amazing piece of technology.
I am convinced Web 3.0-driven decentralized communities will be fairer in more ways than any social platform of yesteryears. However, I also think that when you confer the tools to the individual to be at par with a sovereign, along with our best, our worst will amplify too.
The potential of most communities, online or otherwise, will remain unexploited until we fix a few bugs in our behaviors.
We seldom know how to disagree with people we admire or seek common ground with those we don't.
We put those on a pedestal who conform to our worldview. We destroy others with the slightest differences. It's us who desire the world to be black and white when instead it is so colorful.
One of the baggage of modern ways of consuming information is the risk of being caught in a bubble of like-minded networks. I would pay money for a curation service that monitors my existing behavior for content consumption and serves me literature that has contrary perspectives but I haven't found one.
Communities of the Web 3.0 era will bring voices with shared interests together and evenly distribute gains from the pursuit with the creators and builders of the community. On the flip side, I fear it will also add to the number of bubbles we chose to be cozy within.
Today, the onus for proverbially "crossing the aisle" to hear an opinion different than ours is still on the individual. Most sources of online engagement have created distant bubbles of like-minded groups that rarely reconcile. Web 3.0 may further accelerate this.
Critical thinking requires one to praise a worthy foe and criticize a hero when needed. But when we let go of our reasoning, allow our political (or pick any field) leaders to pander to our emotions, and break our ethical standards, we fail our systems.
Tech can't fix this.
The gradual loss of unbiased, critical, and objective thinking in human minds will be the likeliest cause of our misery, much before climate change or any other armageddon. I just hope Web 3.0 doesn't aid it. That would be a pity for such an amazing piece of technology.
No activity yet