Editing Talk:AI Governance DAO (section)

= Proposals =
== Domain specificity ==
The AI DAO should be devoted to the narrow problem of democratically governing the deployment of AI tech. We should strive to avoid splintering concerns such as governing nano-manufacturing, or P2P IT, etc., even though they certainly overlap. Instead, separate DAOs should be instituted for addressing separate issues, with membership overlapping and protocols being partially cloned.
== REP-weighted Democracy ==

== AI members ==
The issue of power given to AI members--as opposed to human members--is basic. It is a challenging question of whether to allow it. At the moment, given the lack of wisdom in current iterations of AI, it is obvious that AI ungoverned by human members violates the fundamental purpose of this group. The group is devoted to the cause of finding wise protocols for the deployment of AI to promote human flourishing. That includes promoting human agency. So AI contributions to the group need to be consciously directed by human members.

== Pseudonymity ==
Do we allow pseudonymity and therefore allow ourselves to be completely open to AI participation unguided by humans? It seems counter to the mission of the group. But pseudonymity is a value that will improve the group. I propose allowing pseudonymity, but having a defensive posture that analyzes contributions of members to detect whether they are undirected AI contributors. Then slashing the REP of detected AI members and consciously re-evaluating their contributions. --Craig
<br>


We have to create a lot of avenues to look at the same set of information in different ways. We can have different networks that interface with each other where pseudonymity exists in one and KYC in another. Within the same community, it is recommended that they have pseudonymous and KYC identities. Different identity types come with certain risks and will be treated accordingly. Reputation accumulation over time will grant the identity more "rights". --Jonathan

<br>

I agree about different types in general. And pseudonymous accounts are preferable in general. But the question here is whether we allow pseudonymous members in the AIgovDAO. If we do, then we are open to members who are non-human.

So before we discuss whether to allow pseudonymous members, we should first decide whether we are okay with non-human members. I am against it, but open to discussion. --Craig

== Onboarding members ==
Founding members are given fREP which clones the powers of cREP, wREP, and gREP. New members may earn cREP by participating in the discussions through posts in the Forum, and they may earn wREP and gREP by making proposals that are eventually referenced.

== Governance process ==