Science DAO Framework FAQ: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Links | [[Science DAO Framework FAQ#More details|Links]] | ||
[[Science DAO Framework FAQ#references|Research papers]] | |||
[ | [https://gitlab.com/dao-governance-framework/%20%20See%20Also Gitlab repo] | ||
[[Science DAO Framework|Wiki]] | |||
== SDF: "We're building an open, merit-based democracy for the science community." == | |||
SDF: "We're building an open, merit-based democracy for the science community." | |||
=== Q: How? === | |||
A: We're building a decentralized platform for science publishing. It's a place to collaborate, learn, share knowledge, review papers, debate, and earn credit for your contributions. It's an improvement on traditional journals and academic research organizations. | A: We're building a decentralized platform for science publishing. It's a place to collaborate, learn, share knowledge, review papers, debate, and earn credit for your contributions. It's an improvement on traditional journals and academic research organizations. | ||
=== Q: Why are you building it? === | |||
A: ?? list problems with science publishing and research incentives. Instead of decentralizing power, the internet has led to the erosion of traditional, smaller local scientific societies. Diverse journals for specific subjects in science have been centralized behind the control of a few, big, for-profit publishers, such as Elsevier and JSTOR. Even larger journals, such as Nature, have been driven toward a greater focus on business profit over science curation and education. | |||
Q: Why are you building it? | |||
A: ?? list problems with science publishing and research incentives. | |||
Research is suffering from poor incentives mismatched to human values. We see this in the replication crisis and ... . Problems are fine. But we should also end positive: we can build something new that doesn't just halt the erosion of traditional institutions, but actually improves them. | Research is suffering from poor incentives mismatched to human values. We see this in the replication crisis and ... . Problems are fine. But we should also end positive: we can build something new that doesn't just halt the erosion of traditional institutions, but actually improves them. | ||
=== Q: How do you solve that? === | |||
Q: How do you solve that? | |||
A: We're using the same technology that has been undermining the global institution of science to help fix it. | A: We're using the same technology that has been undermining the global institution of science to help fix it. | ||
=== Q: What technology? How can you improve the global institution of science?? === | |||
Q: What technology? How can you improve the global institution of science?? | |||
A: There are new tools available to humanity. Public key cryptography and peer-to-peer tech including blockchain, distributed hash tables, and smart contracts allow decentralized accounting and collaboration on a previously unimagined global scale. | A: There are new tools available to humanity. Public key cryptography and peer-to-peer tech including blockchain, distributed hash tables, and smart contracts allow decentralized accounting and collaboration on a previously unimagined global scale. | ||
These tools allow us to build networks that empower the communities they serve, because their members are in charge. So these networks can be driven primarily by the desire to promote scientific knowledge and discovery, with profit as a secondary concern. | These tools allow us to build networks that empower the communities they serve, because their members are in charge. So these networks can be driven primarily by the desire to promote scientific knowledge and discovery, with profit as a much lower secondary concern compared with contemporary dominant scientific publishing platforms. | ||
Q: How | === Q: How, specifically? What are the details of this plan? === | ||
A: We are using new techniques for building DAO architectures for decentralized governance.<ref>Craig Calcaterra (2018 May 24) "On-Chain Governance of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations" SSRN: <nowiki>https://ssrn.com/abstract=3188374</nowiki> or <nowiki>http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3188374</nowiki> (Retrieved 2023 April 11)</ref> This allows an open, reputation-based<ref>Craig Calcaterra & Wulf Kaal & Vlad Andrei (2018 February 18) "Blockchain Infrastructure for Measuring Domain Specific Reputation in Autonomous Decentralized and Anonymous Systems", University of St. Thomas (Minnesota) Legal Studies Research Paper No. 18-11, Available at SSRN: <nowiki>https://ssrn.com/abstract=3125822</nowiki> or <nowiki>http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3125822</nowiki> (Retrieved 2023 April 11)</ref>, global network to collaborate toward our common goals and maintain our values, while protecting the individual rights of our members. | |||
=== Q: How do I start? === | |||
A: You can't. Yet. We're still building the platform. But we're seeking future members. We can use your help in advertising the idea to your colleagues. Discuss the importance of solving these problems. We need developers to improve the UIs and testers during beta release. | A: You can't. Yet. We're still building the platform. But we're seeking future members. We can use your help in advertising the idea to your colleagues. Discuss the importance of solving these problems. We need developers to improve the UIs and testers during beta release. | ||
= More details = | = More details = | ||
*[[DAO Governance Framework project|DGF project]] | |||
*[https://gitlab.com/dao-governance-framework/%20%20See%20Also Gitlab Repo] | |||
*[[DAO Governance Framework|DGF]] | |||
*[[Main Page|DGF Wiki]] | |||
*[[Governance Philosophy|Governance philosophy]] | |||
*[[Guiding Principles|Guiding principles]] | |||
[ | ** [[Guiding principles#Individual code of conduct guidelines|Individual code of conduct]] | ||
**[[Guiding Principles#Group governance code of conduct|Group governance code of conduct]] | |||
*[[Contributors guide]] | |||
*[[Ethical Considerations|Ethical considerations]] | |||
# | *[[Governance Philosophy|Governance philosophy]] | ||
= References = | |||
Latest revision as of 14:32, 12 September 2023
SDF: "We're building an open, merit-based democracy for the science community."[edit | edit source]
Q: How?[edit | edit source]
A: We're building a decentralized platform for science publishing. It's a place to collaborate, learn, share knowledge, review papers, debate, and earn credit for your contributions. It's an improvement on traditional journals and academic research organizations.
Q: Why are you building it?[edit | edit source]
A: ?? list problems with science publishing and research incentives. Instead of decentralizing power, the internet has led to the erosion of traditional, smaller local scientific societies. Diverse journals for specific subjects in science have been centralized behind the control of a few, big, for-profit publishers, such as Elsevier and JSTOR. Even larger journals, such as Nature, have been driven toward a greater focus on business profit over science curation and education.
Research is suffering from poor incentives mismatched to human values. We see this in the replication crisis and ... . Problems are fine. But we should also end positive: we can build something new that doesn't just halt the erosion of traditional institutions, but actually improves them.
Q: How do you solve that?[edit | edit source]
A: We're using the same technology that has been undermining the global institution of science to help fix it.
Q: What technology? How can you improve the global institution of science??[edit | edit source]
A: There are new tools available to humanity. Public key cryptography and peer-to-peer tech including blockchain, distributed hash tables, and smart contracts allow decentralized accounting and collaboration on a previously unimagined global scale.
These tools allow us to build networks that empower the communities they serve, because their members are in charge. So these networks can be driven primarily by the desire to promote scientific knowledge and discovery, with profit as a much lower secondary concern compared with contemporary dominant scientific publishing platforms.
Q: How, specifically? What are the details of this plan?[edit | edit source]
A: We are using new techniques for building DAO architectures for decentralized governance.[1] This allows an open, reputation-based[2], global network to collaborate toward our common goals and maintain our values, while protecting the individual rights of our members.
Q: How do I start?[edit | edit source]
A: You can't. Yet. We're still building the platform. But we're seeking future members. We can use your help in advertising the idea to your colleagues. Discuss the importance of solving these problems. We need developers to improve the UIs and testers during beta release.
More details[edit | edit source]
- DGF project
- Gitlab Repo
- DGF
- DGF Wiki
- Governance philosophy
- Guiding principles
- Contributors guide
- Ethical considerations
- Governance philosophy
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ Craig Calcaterra (2018 May 24) "On-Chain Governance of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations" SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3188374 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3188374 (Retrieved 2023 April 11)
- ↑ Craig Calcaterra & Wulf Kaal & Vlad Andrei (2018 February 18) "Blockchain Infrastructure for Measuring Domain Specific Reputation in Autonomous Decentralized and Anonymous Systems", University of St. Thomas (Minnesota) Legal Studies Research Paper No. 18-11, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3125822 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3125822 (Retrieved 2023 April 11)