This is the novel approach we propose for foreign tokens airdropped to any treasury. Considering the existence of large decentralized governing bodies with effective measures to manage funds, projects and track results like Polkadot’s Opengov, Cardano Governace, Internet Computer governance and other large EVM DAOs and the precedent of token airdrops to important figures as well as to treasuries, we propose that tokens that have been airdropped to any on-chain treasury can have two different courses of action.

Donation or conversion approach & Outsourcing Governance.

Even to this day, no blockchain has emerged victorious in the AI race so it’s still an open game for all AI projects and applications looking for censorship resistance in their models. This type of innovation is still young and potential is yet untapped. AI is not JUST a narrative waiting to be exploited for token appreciation, rather a potential application that can take blockchain technology to the next level.

How would you feel if a referendum without any information, context, content or even an identity was proposed and passed through Polkadot’s OpenGov?

It turns out, this is a valid possibility under the current OpenGov rules.

when it comes to OpenGov, the vote is (on-chain) law and it doesn’t require a public declaration or a break of a “constitution” that all parties ought to abide by. The on-chain reality is rather simpler than expected where concepts like “social contracts” become moot in favor of the actual on-chain enactment of the token holders will.

As bribes are part of many governance platforms and gauges such as Curve and others, we have to be aware that bribes not only affect the outcome of a certain product over another one but also, can be used to hinder development over ideological reasons. However, there are some ways to avoid the fallout. Likely, even more than the ones explored here.

The idea that regulation is coming to blockchain technology is widespread. Many efforts at regulation are being worked on by authorities on many fronts. However the depth and complexity of this regulation (or over-regulation) is still cause of concern. One such case is the new work of the BIS’ Monetary Economic department. Where, despite, deep research on the topic, misses the mark on many points. Here we present the analysis of the paper and a warning for developers and validators of PoW and PoS blockchains concerning about the possible use of over-regulation in the field. Mainly due to the proposed recommendations: “to regulate validators and developers as financial intermediaries”.

The next-gen, zero-privacy, OFAC-compliant coin. With state-of-the-art identity tracking possible by our patented system where only the addresses with full biometric soulbound KYC’d NFTs are able to validate, transact and cash out

Governance 2.0 on Polkadot and Kusama. Massively democratic and open. However, there is one open question. Is it good to incentivize voters to participate in governance? What are the pros and cons? The exploration of how incentives are a continuum and not just a binary question with potentially many details to take care of as well as pitfalls.

"Hard forks cannot be the answer to controversy because it splits the community... governance is the answer." - Jutta Steiner