Distributed Autonomous Consensus Platform
Adam B. Levine:
'DACPs are markets that specific categories of DACs trade on. DACPS tend to be perpetual, since the market always needs to be served while the specific DACs that live out their lives atop it will change over time.
Because DACs are purpose specific, once the purpose has been served the assets can be liquidated and the funds returned to Voiceholders as the DAC essentially buys itself out of existence." (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1854.0)
Adam B. Levine:
'Distributed, Autonomous Consensus - How and Why
Turns out this is not unique to finance, and in fact wherever you find existing, centralized legacy companies you’ll find a structure that is woefully inefficient for the purposes of performing the stated task. This is not to say these companies or their owners are bad, just that they are operating in an older and incredibly inefficient paradigm that we are no longer restricted to.
A legacy structure has the intelligence seated at the top of a hierarchy, automation serves to perform the will of the intelligence at the human level. This is why when legacy companies make cuts for efficiency, they cut at the edges of the network. Low level humans are the least valuable and most easily replaced parts, while to trim from the brains is to cripple your decision-making capacity which no intelligent organism would do. This all changed when Bitcoin introduced the idea of autonomous distributed consensus, automation at the center of the network and intelligence on the edges.
Unlike in a legacy company where decision-making authority is concentrated at the executive level, in a DAC(P) the decision-making authority is the part automated in that it has specific rules which are followed without possibility of deviation from expected form, and has no humans in positions of anything more than fractional organizational power.
Power and authority rather than being collected at the top is spread to the edges of the network by allowing VoiceHolders to influence the decision-making and priorities of the DACP proportionally with their Voice holdings.
If anyone can be blamed for the creation of a DACP or DAC, it is the VoiceHolders who exchange their Digital Funds for DACP specific Voice. Those funds are used by the DACP to hire contractors to create it according to a spec selected and approved by those Voiceholders. This is yet another reason why it’s so important the investment
The Game of DACs
Think of a service, function, cause, technology, wish, whatever. You must have a desire to either know an outcome or for a specific outcome. For the purposes of this paper we’ll be talking about “MUSIC, DACP”, “CONFERENCE, DACP” and “ RESEARCH, DACP”
DACPs are created through the articulation of a desired outcome (the pitch), those who agree with the sentiment send funds to the DACP (the fundraising) and after a value-threshold is met, the DACP acts to bring about the desired result. Funds that are raised during this process are not releasable until a majority of those who put the value there in the first place, or those who purchased their voice, agree to both the need for the expenditure, and the final product being submitted for reimbursement.
Because only those invested have a say, the dynamic will bias towards conservative use of the collected funds unless the idea really pushes forward the goal of the DACP, where it will get overwhelming support. Proposals to spend and the submission of solutions is a completely open and transparent process everyone can participate in (you do not need to be a voiceholder to perform a job for a DACP)." (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1854.0)