Agree, list two or three of the proposed new DACs as childboards under Alternative DACs.

Also list Social as childboard under General Discussion.

And finally list Proposed Bounties as childboard under Bountiful Bounties.

Finally, move this thread to meta section of the forum.

I want to know right away.

DACs currently have a set of metaphors and a few use cases that spring to mind whenever one tries to think their general nature. Could we enhance our creativity by looking at prominent components and perhaps develop a metaphor for each one? Furthermore, how do we evaluate these innovative DACs?

Suggestions welcome!

DAC analysis

0) Storing information.
    - Securely, and in a distributed fashion! Namecoin, torrent trackers..
1) Storing information-property.
    - Secure, distributed with unique, private access. Information as a commodity.
2) Consigning information-property to a set of rules.
    - Time lock information-property, gamble with it.
3) Exchanging information-property.
    - Trade information like a commodity.
4) Predicting information.
    - Predicts the answer to any question.
5) Providing (even empirical) information.
    - Data feeds; weather information, confidential information, answers to factual questions.
6) Using empirical information to create pseudo-empirical information-property.
    - Bitshares X turning the value of the dollar into information-property with the value of the dollar. Patent DACs turning ideas into information-property that can be invested in.

7) ...


DAC evaluation

My evaluation of DACs starts with:
1) Business Model
    - all dacs have one primary business model, transactions
    - so a business model is really a set of transactions supported
2) Profitability  (same business model can have different levels of profit)
3) Security Model  (POW vs POS vs Consensus)
4) Scalability
5) Economic Principles
     - free market, socialist, anti-hoarding, voting

..

Then there is the tools available to DACs:
   1) Market Mechanisms  (prediction markets and trading algorithms)
   2) Auctions
   3) Issuing Shares
   4) Dividends
   5) Nash Equilibrium
   6) Multisig
   7) Swaps
   8.) Options
   9) Interest

..

Perceptrons or Why Does the Brain Predict?

The brain is mainly a prediction-machine. It takes sensory input and through the process of perception figures out what sensory input will occur next. It does this by compressing sensory input in both time and space; if you see an occluded figure, you'll typically still recognize it. If you hear part of a song, you'll typically still recognize it. The brain has compressed the total figure and song, and will be able to predict its presence based on any fraction of the total information.

Why does the brain predict? To make useful actions possible. All moving creatures need to predict the consequences of both sensory input and the result of their own actions (output). This is why brains exist - to coordinate perception with action. At first, nervous systems were used to react immediately to stimuli, but over time the reactions grew to become thoughtful. At heart, the ability to predict the affordances of stimuli and the consequences of action are fundamental.

How do our run-of-the-mill IQ tests try to assess our intelligence? "Which number comes next?" "Pick the figure that completes the pattern," etc. Here we typically expect someone to complete a pattern on the basis of some limited sensory experience by means of finding an elegant way of compressing the given input where the unknown comes out simply.

There are also lots of patterns that are irrational in the sense that they cannot be compressed elegantly to reveal the unknown. To predict events in the world we typically mix these two forces: On the one hand we look for elegant, beautiful ways to compress the total information we are given. On the other hand, we are collecting a vast store of known patterns that exist in the world even if they are ugly (not easily compressible).

What can we draw from all this? First, prediction-markets should be seen as trying to complete incomplete knowledge in two senses, rationally and empirically, and never just temporally. Second, we should recognize that "incomplete knowledge" is a subjective feature that apply to limited perspectives, whether the limit be in intellectual power e.g. we can't compute the answer, scientific insight e.g. we don't know if it's empirically possible, or empirical knowledge e.g. we don't know if a particular fact is true.

I also want to mention that Perceptrons can take hypotheticals as input; IF x, then ?. This is what happens when Perceptrons are used to predict the consequences of the predictors action, it puts the given action as a hypothetical x, and then tries to predict what will happen. In this way we get the additional result that prediction-market also provides predictions about hypothetical situations.

How does one create a Venture Capitalist (VC) DAC?

A VC DAC will get money as input and intelligently spend them as output. In this way, people can put money into the VC DAC and easily get a return on their investment. VC DAC is the DAC of all DACs.

How to make the VC DAC intelligent? One way is to construct the VC DAC in such a way that the people who process the input most intelligently are incentivized to work for the VC DAC. Call these people optimal VCs.

It may be sufficient incentive for the optimal VCs to work within the VC DAC that they are given more purchasing power by the people who put money into the VC DAC. In this case, the people who invest increase the intelligence of their money, and the optimal VCs get more money to invest.

I assume here that it's better for an optimal VC to have 100 bitcoins that they get 50% return on investment from, than it is to have 50 bitcoins with 100% return. Is this true, or true enough?

Well worth paying some attention to the kind of organic movements we're seeing here. NXT is involuntarily having lots and lots of baby clones, and the process seems to be self-organizing.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=423647.0

Would be interested to hear what you guys have to say about this phenomena.

There are two open doc logs tracking the Angel Account Transactions.

One for BTC and one for PTS.

I suggest the larger community is given more insight into the overall plan for allocation of these resources. I think an open discussion on this topic will benefit us all, not just in the name of transparency and healthy curiosity: Spending the amount of money flowing into AGS is difficult and requires the kind of creativity a forum discussion may help provide. What do you guys think?

If this is discussed elsewhere I recant everything.