Underlying Platform for Futarchy on Aragon

#1

Can we use Augur Project instead of GnosisPM for our Futarchy experiments at Aragon please. I distrust this project [it shouldn’t matter what I trust or don’t] and that’s a problem since their oracle is based on… Trust.

Augur Project = Trustless, GnosisPM = trust-based.

Objectively, how are we supposed to achieve our goals with a system that relies on trust and not only that, is bound by US laws? I argue it’s a waste of our time and ressources. I’d love to be corrected if I’m wrong.

I understand tools are provided by GnosisPM to make it easy to leverage their platform to make experiments in Futarchy. My point of view is that it’s not because it’s easier that it’s where we should go.

(forum thread created out of this Twitter exchange: https://twitter.com/GustavMarwin_/status/1123261186068418560)

5 Likes
#2

@GustavMarwin

The use of GnosisPM smart contracts does not make the Aaragon Futarchy app centralized. These are open source smart contracts. The Aragon Futarchy app is not dependent on the Gnosis organization.

Level K is open to developing on Augur, but development efforts require resources. We’re open to any ideas on how to fund this effort or any information comparing the technical specs of Augur and Gnosis prediction market contracts.

2 Likes
#3

Hey @johnkelleher - thank you for your answer. My understanding of the situation is different than yours I think, one of us is probably wrong, and I’d be happy if it’s me.

You say “open-source smart-contracts”, let’s get rid of “open-source” it’s not relevant here. We’re talking about smart-contracts that are on the Ethereum blockchain, under the control of Gnosis. Whatever is under the control of Gnosis is under the control of the US Government. From there, can you tell me that, should there be a Futarchy (futarchic?) market on Aragon, that is illegal in the US, the US government has no way to shut it down or worse, interfere with it? To be clear, I’m talking about legal pressure here. I don’t mind them trying to interfere if it’s (more or less) through the same channels we can all interfere too. It’s really down to that question here. If the answer is not a clear NO, then we should seriously discuss the strategy here.

I care A LOT about Futarchy experiments, and I really want us to succeed and be in a position of strength when it come to this. Would you mind clarifying the (“back of the enveloppe”) ressources you would need along with a very approximate timeline?

Thank you again.

edit:
Or is “open-source” relevant in the sense that you are not leveraging the smart-contracts created by Gnosis and you instead have copied their code to create new smart-contracts yourself? If that’s the case, I suppose you are handling the oracle problem the same way as Gnosis and therefore it still is a legal liability, only in your jurisdiction, whichever it might be?

1 Like
#4

I think the key point here is that when one deploys an Aragon DAO with the Futarchy App (once it’s available on main net) to main net, Gnosis does NOT have control of these smart contracts. How a deployed DAO operates depends on the set up, but in general, the code powering it is a public good. A major goal of DAO’s is to be permissionless and trustless, and we’re implementing Futarchy App in a way that will encourage permissionless and trustless setup.

2 Likes
#5

This would depend entirely on the scope of the effort. Feel free to reach out to me on Aragon chat. My handle is @johnkelleher

#6

Ok I’ll simplify, my question was maybe convoluted: who is/are going to be the Oracle(s) once we deploy your Futarchy solution on Aragon? Will it be compatible (and safe!) with high-stakes situations?

As far as the budget is concerned I’d rather prefer you answer to everybody here, that way should an AGP get created out of this discussion, everybody has all relevant informations to decide. You can just skip this question for now though, probably more relevant if more people than myself show interest.

#7

@GustavMarwin

Just wanted to jump in quickly and add that the Gnosis prediction market framework is actually oracle-agnostic! It allows any contract implementing the appropriate oracle interface to be used as an oracle. This means that any oracle solution that has or will be developed on Ethereum can be used with Gnosis prediction markets.

2 Likes
#8

Noice! I’m looking at my recent tweet with boosted confidence, thanks! :crazy_face:

More seriously, that’s quite interesting, thank you for clarifying that @Eric_Gorski.
Could the Level K team clarify the following, since I believe they are the team in charge of this aspect:

  • Will their code be indeed “pluggable” to any Oracle system, particularly Augur?
  • What is the current plan, in term of what Oracle will be used at first?
  • If Augur is not part of the plan, would it be possible to have an approximate idea of the time and finance ressources necessary to get there?

Thanks!

#9

@GustavMarwin @Eric_Gorski Level K just updated a proposal to build an Oracle Manager App for Aragon (and to also launch futarchy signaling markets): https://github.com/aragon/nest/issues/158

The Oracle Manager App will allow Aragon users to plug into difference oracles and even manage and blend multiple oracles.

The most immediate need we see for Oracles is for price data. We have been considering DEX’s like Uniswap to potentially be the first oracles we plug into, but at this point we are focused on developing the infrastructure to support decentralized oracles. Augur could definitely be very useful as an oracle! We would be interested in using it and also hope the Aragon Oracle Manager app will enable other teams to leverage Augur as well.

3 Likes
#10

I couldn’t disagree more. It’s crucially relevant. Being open source allows you to inspect the code, to see for instance “who controls what” and also to deploy it yourself.

I think everything has already been answered, but to make it even more clear, this is the most relevant part of the code regarding the “centralization” or trust-based issue:

(@johnkelleher or anybody from LevelK, correct me if I’m wrong)

As you can see this is indeed centralized but not controlled by Gnosis at all. It’s controlled by whoever deploys it (isOwner) (I’m not aware of what’s wrong with Gnosis, but it doesn’t matter, precisely because we are just using their open source code, not any infrastructure controlled by them).
You can perfectly take this code and deploy your instance of a Futarchy app with your own instance of the Oracle, which would be centralized… but controlled by you, not by Gnosis.
The idea of a decentralized source (Uniswap for instance) was there from the very beginning, as you can see here.
Due to some funding cut, this was dropped, but as @johnkelleher said there’s a proposal to add the missing pieces.

4 Likes
#11

@johnkelleher: thank you very much for your answer. I do feel very much relieved thanks to it, as I was quite concerned we were heading in a direction that could get us stuck later on. Looking forward to your progress on the implementation of Futarchy on Aragon.

@bingen: I didn’t mean “open-source” was irrelevant in the sense that it doesn’t matter as a whole, rather to the conversation. smart-contracts are inherently open-source. I was just trying to discard what wasn’t necessary as we were still trying understand each others at that point. But yes, absolutely, as a whole, open-source is critical. – Thank you very much for clarifying all those details. Sorry if all this was obvious to everyone but I’m glad to see we’re heading in a very good direction. :+1:

2 Likes