Like that you are talking about Oraclesā:clap:
. Been out of the loop with a lovely case of Covid but please loop back to me if you are looking for more team members. I am still interested in working on project!
2 Likes
@owocki been out of loop for a bit here with Covid but officially on the mend. Wondering if someone from Gitcoindao can connect with me.
Iām trying to figure out if my time is better used going for supporting role in the public goods discussion work stream or if I should just go ahead and try to get funding for my idea about using web3 tech to make Fair Trade more effective and transparent. (Could overlap well as a use case writhing the UN sustainability goals mapping)
Either way my background in international manufacturing and fashion activism would bring more diversity to the work around public goods and would appreciate it if I could get pointed in the right direction.
1 Like
My two cents: I think weāre at a fascinating inflection point in mainstreaming Web3.0, and the space could be ripe for disruption.
Part of this has to do with the fact that, as you point out, weāre nowhere near close to achieving the SDGs. At the same time, though, thatās been known for a while now.
I think a larger driver is that many āmainstreamā SDG folks have moved into prominent positions in the Web3.0 space. The SDG space is very technocratic and risk-averse; you need the āhundredth monkey effectā to kick in to see increased uptake of Web3.0 solutions.
2 Likes
still working on figuring out how to evaluate these. i would expect an update sometime in june.
2 Likes
Thank you. And yes can see itās a bit bonkers with āall the thingsā. But want to emphasize that I have sincere interest in coordinating and understand that reimagining the Fair Trade system is going to take some patience.
Maybe thereās a steward that can point me in the right direction?
Or go thru Kernal and come back later?
Update: we have had our first proposal review committee meeting today! progress, sorry for the stop & go pace so far folks.
2 Likes
Hi Kevin,
Iām a little late to the party but hope you and your team still see this somehow.
Iāve introduced our project to a couple of guys on the Gitcoin team at Funding The Commons New York a couple of weeks ago, and would love to get your thoughts here as well.
A quick introduction of the idea, the NFT project is called Fox Of Utopias, we were inspired by the Ukraine airdrop announcement which incentivized 3x more donation amount and 9x more contributor counts a week after they first made their ETH address public. Weāre trying to apply that process to various global causes selected by our community, hoping to start with Gitcoin Grants Round 15.
To address the attributes you mentioned
- NFT : The Fox PFP NFTs act as impact certificate to reward donors
- Governance : Holders of NFTs have a vote on which causes to support next, not with funding but with airdrops
- Buy pressure : The NFT project will still be an IP business, which would come with its own stories, content, merch and whatever attracts public attention, the more popular it gets the more incentives for donors to make a contribution
- Team : I built one of the leading music NFT marketplaces in Asia, founding partners are ex-Googler and award winning artist
- Gitcoin integration : Gitcoin rd15 donors are our intended first target for airdrops
We do a couple of things differently,
-
we find the task to fairly measure impact at scale extremely hard, Gitcoin can of course be neutral but probably not knowledgable enough in all areas that require measurements. Although fair measurement is still possible with a well designed government structure, it is a hefty task to kickstart momentum for impact certificate. Our solution is to simplify and focus on one variable, on-chain donations, which requires no human measurement, scalable and transparent we can just airdrop to them with no permission. This might not be the impact that you guys are looking for, but donations are still undeniably impacts, and the easiest place to start with.
-
We created a character and story for the NFT project. What weāve learned from the PFP market is itās almost always in some ways about self-expression, attaching oneself to a likable character that has a story to tell is more attractive than a certificate written in words, this also creates a desire to hold on secondary market.
-
To create buy pressure, we decided to leverage mainstream demand. One one side we do what other NFT projects do to create a strong community with storytelling and with IP building, on the other side because we chose high impact high net worth individuals to be our holders, we think we can create a focal point for other projects to provide WL to or utilities to our holders, as an acquisition strategy or as a charitable attempt to help the world.
All in all the higher the demand and price of these NFTs, the more incentives our potential target has to make donations, in that way we can help more causes reach their goals, while building a brand that does good.
Would love to talk to you and answer your questions if any.
Noah
Hey everyone,
Thanks for your submissions to this proposal process and for your patience as we evaluated them.
As you know, the market has shifted around over the past few months. I have been preoccupied with the many implications that that has on the work we do here. So that accounts for part of the delay.
The rest of the delay is accommodated by the fact that Gitcoin is currently in the early stages of forming a partnership with Protocols Labs, who runs the Funding the Commons conference series. You may have noticed that we recently did a podcast episode with them about the collaboration. Protocol Labs bring strong economic/ game theory/ design thinking to the table that we just did not have when we launched these RFPs. Checkout this talk from their recent conference to see what I mean. We have learned a lot from them in the last few months and leveled up our seriousness in solving these problems!
Weāve read through each of the submissions and given private feedback to many of the top proposals. Through the last few months, we realized that many of these proposals bring something to the table, but none of them completely solved for what we wanted to solve for. And after getting in touch with PL, we ended up very excited about HyperCertificates.
We would like to build a long term ecosystem where each composite part of this movement can contribute different components to a thriving interoperable ecosystem, but in the short term, we need to figure out how all these things fit together.
The components
- Gitcoin Grants
- Impact Certificates NFTs / HyperCertificates
- Impact Marketplaces
- Marketing
- Category Creation
- More???
As such, we have decided that the most prudent course of action will be to.
- Reward the top 5 proposals with a stipend of $2k each, thanking them for their time & effort so far. We consider this a retrospective reward for the time spent pulling together these proposals, but more importantly the value generated through the discussion and questions raised by the community during this process that significantly accelerated our thinking on impact markets / hypercertificates. We hope that the funds are used to continue these efforts.
- Have a series of bi-weekly calls in which we attempt to achieve consensus about how the composite parts fit together. The end goal of these weekly series will be to define a set of interfaces that interoperate with each other.
- Once we have defined the interfaces, we will revisit funding individual proposals for different components.
The proposals that will receive a stipend now are
- Digital Gaia (rkauf)
- Protein (willprotein)
- Ethelo/Ashoka (Ahmed_Lelamo)
- Impact Oracle (OrBlob)
- Crowdmuse
If you are on one of these teams, please send us an ETH address where we can pay you the stipend in the shared channel we created at the start of the collaboration. If there is no shared channel, please email me kevin@gitcoin.co
Even though this isnāt a grant big enough to implement the proposals, we hope that youāll continue your work and push this forward together with us.
Thanks again for your time and patience.
Best,
Kevin + the DAO Impact Team + Protocol Labs
PS - pls join the telegram continuing the discussion here Telegram: Join Group Chat
6 Likes
@owocki Hi Kevin hypercerts is brilliant, I believe this is to be an open standard we can build on top of? If we wish to do so, who would be the best way to push this forward? We also intend to work with Gitcoin Grants, which we hope to talk to Connor soon.
1 Like
Hi folks - Iām a founder of Crowd Funded Cures (crowdfundedcures [dot] org), which is a DeSci crowdfunding platform (NZ charity aiming to launch as Impact DAO), that will issue Open Source Medical Prize NFTs / Hypercerts to create demand for clinical trial data (using Moleculeās IP-NFT platform) validating the safety and efficacy of āunmonopolisable therapiesā (e.g. repurposing generic drugs as open source medicines such as generic ketamine to treat depression or fluvoxamine to treat covid).
I conducted my Masters thesis on this problem back in 2014 and set up a NZ charity to implement the idea of flexible Medical Prizes to address it. This has evolved into the concept of Social Impact Bonds and now, with crypto, I believe the Impact Certificate or Hypercert framework fits well. Basically, you issue an Open Source Medical Prize NFT / Hypercert in a specific disease class, which represents a bounty that is split annually or paid specifically to a research group that publishes a clinical trial validating the safety and efficacy of an off-patent medicine or unmonopolisable therapy.
We have a number of off-patent use cases, and reaching out to key stakeholders, e.g. am presenting to NHS Medicines Repurposing Steering Group on 26 July and have been in discussions with BARDA about backing a generic drug repurposing Advance Market Commitment / Pay-For-Success contract incentive of $50-100m. Also working PsyDAO on an Open Ketamine project to obtain FDA-approved generic (racemic) ketamine for treatment resistant depression, which has been shown to be more effective than the patented s-ketamine intranasal spray. As mentioned, above, another use case is FDA-approved generic fluvoxamine to treat Covid (like ivermectin but actually effective at only $10 a course, as shown in TOGETHER Phase 3 trial in Brazil and similar to patented molnupiravir that costs $700 a course).
We are also trying to raise funds for a feasibility study with a management consulting firm (e.g. BCG, McKinsey, Guidehouse) to show that repurposing either of these drugs to get FDA-approval would be worth billions of dollars in value for a relatively low cost ($5-10m Impact Certificates to de-risk optimal open source treatment protocol in Phase 2 clinical trials, then $50-100m PFS contract negotiated with government for Phase 3 clinical trials and regulatory approval).
We have a front end dev and blockchain dev, but if any folks interested to contribute in a high impact DeSci project, please email savva [at] crowdfundedcures [dot] org or check our our Discord (link at bottom of website).
Scott Alexander (author of Meditations on Moloch) just created a great post on Impact Certificates => Impact Markets: The Annoying Details - EA Forum
1 Like
Thanks for sharing, my thoughts:
- EAās are primarily funders and view issues through a funderās lens.
Hence it is no surprise that Scott and other EAs think of Impact Certificates as a funding/investment vehicle.
While ICs could be used in this manner, this completely misses the primary way to use ICs.
We should think of Impact Certificates as purchases, not investments. You can go to the store and buy a product. Or you can go to a charity and buy an impact certificate. An IC represents one verifiably unique outcome, e.g. one rescued puppy.
There doesnāt need to be any reselling or financial ROI associated with the purchase. Paying to rescue a puppy (and own the associated IC) is valuable to a dog lover.
- Nonprofit is no longer necessary or beneficial for charity.
The web3 public goods/charity space needs to unlearn the concept of nonprofit. Iāve seen too many proposed web3 public goods/charity funding mechanisms bend into pretzels to add investment dynamics to a nonprofit. Itās unnecessary.
If you want a way to invest in these organizations, there is a dead simple solution: make them businesses and then invest in them like any other business.
1 Like
+1; this is an avoidable cultural mistake that could be learned from the broader NFT community. My view is a bit more nuanced - IMO we need to tread the fine line of sometimes investing in ICs and sometimes purchasing ICs. Both ICs and NFTs in general recognize in theory that both speculators and final purchasers are necessary for a long-term healthy ecosystem. However, the broader NFT community arguably didnāt give enough love to the latter, and so is up until now largely Ponzi. While āPonzi for goodā is arguably productive, we could probably do even better.
One thing about making these more attractive for final purchasers: although the media/community/status/etc should be compelling, this ideally shouldnāt require significant amounts of skillful labor on behalf of every organization hoping to raise money (Iāve spoken to at least one org thatās noted ābut we donāt want to manage a communityā - and wasteful donor engagement is already a pain point of trad nonprofits).
Of course, one approach to āfinal purchasersā is to have them picked out in advance and flush with cash (a luxury that happily, some orgs have). Other than that these social planners should be decentralized, we must also ask whether it makes sense from a specialization standpoint to separate the āinitial purchasersā from the āfinal purchasersā (it seems likely both would require similar skillsets - and a lot of coordination/iteration can be achieved by having the same people do the initial action and the retro, as āagile teamsā do).
Finally, I believe the following āanti-prizeā pieces are worth us prize-proponents reading (for the purpose of steelmanning our own approaches):
https ://itif.org/publications/2020/02/03/delinkage-debunked-why-replacing-patents-prizes-drug-development-wont-work/
https ://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31217851
1 Like
A follow-up: I just came across this extension: Lit Token Access. I think itād be cool for Gitcoin and/or impact certificates to collab with some e-commerce stores.
For example, we could have Gold Sponsor, Silver Sponsor, Bronze Sponsor for contributing to the matching pool; Gold Voter, Silver Voter, and Bronze Voter for contributing to a project; Gold Seer, Silver Seer, Bronze Seer retroactively for contributing to a project that the community in hindsight voted to turn out highly impactful. Then partner stores could have different discount tiers (see this Vitalik post). Is it still āmathematically optimalā at this point? Probably not. But the increased volume seems worth it.
I think weāll continue to see really cool integrations of NFT/POAPs with Web2 services for āutilityā (the Twitter hexagon was another good one, and it sounds like Instagram is making a play as well).
For Grants 2.0 we could make it a core part of the stack to provide the tools & the network for any community to promo and build a viral campaign around their round. So we open-source not only an FDD stack but also an MMM stack.
4 Likes
Yes, there will be both use cases. I just wanted to push back on the investment tunnel vision.
Impact certificates are like donation receipts but 100x better. We donāt need to coax people to buy them. People already donate. Now they will donate and get the associated impact certificate. Impact certificates improve the donor experience.
The need to create a liquid market for impact certificates is unnecessary.