Today's NYT article on DAOs misses the big picture. DAOs are a groundbreaking way for people with shared interests to collaborate towards common goals, and can deliver unprecedented societal benefits if we cultivate them well. 🧵www.nytimes.com/2022/03/08/us/politics/cryptocurrency-dao.html

Because of the trustless nature of DAOs, people can collaborate with confidence even if they don't know each other.
We've seen an explosion in the number and size of DAOs over the past year, as well as the variety and scale of their objectives.

Every day, entrepreneurs and participants are discovering new things DAOs are capable of in web3 that other org structures can't match, including mitigations of intermediary risk like fraud and other problems that plague LLCs, C-corps, etc.

That doesn't mean every business should be a DAO.

DAOs are a critical component of the decentralized architecture that makes web3 so powerful. Where they are merely DINOs (decentralized-in-name-only), then obviously the trustless paradigm and other web3 advantages don't apply.

In order to progress, DAOs need i) guidance from regulators to reduce uncertainty that benefits bad actors, and ii) a pathway for compliance and legal existence. The paper we released (& the NYT linked) is one path that @a16z is pursuing on their behalf.