#Optimism pbc software

How the retroactive public goods funding DAO works While there aren’t any profits to grant yet, and details are still under development, we’re excited to make this commitment now and share the foundational ideas of our first experiment! We, the Optimism team, commit to giving all our profits made from sequencing (prior to decentralizing the sequencer) to public goods funding experiments, including the first public goods exit. With protocol generated revenue, retroactive public goods funding, and a Results Oracle, we will create a startup-style funding cycle for public good projects. We propose a mechanism to achieve these ends below. Would we see more vigorous investment and innovation on technology that maximizes community benefit? Would we see more nonprofits thriving rather than surviving? So… what would happen if suddenly, exits did exist for public goods projects? An exit determined by how much public good has been created by the project rather than quarterly profit.

#Optimism pbc software

Why toil building free software that others make massive profits off of, without any upside yourself? For many, it’s not simply about wealth, it’s about fairness. Given this, it’s not surprising that many of the best and brightest rockstar builders, even those who genuinely want to do maximum good, end up taking a for-profit path, even if it ends up compromising on the mission. However, for nonprofits, FOSS, and public goods projects, this “light at the end of the tunnel” does not exist. Exits create incentives for upfront funding, hiring, motivation and alignment through equity, a share in the exit. But they have one important advantage - the possibility of an exit. Startups are notoriously difficult challenges even with ample investment funding: the majority fail. It’s hard to get funding, to hire the best, and to persist through the hardships and obstacles of creating something great. It’s insanely hard to build an ambitious project with no business model.