The core principle behind the concept of retroactive public goods funding is simple: it's easier to agree on what was useful than what will be useful. The former is still often a source of disagreement, but it's a type of disagreement where you could still get reasonably good top-level judgements by using some existing voting mechanism (eg. quadratic voting or even regular voting). The latter is much more challenging. For the profit-making sector, the best that we can do is to build out an ecosystem where people can create startups and invest in them, and get rewarded if they end up correct. So rather than reinventing the wheel entirely, we will create a public-goods-oriented version of the exact same mechanism.
To realize this, we use the mechanism of One person, one vote.> /emoji/twitter.icon If we retroactively fund the tax revenue of any local governments or countries with Results Oracle (= Futarchy), rather than Optimism's FeePool, we will allocate the Results Oracle decision-making power democratically, with one person, one vote. Investing in voting is a separate matter from purchasing Project Tokens.> "Market failure," as Kachiokun says, begins to appear when the right to vote for Results Oracle is not one person, one vote. This is when a few decision makers try to bribe or push kickbacks, or when decision-making power is given to the wealthy.> @shogochiaishogochiai.icon July 27, 2021