DAOUSDT
DAO Maker / Tether USD
crypto Composite

The "firsts" angle is underexplored. Most people think Ethereum's innovation timeline starts with DeFi Summer 2020, but the 2015-2017 period had way more creative experimentation per capita.
Just off the top of my head from that era: quadratic voting DAOs (April 2016, before Gitcoin existed), bonding curves for token transformations, on-chain governance with minority veto mechanisms, custom crowdsale contracts that deliberately avoided The DAO's complexity. All deployed by like 50 people.
The difference was nobody was building for speculation back then. They were genuinely trying to figure out what smart contracts could do. Some of the most interesting governance patterns came from joke projects because the stakes were low enough to experiment freely.
Would be great to see EthDenver talks that actually dig into that pre-ICO history rather than treating everything before 2020 as "early days."

TIL Ethereum had quadratic voting on-chain in 2016, and the DAO that used it is still alive

those early raises really did reset expectations around speed and simplicity, especially coming right after the DAO era. one practical check when looking back is to actually read the original crowdsale contracts and compare how they separated funding logic from token logic, you can see how security lessons were baked in.

Bisq is super cool! And it might have the only DAO out there that isn't a scam (it's not for raising funds and is not an investment, it's for managing distributed governance and handling of funds bisq generates through fees that are used for it's maintenance and development), and it's run on the bitcoin blockchain!
If you run a bitcoin node, consider spinning up a Bisq node as well!

Most people remember the 2017 ICO boom, but the culture started forming in late 2016 with projects like Golem and SingularDTV.
**Golem (GNT) — November 11, 2016**
Golem launched what was essentially an 820,000 ETH hard cap crowdsale. It filled in 29 minutes. $8.6 million for a decentralized computing network. The contract was deliberately simple by design. After the DAO hack a few months earlier, the team and their auditors at Zeppelin went out of their way to avoid complexity. No recursive calls, no token logic mixed with funding logic. Just "send ETH, receive tokens, done."
They also built in a migration mechanism from day one (GNT to GLM), which they actually used four years later in 2020. That kind of foresight was rare.
**SingularDTV — September/October 2016**
SingularDTV took a different approach with a tri-contract architecture: one for the crowdsale, one for the token, one for the treasury fund. Stefan George (who later cofounded Gnosis) was involved. They raised $7.5M in 17 minutes. The treasury contract had a 2-year workshop token lockup built in.
The speed of these raises changed expectations for every project that followed. Before this, "fast fundraising" for crypto meant days or weeks. After Golem and SingularDTV, everyone expected minutes.
**Why this matters now**
These contracts are still on-chain. You can read them, verify the logic, trace every transaction. Unlike web2 startup history where products get shut down and documentation disappears, Ethereum's history is permanently readable.
I've been documenting these early contracts at [ethereumhistory.com](https://www.ethereumhistory.com) — trying to build a proper archive before the people who remember this era move on. We've got about 40 contracts documented so far from 2015-2017.
If you were around during this period or remember other significant early contracts, would love to hear about them.

The on-chain credential storage use case is one of the more legitimate reasons to put something on a blockchain. Permanent, verifiable proof of certification that doesn't depend on your company existing in five years actually solves a real problem.
A few observations from the technical side.
The credential writing cost advantage is real. Storing a small credential record on Solana costs fractions of a cent versus the dollar-plus you'd pay on Ethereum. For high-volume micro-credentials this matters.
The 35-44 question assessments with 80% pass rate gives the certifications some weight. A lot of "credential" systems in this space are participation badges that mean nothing. Actual assessment with a failure threshold is better, though the real question is whether employers or anyone outside the Doggos ecosystem will recognize or care about these credentials. The credential is only valuable if someone checking it trusts the assessment quality.
The governance structure with a 9-seat council feels heavy for an early-stage product. Governance overhead can kill momentum. Most successful projects start more centralized and decentralize as they scale rather than launching with full DAO mechanics.
On the Slack integration specifically, enterprise IT teams are cautious about apps that move money or crypto through workplace tools. Your adoption path might be smoother with smaller companies and startups initially.
Our clients exploring on-chain credentials have found that the integration with existing verification systems like LinkedIn or background check providers matters more than the on-chain storage itself. The blockchain provides permanence but adoption requires fitting into existing workflows.

* **Stripe reports $1.9T in 2025 payment volume**
* **Crypto Dot Com receives conditional U.S. National Trust Bank approval**
* **Grayscale launches first U.S. Sui staking ETF**
Stay ahead of the curve 👇
**1. Stripe Reports $1.9T Volume in 2025 Annual Letter**
Stripe revealed businesses processed $1.9T in payment volume in 2025 (+34% YoY), representing \~1.6% of global GDP, while remaining strongly profitable. With 5M+ businesses, rising stablecoin usage, and new agentic commerce tooling, Stripe is positioning itself as core financial infrastructure for the AI-driven internet economy.
**2. Crypto Dot Com Receives Conditional U.S. National Trust Bank Approval**
Secured conditional approval for a U.S. National Trust Bank Charter from the OCC, paving the way for regulated crypto-native banking services. This marks deeper integration of digital asset platforms into federally supervised financial infrastructure.
**3. Grayscale Launches First U.S. Sui Network Staking ETF**
Grayscale’s GSUI is now live on NYSE Arca, offering $SUI exposure plus staking rewards via an exchange-traded product. Proof-of-stake yield is officially entering traditional ETF markets.
**4. Uniswap Opens Developer Platform Beta**
Builders can now generate API keys to embed swaps and LPs directly into apps, plus integrate via a new agent Skill. Uniswap is doubling down on developer tooling and agent-ready DeFi infrastructure.
**5. Solana Expands USDC Payments, AI DAO Control & Prediction Markets**
Solana highlighted launches enabling USDC bill pay via Altitude, AI agents with full DAO governance through Realms’ MCP, and new prediction + attention markets from Zora and others. Payments, AI agents, and on-chain capital markets are converging into a single composable stack.
**6. Circle Joins Agentic AI Foundation**
Circle joined the Agentic AI Foundation to support open standards and interoperable infrastructure for AI agents. With USDC and programmable payments, stablecoins are being positioned as foundational rails for the agentic economy.
**7. Kamino Launches Stablecoin Multiply**
Kamino introduced “Stablecoin Multiply,” automating looping strategies into a single transaction with up to 10x leverage and optimized routing. This reduces execution friction while keeping zero fees and neutral routing built in.
**8. Solana Mobile Surpasses 500 Apps on Seeker**
Solana Mobile highlighted over 500 apps now live on Seeker, signaling growing traction for crypto-native mobile distribution. The $125K MONOLITH Hackathon is also live, accelerating ecosystem growth.
**9. Step Finance Shuts Down After $26M Exploit**
Step Finance, once dubbed the “front page of Solana,” is winding down after a $26M hack earlier this year. Despite exploring fundraising and acquisition options, the team failed to secure a sustainable path forward—underscoring persistent security risks in DeFi.
**10. Polymarket Launches CLI for AI Agents**
Polymarket introduced a Rust-built CLI tool enabling AI agents to query markets, place trades, and pull prediction data programmatically. This brings low-latency, terminal-native access to on-chain prediction markets directly into agent workflows.

**That’s a wrap on this week’s DeFi news.**
Which update surprised you most?

**Source:** [https://x.com/defisensei7/status/2026893563540152690](https://x.com/defisensei7/status/2026893563540152690)
https://preview.redd.it/edx0wc0p8vlg1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=c425d3f70b9520ff31a3d7df84c877860aab4c02
The [@metaplex](https://x.com/@metaplex) App Just Changed Token Launches on [@solana](https://x.com/@solana).
There’s a new standard being set for capital formation on Solana and it’s called the Metaplex App.
This isn’t just another token launcher.
It’s a permissionless, fair-launch protocol designed to fix one of crypto’s biggest flaws: insiders bundling supply and sniping at launch.
Here’s what makes it different 👇
Instead of fixed-price sales, Metaplex uses time-based launch pools.
Creators allocate tokens to a pool.
Participants deposit during a defined window.
When the window closes, tokens are distributed pro-rata based on each participant’s share of the pool.
No early sniping.
No supply cornering.
No preferential pricing.
Everyone gets the same price. Everyone gets the same chance.
And if the graduation minimum isn’t hit?
Deposits are fully refunded and claimable.
That alone changes the game.
Season 1 kicks off with Spotlight launches from:
[@bankmefun](https://x.com/@bankmefun) [@beacon\_defi](https://x.com/@beacon_defi) [@hubraapp](https://x.com/@hubraapp) [@tashiprotocol](https://x.com/@tashiprotocol) There’s also a $250K [$MPLX](https://x.com/search?q=%24MPLX&src=cashtag_click) rewards campaign sponsored by the Metaplex DAO and powered by [@torqueprotocol](https://x.com/@torqueprotocol) (more details coming soon).
**Now let’s talk liquidity.**
All tokens launched through the Metaplex App automatically migrate liquidity to Raydium, Solana’s liquidity hub.
• Project tokens must allocate at least 20% of proceeds to dedicated liquidity, unlocked quarterly over one year.
• Memecoins send 98% of proceeds to liquidity, locked forever.
As Solana matures, more assets, not just memecoins will use tokens for capital formation.
**Metaplex is positioning itself as the end-to-end issuance platform:**
• Front-end
• Asset standards
• Dev tooling
• Fair-launch rails
Permissionless. Onchain. Accessible in a few clicks.
This is only day one.
But the direction is clear:
Fair launches > Extractive launches.
Solana just leveled up.
(This is not a sponsored post, i am obsessed with gud tek)

The Walmart DAO (Option 2)

Following the recent governance vote conducted by Jupiter DAO, I am requesting the publication of voting power concentration metrics for this vote and the adoption of a standardized disclosure framework for all future votes.
This request is not an allegation of misconduct. It is a request for reproducible governance transparency.
# 1. Context
Reported vote totals:
* Total voting power: 480,035,391
* Option 1: 118,730,351
* Option 2: 361,296,102 (\~75.3%)
* Staked supply reported: 835,191,751 JUP
A 75/25 breakdown itself does not answer the relevant governance to determine whether that outcome reflects:
1. Broad distributed agreement or
2. Concentrated voting power alignment
Without concentration metrics, the community cannot evaluate this.
# 2. Deterministic Control Threshold
To unilaterally produce a 75% outcome in this vote, a coordinated bloc would need control of approximately:
361,296,102 voting power
≈ 43.3% of total staked supply
Therefore:
If the top N wallets collectively control ≥ 43–45% of staked voting power and vote cohesively, a 75% outcome can be structurally predetermined.
If concentration is materially lower, then the outcome more likely reflects distributed consensus.
This is a structural property of weighted voting systems, not speculation.
# 3. Required Concentration Metrics
For independent verification, the following metrics should be published per vote:
**A. Wallet Concentration Breakdown**
* % voting power held by top 1 wallet
* Top 3 wallets
* Top 5 wallets
* Top 10 wallets
* Top 20 wallets
* Top 50 wallets
**B. Concentration Indices**
* Gini coefficient of voting power distribution
* Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI)
HHI in particular is widely used in antitrust and market concentration analysis:
* HHI < 1500 → competitive distribution
* HHI 1500–2500 → moderate concentration
* HHI > 2500 → high concentration
DAO governance can be evaluated using the same framework.
**C. Participation Metrics**
* Total unique voting wallets
* Median voting power per wallet
* Mean voting power per wallet
* Delegation clustering statistics
# 4. Snapshot & Reproducibility
To ensure auditability, each vote should publish:
* Snapshot block number
* Snapshot timestamp
* Total eligible voting power at snapshot
* Quorum formula and threshold
* Machine-readable raw export (CSV or JSON)
Without these elements, independent replication of results is not possible.
DAO governance must be reproducible to be credible.
# 5. Why This Matters
Weighted token voting systems are mathematically sensitive to concentration.
A high participation percentage does not imply decentralization.
A 75% outcome does not imply consensus.
Only concentration data can distinguish between:
* Distributed agreement
* Coordinated bloc dominance
* Delegation centralization
Absent that data, the governance system cannot be independently evaluated.
# 6. Proposed Standard
I propose that Jupiter DAO adopt a “Governance Transparency Standard” requiring:
1. Snapshot disclosure
2. Concentration breakdown
3. Participation metrics
4. Concentration indices (Gini + HHI)
5. Raw export for independent verification
This would materially strengthen governance legitimacy and differentiate Jupiter DAO as a leader in verifiable decentralized governance.
At minimum, every DAO vote should publish:
1. Top 10 wallet share (% of voting power)
2. Top 20 wallet share
3. Top 50 wallet share
4. Gini coefficient of voting power
5. Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for concentration
6. Number of unique participating wallets
7. Delegation clustering metrics
These are standard concentration risk metrics used in:
* Financial regulation
* Antitrust analysis
* Shareholder governance studies
* Market structure assessments
A DAO handling hundreds of millions in voting power should meet at least that standard.
**Note: This Is Not an Allegation**
The issue is structural: Without concentration disclosure, governance legitimacy cannot be independently assessed.
If governance is truly decentralized, the data will show it. If governance is concentrated, the community deserves to know that too.
Transparency does not weaken a DAO. It strengthens it. And concentration metrics are the difference between:
(1) a decentralized protocol and (2) a coordinated voting bloc with a UI.
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
I welcome feedback and would support drafting a formal governance proposal to codify these standards if there is community interest.