It turned out many of the people working for the DAO were anonymous and nobody in the DAO knew or cared who they were in real life. They did good work, got paid crypto, everyone was happy.
When I asked “what about sanctions” he gave me the blankest look I’ve ever seen.
Yeah, in the same position I wouldn't care about those either and would give you the same blank look.
Economic sanctions are a political act, and I can think of many ethical positions (class, ethnic, religious solidarity, rejection of extremism, rejection of central economic controls, immediate humanitarian need for items that are sanctioned, etc..) that may lead someone to disregard them entirely.
A practical concern here would be security (not knowing who is involved == not knowing if they have alternative goals). I suppose they may have been trying to implement zero-trust development practices (can that even exist?) but that sounds like a great way to put a big fat brake on any work being done.
(Disclaimer: Never owned any crypto, nor have I ever violated any sanctions)
I can see why someone would choose to "disregard" (violate/evade) sanctions if they disagree, and I can see why someone would want to make what is effectively a sanctions-proof company. I just think if you're building a system ideally suited for, say, sanctions-busting or money-laundering or whatever, that you should consider the risk of colliding with the world of laws.
Note that it's not illegal to provide humanitarian aid or help in other ways. It's not even illegal AFAIK to transact, as long as you make sure you are not involving anything or anyone sanctioned. (But I'm not a lawyer)
It’s criminal to evade them as a citizen of the sanctioning country. That might be a lot of countries, it might also be only the world police USA.
The UN security council for example is considered to have a mandate to decree international sanctions against a nation. Here is the UN’s sanctions info https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/sanctions/information
That being said, I don't even think it is better. When you make active decisions to, say, help Russian goverment, you are not exactly coming off better then someone clueless doing the same.
I want widespread crypto, because I want to have the autonomy to initiate transfers myself, transparency of my accounts, easier back office, less payment middlemen, etc.
Yet I would like a state managed crypto (e-euro?) so that a fraudulous transfer, stolen wallet, etc can be canceled.
- We're in 2022 and I still can't have an API with my bank to analyze my purchases, I have to parse PDF monthly reports.
- I still can't automate my savings without a third party robo advisor than requires me giving my account credentials.
- I can't easily make FX swaps without a third party broker with 2 days wire transfers in/out.
- I can't swap without a brokerage margin account.
etc.
Centralized crypto? yes please, it's still better than the current state of affairs.
Not everyone lives in Europe or the US with fancy worldwide smart banking. Here in HK, banks are from the 90s. Crypto centralized would level the banking experience to the current century.
Why should exotic synthetic financial products only be the realm of Wall Street?
Please link to it so we can judge for ourself.