One of the definitions of governance in this interview which I find interesting in the web3 context is the one that relies on control theory. Control theory is a mathematical theory that is used in managing dynamic systems. It functions through a control surface which incorporates set points (SP) against which process variables (PV) are measured. Set points therefore function like protocols which decide whether or not inputted process variables are accepted or not. This paradigm is analogized to governance in the web3 space where governance protocols using a 'governance surface; either validate or invalidate actions.
Enlightening parallels are drawn between constitutions and blockchain protocols which are both difficult to amend, as well as between legislation and smart contracts, which are comparatively easier to amend. The need for protocols and smart contracts to reflect group values is emphasized. It is however recognised that culture is often more nuanced than what is captured in constitutional instruments and this will be true for the relationship between formal protocols and smart contracts. Generally, there is difficulty in capturing group values in both protocols and contracts and this results partly from the dynamism of culture and the inability to contemplate all circumstances when making rules or contracts. These points have been made in one of my earlier comments to the post ‘cryptoeconomics as a limitation on governance’. In that comment, (Discussion Post: Cryptoeconomics as a Limitation on Governance - #6 by BenjaminMukoro) I discussed the need to be able to capture existing semantics in code and to evolve these codes.
4 Likes