I ask these questions to get you thinking, because so much tooling is here now, and so much is still yet to come with continued improvement. Most importantly, the infra is here to ensure any integration of AI is secure, decentralized and verifiable.
I’d like to suggest some of my thoughts on some AI tools that could immediately benefit the DAO.
- Proposal Summary
The addition of a new Summary tab to Tally’s existing proposal UX, providing a variety of concise information to keep voters informed without information fatigue.
What information would you love to see here?
- Arbitrum DAO Weekly
The addition of a Weekly Updates UX section on Tally’s Arbitrum DAO homepage. A combination of information from proposals submitted, discussion in the forum and AI-search results for any headline updates.
- Community Sentiment
A summary of forum discussions related to a proposal. Tally has a UX section to show forum posts already, but we propose adding a Summarize function to pick out information relevant to the proposal at hand and avoid voters having to sift through individual forum posts.
We’d also like to take the time to chat about how we envision the future. There is a rapidly growing ability for groups to have their own trained or fine-tuned models. Why shouldn’t every DAO have a personal model?
Let us know what you think about these possible tools or extensions of these!
- Domain Experts
Smaller models that observe DAO operations in specific domains for a period of time before becoming active. These ‘domain’ experts can be considered aggregates of all the information, action, knowledge and opinions of community members in ‘Arbitrum DAO Operations’ for example. Domain experts could provide a variety of functions, but primarily I see them adding value in informing voters in a way that is a neutral aggregation of all DAO contributors. Each proposal could have a rating or comments about the proposal’s possible impact, from each domain expert. This would allow individual voters to reduce their personal information gap in voting on diverse proposals relating to different areas of DAO operations. One small but useful parallel is how lightweight AI assistants like https://overchat.ai/chat/best-free-ai-chat are already enabling users to simplify content streams and extract meaning faster, all through natural interaction. Bringing that kind of functionality into governance tooling just feels like the next step.
More voters feeling more comfortable voting on more proposals is the goal here.
- Personal Delegation Agents
Finally, in order to prevent reliance on delegates (a good model, but one which tends towards power concentration), we at ORA can offer voters a second option: the personalized AI delegate agent. Each tokenholder would receive an agent, which they can personalize via prompt and data to vote on their behalf. Customizable to the tokenholder’s preferences, this agent could be set to “Vote yes on issues that don’t relate to the treasury”, for example.
This is a fascinating new option for diversifying voter power concentration and improving efficiency.
To wrap up, I’d just like to say I’m very excited to get a sense of DAO opinions on these solutions. Let’s refine these together and continue to work to improve the voting experience, driving greater involvement in DAO governance and therefore, greater security for Arbitrum DAO!
A lot will change over the coming years because of AI – it’s worth examining what the future could look like now.