I agree with you @d3f4ult that this is an important topic but don’t exactly see why hardware devices would solve that challenge.
The reason being that you can easily buy 20 saga phones (which happened according to several posts on twitter and is especially easy if the tokens on the phone pay for the phone itself [no risk]).
Also, as @worza mentioned, you have the centralization risk of the manufacturer (although this might be less relevant to the overall issue).
As a solution to this I think about the following
Assumption 1: Each individual user has limited time
Assumption 2: Generally, the more valuable a contribution, the more time it takes
Assumption 3: Contributions are visible
Assumption 4: Visible contributions can be linked to personas (i.e., the sum of online accounts and their respecitve contributions) and personas can be linked to wallets
Conclusion: Instead of a “one token, one vote” or in this case a “one phone, one vote” basis, in DAOs the amount of time spent on providing value is the criteria to be considered “more legit” instead of “more fraudulent”.
In other words: “social proof of work”.
But who decides on the “more or less legit-ness”?
- first the core team
- at some point the ones that achieve a high enough contribution score
This makes sense from a psychological perspective too: The more sunk costs you have the more likely you are to stay and contribute even more.
Opinions?