0xb875badb…3309sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#25,819,323·view on Etherscan
fey---trade-with-superpowers
I’m against this $360k ask. While Wiz and Sam have history in Nouns, the structure, tech premise, and risk profile of this proposal are bad deals for the DAO.
The proposal promises 30% of trading fees to buy up to $540k of Nouns at auction. That isn't paying back the treasury. They take $360,000 of our liquid funds to build a private business, and then use platform fees to buy Nouns accumulating governance power for themselves while diluting the rest of us. If this were a real payback, the USDC/ETH would go back directly to the treasury, not into buying them more votes.
LLMs do not think nor do they understand real time market liquidity or macro risk. They are probabilistic next token predictors. Expecting an LLM to buy the selloff, not a falling knife by reading charts and news in a prompt window will lead to hallucinated trade setups and wrecked user portfolios. Calling raw LLM outputs trading superpowers encourages retail users to risk real capital on statistical text predictions, which creates massive reputational risk for Nouns when trades go south.
They explicitly state they are not providing a fixed budget line item for this $360k ask, it's essentially a blank check for startup runway. Furthermore, building automated AI trading tools for perps and prediction markets without regulatory registration puts severe legal exposure on the DAO.
We’ve seen prior treasury allocations dead end without generating sustainable revenue for the DAO(see Federation https://nouns.wtf/vote/229). We shouldn't be handing over $360k in unitemized cash for an unsafe tech premise with a repayment model that just buys the founders more votes.