AFAIK there's nothing mutually exclusive about using a service that requires identity (in this case, proof of unique human-ness) on a decentralized blockchain. In fact there are services that are actively working to create DIDs (like brightID, 3box, etc).
One thing I forgot to add: In pockets of the ethereum community, it is widely considered that having identity mechanisms that can be relied upon is one of the things that is holding blockchain services back from going mainstream. There are all kinds of applications (decentralized social networks, payroll, voting, etc) that could benefit from having an identity overlay on a blockchain network.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. But if it's that the identity mechanism on Gitcoin (aged github accounts) isnt perfect, then I think you're absolutely right.
I think a more important question is "are the round results valid?" Vitalik goes into this in his post - As Vitalik notes in his post, we are certainly reaching the limits of our existing identity framework as more money/users get involved.
Identity networks are a chicken and egg problem. My view is that Gitcoin being one of the first widely/actively used Ethereum products (https://gitcoin.co/results) we have a unique opportunity (and challenge/responsibility honestly) to bootstrap a DID network.
Gitcoin's approach thus far has been to stop collusion from unsophisticated actors, then progressively get more organized (as more money gets involved, and as we learn from each round) about stopping collusion from more sophisticated actors.
can you give more details on why this doesn’t work in a decentralized setting? It sounds like the proposed collusion plan will be effective and if they need decentralized identities, those do exist in the blockchain ecosystem.
Noone has solved identity in decentralized systems.
Quadratic funding allocates a pool of funds based on the number of unique donors a project has.
The proposed solution will exclude a very significant portion of potential contributors. Vitalik hints politely on that by saying that there are trade-offs between security and inclusiveness...
You have done great for the community. You have helped programmers in Africa to get involved and exposed into something serious. You have helped to bridge the digital divide and also increase social mobility.
Thank you! But honestly its the gitcoin team/community that is doing it, I'm just helping the team/community coordinate at this point :)
Hopefully this (https://gitcoin.co/results) is just a start and we can build information age native institutions that support all sorts of public goods (Open Source Software being the focal point right now) at 100x this scale one day.
The proposed mechanism "assumes" identity, otherwise the mechanism is gamed easily. Which is what has been happening.