How each model solves the same problems
Instead of “democracy versus anarchism”, compare the concrete ways collective problems get solved.
| Question | + Model | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| How are decisions made? | Delegated UNI-weighted voting through forum comment, temperature check and on-chain vote with a timelock; initial quorum of 40 million UNI. | The Prime Minister is formally responsible for Diella; the Constitutional Court states AI cannot change who exercises public power or bears accountability. | |
| How are conflicts resolved? | Forum debate and competing proposals; no appeal beyond token votes; legal disputes handled through the DUNA wrapper. | Opposition challenged the decrees before the Constitutional Court, which dismissed the request on 8 October 2026; its full reasoning is pending. | |
| How are public goods funded? | Grants by the Uniswap Foundation funded from the treasury; protocol fees now used to burn UNI rather than fund public goods. | Aims to improve public-service access and reduce discretion in public procurement. | |
| How is AI used? | None in governance. | Chatbot and voice assistant on e-Albania; a procurement system tender was still being prepared in August 2026. | |
| What are the main risks? | Concentration of voting power in venture investors and large delegates, agenda control by Uniswap Labs, low turnout and regulatory exposure. | Unclear accountability for an AI 'minister'; no AI law yet; no published technical detail; AKSHI's leaders face a tender-rigging case.CLM-0359 |
This illustrates differences in design; it is not a universal claim about outcomes. Each cell links to mechanisms and the claims behind them.