Decentralized Autonomous Organizations: A Conversation With Parsl’s Isaac Balbin

Decentralized Autonomous Organizations: A Conversation With Parsl’s Isaac Balbin

The following is an interview we recently had with Dr. Isaac Balbin, Founder, Chairman and CEO of Parsl.

What's your background? How did you get involved in crypto/blockchain? 

IB: I am a PhD educated RF and microwave electrical engineer that also holds a bachelor of science majoring in maths and physics. I am a successful entrepreneur, having sold my first startup to a listed company and have a lot of experience managing companies, development teams and major projects. I became involved in the blockchain industry after having been exposed to Bitcoin in 2017, and after finding it interesting, I delved into the technical underpinnings of it, where I fell in love with blockchain and its ability to reform our society and propel it forward with more efficient structures than what we currently use.

What value does your company bring to users? 

IB: My company provides relief to cannabis businesses by helping them manage their compliance requirements while also connecting them together into a unified force. By connecting cannabis businesses together, they are able to operate as a decentralised unit, and thus we are able to put together levels of supply chain intelligence that simply don't exist in the cannabis industry. It will allow the industry to be significantly more profitable, and allow it to be a beacon of light for every other supply chain on how to operate as efficiently as amazon does, while not needing to be a single centralised company.

Where do you see your company five years from now?

IB: In five years I see my company working with different cannabis businesses all around the world to create a truly integrated international supply chain the likes of which have never been seen before. I see my company as dealing with the suffering endured by people all around the world due to cannabis prohibition, in a revolutionary way that provides specific levels of compensation to specific people for specific levels of suffering. I see my company as being able to unite people for the common good rather than falling into the traps that are set by particular political ideologies, but by providing solutions that tread the middle ground in a fashion that is palatable and appealing to the reasonable, but silent majority. And I see my company as being able to help governments regulate an industry they don't understand, but which they are keen to be able to tax effectively, and to do so without stymieing the growth of the industry and preventing people from benefiting from the miracle of medicinal cannabis.

What are the most common misconceptions you hear about decentralized autonomous organizations? 

IB: To be honest, I don't really hear much about DAOs (Or DACs for some people) as they are not a well known or understood concept. I feel that for those who know what they are, the biggest misconception is that the management of an organisation can be done by a large collection of people. Even a DAO needs an effective management and operations structure behind it or nothing will get done and it will eventually fail.

What's next for decentralized autonomous organizations in 2021?

IB: 2021 should be a year for educating the wider public about DAOs and what potential they can offer people as an alternative structure to existing organisational structures. Alongside that should come some very significant research and development that explores such possibilities both from a theoretical perspective, but also from a practical perspective on how they can be implemented. Additionally, there are costs to running an organisation as a DAO, and those costs need to be justified from the benefits that they can deliver, and that's another thing that should be explored and discussed on a wider level. Finally, I believe that the different governing structures for DAOs need to be explored, as I believe that having your vote weighted by your investment would cause significant concern for most people who are used to having 1 vote for 1 person being the norm. There is logic and sense to allowing people who have invested more to having a larger say, however this needs to be balanced carefully so that we don't have a plutocracy.