[an1sotropy]

ok but if GiveDirectly is doing good work, why not side-step the crypto-everything and spend your efforts helping people with IRAs to make qualified charitable distributions give directly to GiveDirectly? Or other ways of directly supporting GiveDirectly?

[balanceisgolden]

I find the idea of "Passive Philanthropy" revolutionary. This would be the first model to demonstrate such a concept. That alone is worth the effort IMHO

[AnimalMuppet]

For prior art, see "taxes".

I mean, yes, a charity that is 1) not a government, and so not subject to politics, 2) doesn't require continual donations because it is self-funding, and 3) big enough to do massive good... that combination is in fact revolutionary.

I'm just saying that government programs to help the poor, and even to do foreign aid, are kind of on the same model, except for point 1.

[Edit: I guess foundations are also kind of prior art. It's just that none of them are big enough for the kind of impact that Glo is reaching for.]

[an1sotropy]

Another prior art, and a non-governmental one, is tithing. Lots of religious charities use tithings in ways that combat poverty. Or they could, at scale, if everyone joined the religion.

[balanceisgolden]

(In the future, at scale) Imagine if foundations kept their funds in Glo. That would be a philanthropic force multiplier. They are doing good on the front end and the back. We aren't a replacement of any giving channels but we could potentially be a maximizer to any of them.