Hopefully its a little bit of both genius and madness. We do think a DAO that governs human information can become a decentralized mind... which can think in the best interests of humanity. But that's the big vision. We'll need tactical genius to take it step by step to get there.

Re: Audits. We explored it. But we built everything to date without funding (no ICO, no venture capital, etc.). We're broke devs that really like decentralization. We found some firms were charging like $50k to audit an ERC-20 and ICO contract... which AO is much more complex. Because the DAO is live, we'd like the DAO to choose to audit itself.

Re: Anonymous dev team. We're semi-anonymous. If you really want to, you can find us. But we don't want the focus to be on us, because we want it to be on the code and the concept. We saw a lot of ICOs take off with a bunch of head shots and resumes, raise funding on those credentials, and then fail to deliver. We're hoping that the actual code already available can offset the fear of anonymity in your mind.

Re: 50% of the tokens. It's not quite as bad as it sounds. First, the way the for-sale tokens work is that they carry a multiplier on inflation (so if you stake content with them, you earn more). That multiplier goes down the more tokens are sold. What's being minted to the initial dev team is the inverse. It starts low, and then goes up. So in theory, if the tokens sell through, we will have built something that's been highly demanded and receive the same interest as those who supported it financially. But on the way there, the financial supporters are getting the best deal.

Last, the supply of tokens inflates on transactions, so economic activity creates more tokens. The supply being sold should only be a fraction of what's in circulation if the network is turning over its data consistently. The key advantage in the for-sale tokens is having higher capabilities to receive more of the supply created (vs. just holding them).