1. I would wager a good amount of people working on DAOs would never have gotten a job at Google. This isn't poaching the top tier talent from FAANGS but rather unlocking an ignored pool of talent because they lack traditional credentialism. To wit one of our investors is a co-founder of Sushiswap. Knowing them I don't think its possible they would have ever been considered for a FAANG position.
2. People mostly just want to work when and where they want with clear objectives and a chance to earn a good chunk of what their labor produces. I would argue for many that having a decent equity stake in a startup that is worldwide remote solves for this.
I keep hearing about this war for talent over and over and even though we're functionally a nobody seed stage startup I've never felt it because from day 1 we've been worldwide remote and asycnh. People say they can't find developers but the last time we posted a job we got 300+ applications in less than 24 hours and probably 1/3rd were reasonably qualified. DAOs are fine. I think they'll exist to some degree moving forward, but it isn't the end all be all I think some folks make it out to be.
Just to prove my point: Look at the P2P micro credit market (which works in the similar direction and out of the scope of fed regulated money market) where it is no big problem to get 12% APY on established P2P institutions.
Due to the nature of p2p lending sites the sites often have incentive to make it look good for the investor, as for them any activity on the platform brings fees in.
I think it is pretty logical that if some place makes consistent 12% to have that lowered along the years as investors will find the good places quite quickly and start competing for the price.