Uniswap has already seen some difficulty enacting governance with the token, I wonder if spreading token utility out further would make governance even harder.
Meanwhile the full market cap of the LINK token can be dedicated to purchasing data and securing it when the staking mechanism outlined in their 2.0 model is deployed. No cross-utility to worry about spreading the cryptoeconomics around, it’s fully oracle focused.
May edit this with more thoughts as I further process the proposal.
Edit: As I outlined further below, my conclusion here is this both solves the issue in a lesser manner than Chainlink and also burdens Uniswap development with a specialized use not core to their product. This Augur arbitration model is not exactly a simple extension of Uniswap’s current oracle model, it’s a whole new economic system tacked on for one specific case.
Furthermore Chainlink is already solving this in the same way with their proposed two tier arbitration system that lets latency tolerant contracts (like what’s proposed here) go into an Augur style resolution (also like what’s proposed here) but the difference is that the security of Chainlink’s model has n^2 scaling with the value of LINK whereas the Augur/UMA model has 1/2n scaling.
So basically this seems like extra work for the Uniswap team just to result in something similar to Chainlink 2.0 but less effective.