I am absolutely with you concerning attacks. I am definitely not worried about hive being attacked.
But my criticism (inspired by Vitalik) is that you could get worse governance decisions. For instance, a bad proposal gets voted in, where something is being built that is not worth the spending, because some random hedge funds with no skin in the game approved that proposal.
Now, I understand, this is not catastrophic. But still something that could be improved if we somehow manage to incentivize stakeholders to only make good votes.
Good votes as in votes that inherently have skin in the game. Hedge funds with small allocations and stakeholders who believe they can avoid lockups quickly do not have enough skin in the game to make good decisions.
But yes, I agree that we are safe from attacks.
The DAO pays out only so much per day, so the bad proposal needs sustained funding. This could happen on a smaller scale with the DAO, as there is far less HP needed to sway votes. It would make for some ruckus, that's for sure, and whoever was lending that HP could kiss their reps goodbye. However, to those that wouldn't care about their reps, just the returns, it would be an interesting attack vector. The defense would be everyone voting on the returned proposal; thus, the attacker would have to pay rent on HP they couldn't utilize in the way they wanted. Would be an interesting attack for sure.