Indeed, no one has claimed that neuron so far.
TBH I am not entirely sure about the gains from having this decentralized setup for your proposed neuron:
- The decentralized setup primarily makes sense if your organization consists of multiple people and you want to make changes to the setup of the neuron by threshold voting. If you control this neuron through a single other neuron, there is really no advantage in doing so.
- If your neuron votes automatically through a script on AWS, then the voting (which seems to be the important part here) is centralized anyway, even if you had multiple people controlling the neuron.
To me, this seems to be a case where the “right” setup seems to be:
- Have a canister control the neuron.
- Instead of hosting the script on AWS, build the same functionality in that canister.
- Give up central control over your canister by (a) blackholing it, (b) putting it under DAO control, or (c) letting the canister control itself.
That said, if you think this is the proper setup for your neuron, I don’t mind sending you the one I created. Just send me the id of the neuron that you want to control it with, and I’ll configure it so it’s from then on exclusively controlled by your neuron. (And you can then again change the setup so that it’s controlled by multiple independent neurons.)
Note that the NNS frontend dapp currently does not support neuron management proposals, so you’d need to be able to use your existing neuron from dfx or ic-repl in order to send management proposals.