5 ms·

You've obviously never heard of extradition have you?

by bunkydoo 10y ago

aminok 10y ago
The US doesn't rule the world (yet).
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  We don't and never will. Does that mean that US law is irrelevant? From from it.
  - aminok 10y ago
    US law is not applicable in some countries, because they maintain independence from the US legal system.
  - gst 10y ago
    Yes - US law is pretty irrelevant for most people who live outside the US and who don't do business with the US. How relevant is China's law for an US citizen who doesn't leave the country?
darawk 10y ago
No country is going to extradite one of its own citizens for selling a financial product that doesn't happen to be approved by the US SEC and isn't a ponzi scheme / scam (the DAO may be a lot of things, but it is likely not an explicit confidence scheme). Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of countries who won't extradite to the US for any reason.
- ubernostrum 10y ago
  Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of countries who won't extradite to the US for any reason. Try setting up a business in one of them and let me know how you like the environment.
  - darawk 10y ago
    You're missing the point. The DAO does not care about the business climate of any particular country. The curators can reside in any country in the world and finance any company anywhere in the world.
    - ubernostrum 10y ago
      So, set up in a repressive place with no extradition to the US, and see how well the "we operate under magical Internet law, it means you can't touch us" defense works there.
      - darawk 10y ago
        Are you serious? Take a look around eastern europe. Take a look at international pharmacies that ship prescription drugs into the US. Take a look at chinese labs that ship research chemicals (recreational drugs) into the US. There are tons of examples of this happening in practice, in the real world, right now. All you have to do is look.
- zekevermillion 10y ago
  But I am speaking exactly of the scenario where a dao project curator/contractor is perpetrating a financial crime. In that case, most countries would in fact extradite. If that's even necessary. I mention US laws not b/c I'm in favor of US imperialism but b/c I am familiar with these laws. I'm sure that there are other relevant jurisdictions that would frown upon financial crimes regardless of new age window dressing.
  - darawk 10y ago
    I don't think it's clear that the DAO represents a 'financial crime'. Especially not on the part of the curators. It is an unregulated, unlicensed investment vehicle, but it's certainly not predatory, and especially not on the part of the curators (who are the only arrestable individuals).
    - zekevermillion 10y ago
      The problem as I see it is that a curator could be affiliated with a contractor, and the same person could also hold a large stake of tokens. At some point the dao is not truly decentralized, and the parties with the power to influence voting decisions for their own benefit do not disclose this conflict.
      - darawk 10y ago
        Ya that's certainly a possibility. Of course, in such a situation, the curator could be fired. However, you face the same issue in any publicly traded corporation, but with even less recourse for the shareholders. Don't get me wrong, even though i'm invested in the DAO a bit, I fully expect there will be serious disasters like this along the way. I'm not blind to how overwhelmingly likely it is that at least some people will run off with at least some of the money they get. But I do think these issues will get shaken out over time. And then we'll simply be left with: is it a good idea to let the wisdom of crowds make investment decisions? (also, likely the answer here is an emphatic: no, but it'll be interesting to find out).
  - gst 10y ago

You've obviously never heard of extradition have you?

aminok 10y ago

The US doesn't rule the world (yet).

zekevermillion 10y ago
We don't and never will. Does that mean that US law is irrelevant? From from it.
- aminok 10y ago
  US law is not applicable in some countries, because they maintain independence from the US legal system.
- gst 10y ago
  Yes - US law is pretty irrelevant for most people who live outside the US and who don't do business with the US. How relevant is China's law for an US citizen who doesn't leave the country?

darawk 10y ago

No country is going to extradite one of its own citizens for selling a financial product that doesn't happen to be approved by the US SEC and isn't a ponzi scheme / scam (the DAO may be a lot of things, but it is likely not an explicit confidence scheme). Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of countries who won't extradite to the US for any reason.

ubernostrum 10y ago
Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of countries who won't extradite to the US for any reason. Try setting up a business in one of them and let me know how you like the environment.
- darawk 10y ago
  You're missing the point. The DAO does not care about the business climate of any particular country. The curators can reside in any country in the world and finance any company anywhere in the world.
  - ubernostrum 10y ago
    So, set up in a repressive place with no extradition to the US, and see how well the "we operate under magical Internet law, it means you can't touch us" defense works there.
    - darawk 10y ago
      Are you serious? Take a look around eastern europe. Take a look at international pharmacies that ship prescription drugs into the US. Take a look at chinese labs that ship research chemicals (recreational drugs) into the US. There are tons of examples of this happening in practice, in the real world, right now. All you have to do is look.
zekevermillion 10y ago
But I am speaking exactly of the scenario where a dao project curator/contractor is perpetrating a financial crime. In that case, most countries would in fact extradite. If that's even necessary. I mention US laws not b/c I'm in favor of US imperialism but b/c I am familiar with these laws. I'm sure that there are other relevant jurisdictions that would frown upon financial crimes regardless of new age window dressing.
- darawk 10y ago
  I don't think it's clear that the DAO represents a 'financial crime'. Especially not on the part of the curators. It is an unregulated, unlicensed investment vehicle, but it's certainly not predatory, and especially not on the part of the curators (who are the only arrestable individuals).
  - zekevermillion 10y ago
    The problem as I see it is that a curator could be affiliated with a contractor, and the same person could also hold a large stake of tokens. At some point the dao is not truly decentralized, and the parties with the power to influence voting decisions for their own benefit do not disclose this conflict.
    - darawk 10y ago
      Ya that's certainly a possibility. Of course, in such a situation, the curator could be fired. However, you face the same issue in any publicly traded corporation, but with even less recourse for the shareholders. Don't get me wrong, even though i'm invested in the DAO a bit, I fully expect there will be serious disasters like this along the way. I'm not blind to how overwhelmingly likely it is that at least some people will run off with at least some of the money they get. But I do think these issues will get shaken out over time. And then we'll simply be left with: is it a good idea to let the wisdom of crowds make investment decisions? (also, likely the answer here is an emphatic: no, but it'll be interesting to find out).
- gst 10y ago