3 ms·
if you could 100% accurately and reliably model a contractual understanding in any kind of language, it would have been done eons ago. human language (i'm fond
by beachstartup 10y ago
if you could 100% accurately and reliably model a contractual understanding in any kind of language, it would have been done eons ago. human language (i'm fond of english in particular), is extremely expressive.
but there's a reason we still have courts and judges. it's because language is the tool through which humans express their desires and fears (computer language included, because it is written by humans, so far), it's not a machine.
- tdaltonc 10y agoI don't think that there was any pressure to deeply formalize contrasts before this because even if you did, there would still be recourse to a human judge (not just a compiler). If one party didn't like the strict reading they could sue. The question that's playing out right now is "is there human judge behind the code." If a set of humans (miners and developers) successfully overrule the code, this will seriously undermine the whole premise of this project.