5 ms·
> there's no underlying system that can tell me to fuck off and that I'm not getting paid. You are right. This is why these things will not go anywhere. Ultima
by monkmartinez 10y ago
> there's no underlying system that can tell me to fuck off and that I'm not getting paid.
You are right. This is why these things will not go anywhere. Ultimately they need some kind of "back up"... For example, the system we currently have flows like so: Nation state Military > Federal Police > Local Police > Physical Intimidation via face to face meeting. At every step, stop when lawyers and/or politicians get involved.
- pavel_lishin 10y agoWell, you could have trusted third-party arbiters who would evaluate whether or not to release the funds on delivery of the good or service. But that brings on a whole new level of reputation-economy things you have to think about.
- monkmartinez 10y agoAnd how deep should that go? Pretty soon you will need arbitration for the arbiters. Has no one addressed the basic need of a justice system with these crypto currencies?
- pavel_lishin 10y agoLike I said, > that brings on a whole new level of reputation-economy things you have to think about.
- throwaway29292 10y agoHow about some image processing/object recognition by standardized AI interfaces?
- gukov 10y agoI'm thinking something like unit tests but for real life objects, eg. the chair has to have four legs, specific length, etc. Then have mechanical turks "run" the tests.
- vkou 10y agoIn other words, Eth and Aragon would work great, as soon as someone figures out how to build a strong AI that can arbitrate and enforce contracts? We already have an inscrutable, unaccountable, super-intelligent system that can do that - the courts, the police...
- joosters 10y agoThen what's the point of doing the transaction with a digital contract in the first place? Weren't they meant to remove the need for trust or centralised arbitration? We already have well-established mechanisms to arbitrate these kind of disagreements, e.g. courts. Adding blockchains to the process just makes it more complicated for no gain.
- mode80 10y agoA notable advantage of smart contracts is the flexibility to choose your own arbiter in advance -- a "chair expert" perhaps.
- Analemma_ 10y agoYou can already do that. Parties entering into an analog contract can agree to binding arbitration with a mutually-agreed-on arbiter (like a "chair expert"), instead of resolution in the courts. Again: what is being gained by smart contracts?
- UweSchmidt 10y agoA system could arise where things start small, and trust and reputation is built up over many transactions, similar to how money works post gold-standard. Then there's the idea of private blockchains, where actors already kinda trust each other anyway (transactions between banks) which may apply at some point. Gains would be mostly efficiency. However when I tried some Ethereum development my impression was that most cryptocurrency people I met just hope that the value of their bitcoins goes up, or that they can sell related products or services. Many things seem to be financed by cryptocoin-money (not necessarily bad in itself) to keep the hype going, but it doesn't feel like a movement that wants to change things. It's not like with open source where Stallman, Linus and many many other dreamt a dream but also built a lot of really high quality and important software. I don't see that kind of movement going on with Ethereum.
- tigershark 10y agowhat is that is stopping you to do the same with normal contracts? You can get the chair experts with a normal contract and a blockchain one. arguably much, much, more easily with the former one.