3 ms·

> all this effort to not pay lawyers to draft/read/interperet contracts due to "legalese" only to write contracts in programing languages no one can read and un

by Shorel 9y ago

> all this effort to not pay lawyers to draft/read/interperet contracts due to "legalese" only to write contracts in programing languages no one can read and understand....see the doa contract which was misread by the founders, by the third party reviewer, and every single person who bought in (except the party that stole $150m via smart contract). If that seems ludicrous to you, we can all stop using computers as well. Because of the potential bugs! In reality, there are startups that aim to process actual contracts with algorithms to avoid such ambiguities.

will_brown 9y ago
In reality these startups are already marketing,promoting and hyping "smart contracts" as something they are not. I have no problem with a dencentralized/distributed "if this, then that" algorithms but let be honest about its real life applications and its limits...and not call them "smart contracts" capable of replacing lawyers/courts/legal systems in order to sell the tech to investors who are uneducated about the technology or law. im not saying we should not use smart contracts (computers) because there was a bug in one, I am saying the tech is being sold as something it purports to be which it is not, and that is ripe for abuse. In the case of dao, assuming there was no bug and smart contracts really were capable of contract enforcement and preventing breaches, they never needed to collect investors money up front, yet no one ever stopped to ask why they did that, well when $150m gets stolen it becomes obvious why they wanted investor funds upfront before a single investment opportunity even existed.
- Shorel 9y ago
  No. Using algorithmic analysis of legal contracts is an entirely different approach. This startup has nothing to do with cryptocurrencies: http://beagle.ai/ http://beagle.ai/
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

by Shorel 9y ago

will_brown 9y ago

In reality these startups are already marketing,promoting and hyping "smart contracts" as something they are not. I have no problem with a dencentralized/distributed "if this, then that" algorithms but let be honest about its real life applications and its limits...and not call them "smart contracts" capable of replacing lawyers/courts/legal systems in order to sell the tech to investors who are uneducated about the technology or law. im not saying we should not use smart contracts (computers) because there was a bug in one, I am saying the tech is being sold as something it purports to be which it is not, and that is ripe for abuse. In the case of dao, assuming there was no bug and smart contracts really were capable of contract enforcement and preventing breaches, they never needed to collect investors money up front, yet no one ever stopped to ask why they did that, well when $150m gets stolen it becomes obvious why they wanted investor funds upfront before a single investment opportunity even existed.

Shorel 9y ago
No. Using algorithmic analysis of legal contracts is an entirely different approach. This startup has nothing to do with cryptocurrencies: http://beagle.ai/ http://beagle.ai/
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]