3 ms·

Why specifically traditional legal system? We have things like credit card anti fraud or arbitration courts that work outside of it. Of course these entities ne

Why specifically traditional legal system? We have things like credit card anti fraud or arbitration courts that work outside of it. Of course these entities need a way to enforce their rulings, but this issue is built into the traditional legal systems, not smart contracts, and can be changed (no idea how to do it correctly, though - just like we're not yet sure how to do smart contracts correctly). Also, saying that there is no utility because in some edge cases, a traditional system is required, that's like saying a computer is useless because sometimes you need to have things on a paper.

CPLX 8y ago
> We have things like credit card anti fraud or arbitration courts that work outside of it. These things are within, and subordinate to, the legal system.
- sandworm101 8y ago
  >> These things are within, and subordinate to, the legal system. Small point: They are not within. They are private arrangements in addition to the legal system. They are creations of contract between individuals and represent the wills of only those individuals. The legal system is created by legislatures and legal societies (bars), bound by ethical rules, and are representative of the people generally. The distinction is important. People should not think that arbitration committees or VISA's dispute resolution process is in any way part of the legal system. The legal system belongs to the country, to the democracy. Arbitration services belong only to themselves.
  - CPLX 8y ago
    I am no fan of arbitration agreements and the trend of avoiding courts for big corporations. But in this context, simply as a technical matter, arbitration is within and subordinate to the legal system. You can sue anyone for any reason at any time, period. The degree to which you might succeed depends on laws. To the extent a contract demands arbitration it's because it is a contract, which is defined by the legal system. The system of arbitration depends on those laws to be effective, and the backstop for it is always the courts. This isn't true in the reverse. Congress could outlaw or limit arbitration tomorrow. No arbitrator could dissolve Congress.
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      The contract is, by extension, guaranteed by violence. You can have private security firms. (I'm not saying that it's good or bad, just that it's a possibility).

CPLX 8y ago

> We have things like credit card anti fraud or arbitration courts that work outside of it. These things are within, and subordinate to, the legal system.

sandworm101 8y ago
>> These things are within, and subordinate to, the legal system. Small point: They are not within. They are private arrangements in addition to the legal system. They are creations of contract between individuals and represent the wills of only those individuals. The legal system is created by legislatures and legal societies (bars), bound by ethical rules, and are representative of the people generally. The distinction is important. People should not think that arbitration committees or VISA's dispute resolution process is in any way part of the legal system. The legal system belongs to the country, to the democracy. Arbitration services belong only to themselves.
- CPLX 8y ago
  I am no fan of arbitration agreements and the trend of avoiding courts for big corporations. But in this context, simply as a technical matter, arbitration is within and subordinate to the legal system. You can sue anyone for any reason at any time, period. The degree to which you might succeed depends on laws. To the extent a contract demands arbitration it's because it is a contract, which is defined by the legal system. The system of arbitration depends on those laws to be effective, and the backstop for it is always the courts. This isn't true in the reverse. Congress could outlaw or limit arbitration tomorrow. No arbitrator could dissolve Congress.
  - TomMarius 8y ago
    The contract is, by extension, guaranteed by violence. You can have private security firms. (I'm not saying that it's good or bad, just that it's a possibility).