3 ms·

> "Smart contracts". All (democratic) countries have courts in place to settle legistlative disputes between two parties. The case for smart contracts is, you

> "Smart contracts". All (democratic) countries have courts in place to settle legistlative disputes between two parties. The case for smart contracts is, you can't have disputes. No need for attorneys, that will bleed you dry. It does not add an additional layer, instead it removes them all and becomes the sole layer.

acdha 5y ago
Who writes those contracts? Who debugs them? Who settles disputes if one the parties feels that the other isn’t honoring them? This replaces attorneys by creating attorney-programmers who charge more and have less recourse when someone makes a mistake.
- mindcandy 5y ago
  The assumption that smart contracts are going to cost more than attorneys is presumptive. For the common cases, open source contracts will be inevitable. This will give the world’s poorest options that were never available before.
  - acdha 5y ago
    Kind of like the way standard contracts have been available for many common needs for many decades? Remember, there’s no reason why you can’t have open source contracts now - the challenge is that knowledge of the law is not trivial and liability is a very real concern (want to risk being charged with practicing law without a license?). Adding a separate source of problems might distract from that but it doesn’t make the hard problem go away.
pgesmm 5y ago
Suppose we two make a "smart contract": I say I pay 100k, you say you sell me a functional car. Let's say you then deliver a broken car. Now what? How can't we have disputes, we did a "smart contract"?
- mindcandy 5y ago
  You and I can agree on an independent 3rd party as a notary. If within a six months of the sale both you and the notary sign off that the deal was not fulfilled (the car is junk), you get the $100k back. That means I can’t spend the $100k directly for six months. But, I can easily take out a six month loan against it. That way it’s liquid for me and still safe for you. The loan agent is taking on the risk in exchange for the interest.
  - pgesmm 5y ago
    Good point, but are cryptocurrencies then needed (adding currency trafo risks)? Further, how do you select the trusted 3rd party--can't you get screwed here if there are "multiple" 3rd party notaries? As far as I can see, you can't get rid of some "central" authority
    - mindcandy 5y ago
      At some point you have to trust somebody. Who is more trustworthy for your situation: a government agent, a financial officer or some reputation service? Think about that as someone in a third world country...
      - pgesmm 5y ago
        It's not that simple. Have you ever had to do anything with real legal complex matters? For example for patent suits, I am not sure if I didn't prefer a qualified and experienced set of judges over an anonymous hobby crypto arbitration court.. Don't kid yourself, you can get (and will) screwed in every which way. I also don't know much, but I think there is a lot a lot of illusion going on about "smart contracts"
  - acdha 5y ago
    What value does the smart contract add in this situation? Every part of that arrangement could has been done for thousands of years. What are you really getting to balance the extra expense and risk required to use a blockchain? If the answer is “corrupt third world countries” ask yourself why the demand is driven by affluent Americans trying to sell things, and how effective “but it’ll go down on your permanent record! In a different country!” will be when the local capo’s buddy tells the notary the car was fine when you bought it.

acdha 5y ago

Who writes those contracts? Who debugs them? Who settles disputes if one the parties feels that the other isn’t honoring them? This replaces attorneys by creating attorney-programmers who charge more and have less recourse when someone makes a mistake.

mindcandy 5y ago
The assumption that smart contracts are going to cost more than attorneys is presumptive. For the common cases, open source contracts will be inevitable. This will give the world’s poorest options that were never available before.
- acdha 5y ago
  Kind of like the way standard contracts have been available for many common needs for many decades? Remember, there’s no reason why you can’t have open source contracts now - the challenge is that knowledge of the law is not trivial and liability is a very real concern (want to risk being charged with practicing law without a license?). Adding a separate source of problems might distract from that but it doesn’t make the hard problem go away.

pgesmm 5y ago

Suppose we two make a "smart contract": I say I pay 100k, you say you sell me a functional car. Let's say you then deliver a broken car. Now what? How can't we have disputes, we did a "smart contract"?

mindcandy 5y ago
You and I can agree on an independent 3rd party as a notary. If within a six months of the sale both you and the notary sign off that the deal was not fulfilled (the car is junk), you get the $100k back. That means I can’t spend the $100k directly for six months. But, I can easily take out a six month loan against it. That way it’s liquid for me and still safe for you. The loan agent is taking on the risk in exchange for the interest.
- pgesmm 5y ago
  Good point, but are cryptocurrencies then needed (adding currency trafo risks)? Further, how do you select the trusted 3rd party--can't you get screwed here if there are "multiple" 3rd party notaries? As far as I can see, you can't get rid of some "central" authority
  - mindcandy 5y ago
    At some point you have to trust somebody. Who is more trustworthy for your situation: a government agent, a financial officer or some reputation service? Think about that as someone in a third world country...
    - pgesmm 5y ago
      It's not that simple. Have you ever had to do anything with real legal complex matters? For example for patent suits, I am not sure if I didn't prefer a qualified and experienced set of judges over an anonymous hobby crypto arbitration court.. Don't kid yourself, you can get (and will) screwed in every which way. I also don't know much, but I think there is a lot a lot of illusion going on about "smart contracts"
- acdha 5y ago
  What value does the smart contract add in this situation? Every part of that arrangement could has been done for thousands of years. What are you really getting to balance the extra expense and risk required to use a blockchain? If the answer is “corrupt third world countries” ask yourself why the demand is driven by affluent Americans trying to sell things, and how effective “but it’ll go down on your permanent record! In a different country!” will be when the local capo’s buddy tells the notary the car was fine when you bought it.