3 ms·

>But again, the legal system is king. It doesn't matter what the computer says. There are plenty situation where you dont want or need or can have a legal syst

by noxer 5y ago

>But again, the legal system is king. It doesn't matter what the computer says. There are plenty situation where you dont want or need or can have a legal system to be king. For example: - Cross jurisdiction business, where there is no easy way to sue. - Lottery/betting like systems where the systems rules are the rules people agreed on and its intentionally that there are no way to dispute/sue anyone. - DEX (decentral exchanges) order books are public, participant anonymous or pseudonymous and settlement must be final and indisputable. If that's not the case you may as well use a traditional trading solution with a third party handling the trade. You can sue everyone then but you will have a really hard time proofing if the operator itself cheated. Also you have a middlemen who takes a cut for doing essentially nothing. And on top of that you also have the additional risk of getting sued yourself. I'm sure there is plenty more. It dont see why people keep trying to declare crypto systems or the traditional system to be the "winner" there is no winner there is choice and people pick the winner for each use case.

jayd16 5y ago
But you miss my point. There is no choice. If you are bound by a legal system, crypto doesn't get you out of that. There are situations, as you say, where crypto might be better than the existing legal void but that is the vast minority.
- noxer 5y ago
  But I do already have a choice. Ive been trading both on traditional exchanges and on a DEX since a few years. I choose depending on availability of the assets ofc as not all assets can be traded on both systems (yet) but I'm defensively not bound by any legal system when I choose the DEX. Its not just technically impossible to reverse a trade its also legally impossible. I have no clue from whom I bough or to whom I sold something and it may as well have been multiple parties for a single trade. There is no way to sue or get sued or revert anything. >... but that is the vast minority. How would you know? I just made 3 examples above that came to my mind who all bring clear benefits and 2 of them are not even legal voids. Lotteries/betting/trading are very well regulated but why would you choose to use a system thats objectively worse (cost of the third party) if you can have it without. I gain nothing from the fact that I could theoretically sue some big trading or betting corp. All I want is the system to be fair and cheap. I have no intention to sue anyone if I f**up and the fact that someone could sue me because his loses are my profit is quite frankly very scary. Who would want that. Or imagine you bet against someone and you win, but then you get nothing because it turns out the other parties played with money they dont actually have. I surely prefer a system where I get what I won and if the other party didn't have the legal right to lose that money the legal system can deal with the parties who stole it I want nothing to do with that.

by noxer 5y ago

jayd16 5y ago

But you miss my point. There is no choice. If you are bound by a legal system, crypto doesn't get you out of that. There are situations, as you say, where crypto might be better than the existing legal void but that is the vast minority.

noxer 5y ago
But I do already have a choice. Ive been trading both on traditional exchanges and on a DEX since a few years. I choose depending on availability of the assets ofc as not all assets can be traded on both systems (yet) but I'm defensively not bound by any legal system when I choose the DEX. Its not just technically impossible to reverse a trade its also legally impossible. I have no clue from whom I bough or to whom I sold something and it may as well have been multiple parties for a single trade. There is no way to sue or get sued or revert anything. >... but that is the vast minority. How would you know? I just made 3 examples above that came to my mind who all bring clear benefits and 2 of them are not even legal voids. Lotteries/betting/trading are very well regulated but why would you choose to use a system thats objectively worse (cost of the third party) if you can have it without. I gain nothing from the fact that I could theoretically sue some big trading or betting corp. All I want is the system to be fair and cheap. I have no intention to sue anyone if I f**up and the fact that someone could sue me because his loses are my profit is quite frankly very scary. Who would want that. Or imagine you bet against someone and you win, but then you get nothing because it turns out the other parties played with money they dont actually have. I surely prefer a system where I get what I won and if the other party didn't have the legal right to lose that money the legal system can deal with the parties who stole it I want nothing to do with that.