5 ms·

It would eliminate 1. forfeiture without volition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forf

It would eliminate 1. forfeiture without volition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...) 2. title theft/fraud (https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_foreclosed_had_no_idea_new_jersey/ https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_fo...) 3. Many of the needs for title insurance (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insurance.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insurance.asp) It doesn't need to do much else to be obviously beneficial. Keep in mind that once upon a time the entire internet functioned without https. I have no doubt many of the same arguments against crypto(currency, tokens) were also made against cryto(graphy) not long ago. A vast majority of users of cryptography still subject themselves to side channel attacks (stupid passwords, phishing) and yet somehow still benefit from the existence of https without even realizing it. Since a lot of people still get hung up on the need for a link between an NFT and an underlying asset, consider that we somehow establish the exact same kind of link between a fancy piece of paper (a title) and a plot of land. If you forewent some of the (imo misled) notions that blockchains need to be 100% "trustless" and decentralized, and you JUST upgraded your county's title database with a blockchain, and you accepted that various forms of government are going to have to enforce a lot of it, hopefully it is evident how (1) (2) and (3) above now go away or at least change significantly.

acdha 5y ago
> 1. forfeiture without volition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...) Only if the authorities ceded their power to the blockchain, in which case this situation is unlikely to arise. If the sovereign power in the area says you don’t own it, a record on someone else’s computer doesn’t matter much. > 2. title theft/fraud (https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_fo https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_fo...) By replacing it with electronic fraud, which is much easier to do at scale and harder to disprove. If a good phish / zero-day gets you a house’s worth of money, even more people will try it. > 3. Many of the needs for title insurance (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insura https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insura It only solves the question of transfers, possibly but currently not at lower expense than your local government. It doesn’t solve the analog problems which are the most important reason to have title insurance, such as surveying errors, and you also have new problems like the possibility of someone claiming a malicious transaction years ago.
- grog454 5y ago
  > Only if the authorities ceded their power to the blockchain, in which case this situation is unlikely to arise. Great! Let's do it. It might take a few thousand years but this doesn't represent a problem with blockchain technology. The authority can and should still be around to enforce the blockchain, but they should still have to respect it. >By replacing it with electronic fraud, which is much easier to do at scale and harder to disprove. If a good phish / zero-day gets you a house’s worth of money, even more people will try it. This is an argument against electronic records, not blockchain specifically. They are side channel attacks. > and you also have new problems like the possibility of someone claiming a malicious transaction years ago. What do you mean by this? Maybe an example would help.
  - acdha 5y ago
    > This is an argument against electronic records, not blockchain specifically. They are side channel attacks. What makes it a blockchain problem is removing the safeguards. If you are saying the blockchain is an immutable record controlled by individual private keys, you are saying that any mistake is permanent. If you allow corrections, you don’t need the expense of a blockchain. > > and you also have new problems like the possibility of someone claiming a malicious transaction years ago. > What do you mean by this? Maybe an example would help. I go to buy your house. You show me the chain saying you own it. A month later, someone says you phished their grandfather who was in hospice (or that the transaction was made by a spouse without approval, etc.) and now there’s a dispute about whether the transaction was authorized. Traditionally this is handled with third parties who can confirm that, say, they had everyone in the same room and checked ID. Moving to a model where access to a private key is all that matters requires similar solutions before you can say it removes the need for title insurance.
    - grog454 5y ago
      > What makes it a blockchain problem is removing the safeguards. If you are saying the blockchain is an immutable record controlled by individual private keys, you are saying that any mistake is permanent. If you allow corrections, you don’t need the expense of a blockchain. That makes sense. I think the need to correct mistakes, and mistakes I concede will definitely happen, is debatable. There are benefits to some for correcting mistakes and costs to some for it as well. Figuring out whether the benefit exceeds the cost is way out of my scope. This reminds me of another problem that I've I haven't seen mentioned yet. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/12/13/half-a-billion-in-bitcoin-lost-in-the-dump https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/12/13/half-a-billion... In a fixed supply cryptocurrency like bitcoin these kind of losses will inevitably lead to deflation. > Moving to a model where access to a private key is all that matters requires similar solutions before you can say it removes the need for title insurance. You're right, and I was careful not to say "all" of the needs for title insurance. I think its worth considering the possibility that not being able to correct even that emotionally charged dying grandfather case, and instead seeking recompense between the two parties most directly involved in the crime (the grandfather and me in your example) is OK. For example, I'm now required to purchase a newly minted and desirably worthless "restitution" NFT from the grandfather for the price I sold the house (or the market value, or w/e is fair), or I go to jail. If we try to backtrack the whole transaction, you are now probably being harmed as well. Is that really better? What if we figure this out 10 years after the initial sale, and the property has changed hands 5 times already. Good luck rolling that back. Edit: I have just started reading the bitcoin whitepaper and at least half of the introduction is about the possible benefits of the irreversibility of transactions. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

acdha 5y ago

> 1. forfeiture without volition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...) Only if the authorities ceded their power to the blockchain, in which case this situation is unlikely to arise. If the sovereign power in the area says you don’t own it, a record on someone else’s computer doesn’t matter much. > 2. title theft/fraud (https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_fo https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_fo...) By replacing it with electronic fraud, which is much easier to do at scale and harder to disprove. If a good phish / zero-day gets you a house’s worth of money, even more people will try it. > 3. Many of the needs for title insurance (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insura https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insura It only solves the question of transfers, possibly but currently not at lower expense than your local government. It doesn’t solve the analog problems which are the most important reason to have title insurance, such as surveying errors, and you also have new problems like the possibility of someone claiming a malicious transaction years ago.

grog454 5y ago
> Only if the authorities ceded their power to the blockchain, in which case this situation is unlikely to arise. Great! Let's do it. It might take a few thousand years but this doesn't represent a problem with blockchain technology. The authority can and should still be around to enforce the blockchain, but they should still have to respect it. >By replacing it with electronic fraud, which is much easier to do at scale and harder to disprove. If a good phish / zero-day gets you a house’s worth of money, even more people will try it. This is an argument against electronic records, not blockchain specifically. They are side channel attacks. > and you also have new problems like the possibility of someone claiming a malicious transaction years ago. What do you mean by this? Maybe an example would help.
- acdha 5y ago
  > This is an argument against electronic records, not blockchain specifically. They are side channel attacks. What makes it a blockchain problem is removing the safeguards. If you are saying the blockchain is an immutable record controlled by individual private keys, you are saying that any mistake is permanent. If you allow corrections, you don’t need the expense of a blockchain. > > and you also have new problems like the possibility of someone claiming a malicious transaction years ago. > What do you mean by this? Maybe an example would help. I go to buy your house. You show me the chain saying you own it. A month later, someone says you phished their grandfather who was in hospice (or that the transaction was made by a spouse without approval, etc.) and now there’s a dispute about whether the transaction was authorized. Traditionally this is handled with third parties who can confirm that, say, they had everyone in the same room and checked ID. Moving to a model where access to a private key is all that matters requires similar solutions before you can say it removes the need for title insurance.
  - grog454 5y ago
    > What makes it a blockchain problem is removing the safeguards. If you are saying the blockchain is an immutable record controlled by individual private keys, you are saying that any mistake is permanent. If you allow corrections, you don’t need the expense of a blockchain. That makes sense. I think the need to correct mistakes, and mistakes I concede will definitely happen, is debatable. There are benefits to some for correcting mistakes and costs to some for it as well. Figuring out whether the benefit exceeds the cost is way out of my scope. This reminds me of another problem that I've I haven't seen mentioned yet. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/12/13/half-a-billion-in-bitcoin-lost-in-the-dump https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/12/13/half-a-billion... In a fixed supply cryptocurrency like bitcoin these kind of losses will inevitably lead to deflation. > Moving to a model where access to a private key is all that matters requires similar solutions before you can say it removes the need for title insurance. You're right, and I was careful not to say "all" of the needs for title insurance. I think its worth considering the possibility that not being able to correct even that emotionally charged dying grandfather case, and instead seeking recompense between the two parties most directly involved in the crime (the grandfather and me in your example) is OK. For example, I'm now required to purchase a newly minted and desirably worthless "restitution" NFT from the grandfather for the price I sold the house (or the market value, or w/e is fair), or I go to jail. If we try to backtrack the whole transaction, you are now probably being harmed as well. Is that really better? What if we figure this out 10 years after the initial sale, and the property has changed hands 5 times already. Good luck rolling that back. Edit: I have just started reading the bitcoin whitepaper and at least half of the introduction is about the possible benefits of the irreversibility of transactions. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf