4 ms·

If you're curious about how folks are exploring legal intersection with smart contracts, you might find the work of https://www.lexdao.coop/ https://www.lexdao.

If you're curious about how folks are exploring legal intersection with smart contracts, you might find the work of https://www.lexdao.coop/ https://www.lexdao.coop/ interesting (US focused mostly for now afaik).

dmitriid 5y ago
Let's see: the front page is blank with "Join Us" and "Book a Consultation". The blog is dank memes of Crypto Chads and some bullshit on how crypto is great. Yes, yes, so much interesting.
- andrewxhill 5y ago
  I said curious not dismissive. When people don't communicate like you it doesn't mean their ideas are bad.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > I said curious not dismissive. I was curious. I went to the site. I saw literally nothing about the purported "exploration of legal intersection with smart contracts". > When people don't communicate like you it doesn't mean their ideas are bad. They have to communicate those ideas first
    - gitfan86 5y ago
      The idea is to sell an idea. They learned from Theranos that you shouldn't sell something that is verifiable. For example, if you sell a legal service and that legal service doesn't provide value, people can verify that your service was worthless and call it a scam. However, if you sell the idea that crypto legal services could exist in the future, you are selling something that is unverifiable. You will never be able to prove that the idea of crypto legal services was a scam. The idea exists and the future exists. So these "Crypto Projects" will say something like "We are community supporting innovation in decentralized insurance and smart contracts" So all they are on the hook for is "supporting innovation". Which doesn't mean anything other than saying you on in favor of innovation. When you ask for an example of something they support, they will list people "Doing interesting things". But those people also are just "exploring innovation", they also are not actually selling insurance policies on the block chain.
- samhw 5y ago
  Hmm, I had a look at their blog, and I have mixed feelings. Lots of it is stupid. Lots of the titles contain spelling errors that would be embarrassing for a 14-year-old. But some of it is thoughtful and interesting, albeit basic, like this post on contract law and blockchains: https://lexdao.substack.com/p/legal-contract-formation-in-smart https://lexdao.substack.com/p/legal-contract-formation-in-sm... I do think there's space for some more serious and professional lawyers to think, and possibly provide some solutions, in this space. Hell, even if you think it's a scam, it would still amount to an interesting case study in how the law intersects with technology.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > it would still amount to an interesting case study in how the law intersects with technology Yes, it would. Because "is code law" has applications way beyond "smart contracts" (which are neither smart nor contracts). However, LexDAO is definitely ain't it. Because you either have an interesting discussion, or you cater to crypto chads. You can't have it both ways. The article you linked does give a high level overview of some interesting points, though, so there's that :)

dmitriid 5y ago

Let's see: the front page is blank with "Join Us" and "Book a Consultation". The blog is dank memes of Crypto Chads and some bullshit on how crypto is great. Yes, yes, so much interesting.

andrewxhill 5y ago
I said curious not dismissive. When people don't communicate like you it doesn't mean their ideas are bad.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > I said curious not dismissive. I was curious. I went to the site. I saw literally nothing about the purported "exploration of legal intersection with smart contracts". > When people don't communicate like you it doesn't mean their ideas are bad. They have to communicate those ideas first
  - gitfan86 5y ago
    The idea is to sell an idea. They learned from Theranos that you shouldn't sell something that is verifiable. For example, if you sell a legal service and that legal service doesn't provide value, people can verify that your service was worthless and call it a scam. However, if you sell the idea that crypto legal services could exist in the future, you are selling something that is unverifiable. You will never be able to prove that the idea of crypto legal services was a scam. The idea exists and the future exists. So these "Crypto Projects" will say something like "We are community supporting innovation in decentralized insurance and smart contracts" So all they are on the hook for is "supporting innovation". Which doesn't mean anything other than saying you on in favor of innovation. When you ask for an example of something they support, they will list people "Doing interesting things". But those people also are just "exploring innovation", they also are not actually selling insurance policies on the block chain.
samhw 5y ago
Hmm, I had a look at their blog, and I have mixed feelings. Lots of it is stupid. Lots of the titles contain spelling errors that would be embarrassing for a 14-year-old. But some of it is thoughtful and interesting, albeit basic, like this post on contract law and blockchains: https://lexdao.substack.com/p/legal-contract-formation-in-smart https://lexdao.substack.com/p/legal-contract-formation-in-sm... I do think there's space for some more serious and professional lawyers to think, and possibly provide some solutions, in this space. Hell, even if you think it's a scam, it would still amount to an interesting case study in how the law intersects with technology.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > it would still amount to an interesting case study in how the law intersects with technology Yes, it would. Because "is code law" has applications way beyond "smart contracts" (which are neither smart nor contracts). However, LexDAO is definitely ain't it. Because you either have an interesting discussion, or you cater to crypto chads. You can't have it both ways. The article you linked does give a high level overview of some interesting points, though, so there's that :)