4 ms·
That "sending a token"? Unenforceable and still need to be backed up by, you know, an actual paper contract in the real world. Also, this comment nails it: htt
by dmitriid 4y ago
That "sending a token"? Unenforceable and still need to be backed up by, you know, an actual paper contract in the real world.
Also, this comment nails it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33002963 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33002963
- jedberg 4y agoThe piece of paper (the LLC formation that owns the house) literally says “whoever has control of these tokens owns this LLC in proportion to how many tokens they have”. And yes it’s backed by a paper contract. That’s why I’m ok with it. But it’s still gives me liquidity and ownership security I couldn’t get with a central database.
- dmitriid 4y ago> the LLC formation that owns the house > backed by a paper contract So.... What's the point of blockchain in this case? Other than "hey, we have blockchain"? > But it’s still gives me liquidity and ownership security What gives you ownership security is the paper contract, not some bytes in some database.
- grepfru_it 4y agoYou cannot have partial control of an LLC without being part of the LLC. That would be a C-Corp. Members of the LLC have to be defined in the articles (with filing fees every time it changes) and are liable for criminal activities (this includes tax evasion). For everything you want a c corporation provides the exact same guarantees while not becoming a money laundering hotspot
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]