3 ms·
If you want to put the text of a legal contract into a blockchain, go ahead. I don't see why. But also that isnt what is meant by using the blockchain for owne
by mjburgess 4y ago
If you want to put the text of a legal contract into a blockchain, go ahead. I don't see why.
But also that isnt what is meant by using the blockchain for ownership. For this, people are assuming that the verification algorithms of a blockchain "with some extra steps" are somehow supposed to replace contracts and the legal system.
That is what my comment targets. This misunderstands contracts, rights and the need for a legal system.
If you're just interested in having your legalese registered in public across vast data centres and provably appended to a log, etc. then sure.. that's possible. But incomprehensibly motivated. Since, of course, our current system ("paper") provides vastly more features.
Paper has extremely cheap privacy, modification costs, proof of ownership, etc. Features only blockchain tech could dream of...
- rhn_mk1 4y agoIn the context of owning a domain, having my legalese registered in the public is precisely what I want. It doesn't even need to add any value over records stored in someone's desk to be a viable option, as long as it can compete on price. Unrelated, but actual paper is not cheap. Storing it, finding, modifying, and synchronizing between parties interested in the data involves people actually going places and moving stacks around. Even if you think about single-owner databases of records, those fail at preserving the proof of ownership. The ownership of the record is clear - it's in the hands of whoever has it. The record itself - the actual proof of ownership - is forgeable unless backed by cryptographic signatures, and easily eraseable unless made public. And to solve both, we gravitate back to blockchain-like tech.