3 ms·

You're just deferring the settlement! Someone still must settle the ETH to their preferred actual currency.

jlokier 4y ago
My understanding is the settlement to another currency is deferred, but the legal right to that settlement is established atomically, or not, according to whether the multi-party transaction is accepted by the network. And as it is said possession is 9/10 of the law, practically that right is backed up by possession of the account key and the existence of a variety of exchanges who accept ETH. You can of course execute multi-party transactions without a trustless distributed ledger, but in practice then you have to trust a particular intermediary with your assets. I.e. they can run away with them mid-transaction and you have things like costly legal battles, lengthy timescales and stressful burdens of proof, to recover your assets despite them being yours. Though legal frameworks can be created to minimise the risks associated with intermediaries, legal rights in principle are a different experience from rights backed by possession of things like cash, bank balances, title deeds etc. Possession of ETH and the property NFT in accounts you exclusively hold keys for, as well as a conveyance-encoding transaction on a widely agreed public ledger as evidence to back them up, are in a similar category to posession of bank balances and title deeds on paper or in a land registry. The common factors are their meaning is widely recognised, they are in your control already, and they behave in recognised ways. ETH you can use immediately with an ecosystem of exchanges. The property NFT along with the legalese and history that gave it meaning prior to the transaction are convincing evidence to future parties who need to know you have legal title to the property. As with all property in the real world, someone can always challenge your ownership by the courts or by fraud, but a well established NFT gives you favourable evidence, so they are unlikely to succeed and less likely to try.

My understanding is the settlement to another currency is deferred, but the legal right to that settlement is established atomically, or not, according to whether the multi-party transaction is accepted by the network. And as it is said possession is 9/10 of the law, practically that right is backed up by possession of the account key and the existence of a variety of exchanges who accept ETH. You can of course execute multi-party transactions without a trustless distributed ledger, but in practice then you have to trust a particular intermediary with your assets. I.e. they can run away with them mid-transaction and you have things like costly legal battles, lengthy timescales and stressful burdens of proof, to recover your assets despite them being yours. Though legal frameworks can be created to minimise the risks associated with intermediaries, legal rights in principle are a different experience from rights backed by possession of things like cash, bank balances, title deeds etc. Possession of ETH and the property NFT in accounts you exclusively hold keys for, as well as a conveyance-encoding transaction on a widely agreed public ledger as evidence to back them up, are in a similar category to posession of bank balances and title deeds on paper or in a land registry. The common factors are their meaning is widely recognised, they are in your control already, and they behave in recognised ways. ETH you can use immediately with an ecosystem of exchanges. The property NFT along with the legalese and history that gave it meaning prior to the transaction are convincing evidence to future parties who need to know you have legal title to the property. As with all property in the real world, someone can always challenge your ownership by the courts or by fraud, but a well established NFT gives you favourable evidence, so they are unlikely to succeed and less likely to try.