3 ms·
My point is that human-based contract systems don't suffer from needing to think of every possible edge case up front in order to be legally enforceable; courts
by saghm 3y ago
My point is that human-based contract systems don't suffer from needing to think of every possible edge case up front in order to be legally enforceable; courts make rulings based on stuff like "what would a reasonable person would infer in this case?" all the time, and in some cases, unreasonable contracts aren't even enforceable at all even if they technically are logically sound.
- npoc 3y agoYes, I understand, but legally enforced contracts can be both a blessing and a curse. Contracts where no nanny state/tyrannical state can intervene on a mutual agreement between two people have their own value. > human-based contract systems don't suffer from needing to think of every possible edge case up front This isn't always a good thing. As smart contracts are in a form enforceable by computation, they could be put through a series of automated checks to help ensure all edge cases have been considered.