5 ms·

Is that how it works legally? If you hack into computers using a zero day, did you also just access the computer according to the way it was programmed? Just be

Is that how it works legally? If you hack into computers using a zero day, did you also just access the computer according to the way it was programmed? Just because you can do it technically doesn’t mean it’s not fraud/something else.

cherryteastain 1y ago
If that's not how it works, where's the line for what is fraud and what is not? Once you move away from the "code is law" principle, companies have the perverse incentive to define fraud as "any transaction that results in negative PnL for me", which is exactly what happened here.
- freejazz 1y ago
  What does one have to do with the other? Fraud is "intentional deception to gain an unfair or illegal advantage, often resulting in financial or legal harm" what does that have to do with code? What could code even do about fraud?
  - cherryteastain 1y ago
    If fraud is "intentional deception", who did this guy deceive? Everything was out in the open.
    - freejazz 1y ago
      What does that have to do with my question?
- dan-robertson 1y ago
  Isn’t, in the US system, the definition of fraud built up through a combination of legislation and case law from previous ‘grey area’ cases? I think most laws tend to have some balance between what is easy to define/understand and what is desirable to allow/disallow.
- echoangle 1y ago
  „Code is law“ isn’t a thing. Go tell a judge that your hacking is legal because the code allowed it. That’s not something that’s allowed by law.
  - cellis 1y ago
    It may not pass muster with a judge in some backwater, but with one in the Northern District of California or a jury of their HN peers, it might. Laws are what we make them.
  - archontes 1y ago
    Imagine I write a contract and empower an AI to execute it. I put $10,000 in a bank account and write, "I'd like a nice car." I do this of my own free will, at my own hazard. I know I'm playing this game. I have intentionally elected to use a system that will execute without any further intervention or oversight on my part. Verbally, I state that I am confident enough in the writing of my instruction that I feel secure in whatever outcome it may bring. The system automatically executes and someone has sold me a very nice remote control car. I sue that person. Why should I have standing?
    - olddustytrail 1y ago
      Like buying from eBay?
  - cherryteastain 1y ago
    I am well aware that "code is law" has no weight in actual law. The point I tried to raise was, given the following sequence of events: 1. You deploy a smart contract to the ethereum blockchain 2. I interact with your smart contract in some manner how do we define whether the manner of interaction in step 2 is fradulent or not? "Code is law" is one interpretation by crypto enthusiasts to define under what conditions interacting with the blockchain is fraud; in their definition, it's never fradulent. Let's assume "code is law" is nonsense, as many comments here say. Then, under what conditions do we define interacting with the blockchain as fradulent? What is fraud and what is not fraud? Edit: In the blockchain we can even formalize this. The ethereum blockchain at block K has a certain state S_K. I submit a certain transaction/set of instructions T to the blockchain which is mined as block K+1. How do we define a function isIllegal(S_K, T)? (Assuming block K+1 contains EVM instructions from my transaction T only)

cherryteastain 1y ago

If that's not how it works, where's the line for what is fraud and what is not? Once you move away from the "code is law" principle, companies have the perverse incentive to define fraud as "any transaction that results in negative PnL for me", which is exactly what happened here.

freejazz 1y ago
What does one have to do with the other? Fraud is "intentional deception to gain an unfair or illegal advantage, often resulting in financial or legal harm" what does that have to do with code? What could code even do about fraud?
- cherryteastain 1y ago
  If fraud is "intentional deception", who did this guy deceive? Everything was out in the open.
  - freejazz 1y ago
    What does that have to do with my question?
dan-robertson 1y ago
Isn’t, in the US system, the definition of fraud built up through a combination of legislation and case law from previous ‘grey area’ cases? I think most laws tend to have some balance between what is easy to define/understand and what is desirable to allow/disallow.
echoangle 1y ago
„Code is law“ isn’t a thing. Go tell a judge that your hacking is legal because the code allowed it. That’s not something that’s allowed by law.
- cellis 1y ago
  It may not pass muster with a judge in some backwater, but with one in the Northern District of California or a jury of their HN peers, it might. Laws are what we make them.
- archontes 1y ago
  Imagine I write a contract and empower an AI to execute it. I put $10,000 in a bank account and write, "I'd like a nice car." I do this of my own free will, at my own hazard. I know I'm playing this game. I have intentionally elected to use a system that will execute without any further intervention or oversight on my part. Verbally, I state that I am confident enough in the writing of my instruction that I feel secure in whatever outcome it may bring. The system automatically executes and someone has sold me a very nice remote control car. I sue that person. Why should I have standing?
  - olddustytrail 1y ago
    Like buying from eBay?
- cherryteastain 1y ago
  I am well aware that "code is law" has no weight in actual law. The point I tried to raise was, given the following sequence of events: 1. You deploy a smart contract to the ethereum blockchain 2. I interact with your smart contract in some manner how do we define whether the manner of interaction in step 2 is fradulent or not? "Code is law" is one interpretation by crypto enthusiasts to define under what conditions interacting with the blockchain is fraud; in their definition, it's never fradulent. Let's assume "code is law" is nonsense, as many comments here say. Then, under what conditions do we define interacting with the blockchain as fradulent? What is fraud and what is not fraud? Edit: In the blockchain we can even formalize this. The ethereum blockchain at block K has a certain state S_K. I submit a certain transaction/set of instructions T to the blockchain which is mined as block K+1. How do we define a function isIllegal(S_K, T)? (Assuming block K+1 contains EVM instructions from my transaction T only)