3 ms·
As opposed to being subject to interpretation of the truth, with the courts of varying quality. My point is... everything has error bars.
by RealityVoid 1y ago
As opposed to being subject to interpretation of the truth, with the courts of varying quality. My point is... everything has error bars.
- eightysixfour 1y agoIt must. Things that interact with the real world need slack.
- sealeck 1y ago> with the courts of varying quality You can usually pick the jurisdiction (e.g. many contracts are under jurisdiction of England & Wales/Switzerland/Singapore despite neither party being based there, or doing business there). I think in general judges are quite considered, and the answers you get from courts tend to make quite a lot of sense, especially if you are aware of general legal principles and precedent.
- josefx 1y agoYou are still subject to courts if you use smart contracts, they change literally nothing about that.
- saghm 1y agoThe reliance on context and human intervention in our current system is a feature, not a bug. That's my entire point; if you get rid of that, you're introducing a lot of issues, and if you don't, you're throwing out a system with literal centuries of stress-testing where the flaws are legitimate but well understood to switch to one with literally no evidence to suggest that it's better.