4 ms·

Ether is law, but the example contract says nothing about websites, nor has any provisions to enforce the transfer of said site. I think it's more appropriate

by fleitz 11y ago

Ether is law, but the example contract says nothing about websites, nor has any provisions to enforce the transfer of said site. I think it's more appropriate to say that ethereum is naive

detaro 11y ago
Not without further integrations, but there are proposals for blockchain-based decentral name resolution etc. Nothing you could directly use right now without a lot of effort around it, but I'm glad they are exploring that space.
boombip 11y ago
Yeah what if the website isn't finished? Does the seller still get paid? I really wonder how they plan on solving conditional logic that depends on programmatic sources. What happens if you want to change the contract? How do you revoke the previous one? I suppose this would have to be done in a manner that involves both parties, some sort of two part signing process. What if there's a bug in the contract? The contract then becomes ambiguous and you're left with the same problem.
zaphar 11y ago
If we are being fair here neither does a traditional contract. The enforcement of a that contract falls to person (i.e Policeperson, Bailiff). The benefit of etherscript in theory at least is that the wording of the contract is unambiguous, with the caveat that there may still be some areas where ambiguity is unavoidable. Which means that in the case of a website a digital bailiff could enforce the transfer. This is a clear benefit in some sense at least. How many times have you read about a court case and been bewildered about how someone could possibly be arguing over something that should be clear cut. For contracts like a website domain transfer this sounds at least initially doable. What etherscript will have trouble handling is establishing what actually happened. It will undoubtedly be very good at specifying what the outcome of a sequence of events should be but as soon as it hits the real world the problem of establishing what that sequence of events was will still require some form of investigation and enforcement mechanism composed of people and thus there will still be an unavoidable amount of ambiguity there.
- fleitz 11y ago
  The debate in law is usually about what the words mean rather than what words appear in the contract. (Of course there are always issues where contracts have been lost, etc)

by fleitz 11y ago

Ether is law, but the example contract says nothing about websites, nor has any provisions to enforce the transfer of said site. I think it's more appropriate to say that ethereum is naive

detaro 11y ago

Not without further integrations, but there are proposals for blockchain-based decentral name resolution etc. Nothing you could directly use right now without a lot of effort around it, but I'm glad they are exploring that space.

boombip 11y ago

Yeah what if the website isn't finished? Does the seller still get paid? I really wonder how they plan on solving conditional logic that depends on programmatic sources. What happens if you want to change the contract? How do you revoke the previous one? I suppose this would have to be done in a manner that involves both parties, some sort of two part signing process. What if there's a bug in the contract? The contract then becomes ambiguous and you're left with the same problem.

zaphar 11y ago

If we are being fair here neither does a traditional contract. The enforcement of a that contract falls to person (i.e Policeperson, Bailiff). The benefit of etherscript in theory at least is that the wording of the contract is unambiguous, with the caveat that there may still be some areas where ambiguity is unavoidable. Which means that in the case of a website a digital bailiff could enforce the transfer. This is a clear benefit in some sense at least. How many times have you read about a court case and been bewildered about how someone could possibly be arguing over something that should be clear cut. For contracts like a website domain transfer this sounds at least initially doable. What etherscript will have trouble handling is establishing what actually happened. It will undoubtedly be very good at specifying what the outcome of a sequence of events should be but as soon as it hits the real world the problem of establishing what that sequence of events was will still require some form of investigation and enforcement mechanism composed of people and thus there will still be an unavoidable amount of ambiguity there.

fleitz 11y ago
The debate in law is usually about what the words mean rather than what words appear in the contract. (Of course there are always issues where contracts have been lost, etc)