undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjMyles4y ago0 comments

> I'm saying the legal system takes authority. A smart contract doesn't avoid or override that authority.

On a blockchain, this is absolutely false. The nodes interpret smart contracts. The "legal system" needs to be applied by some kind of oracle or by force to a node operator.

Smart contracts are authoritative in their native environment.

0 comments

toomuchtodo4y ago

> The "legal system" needs to be applied by some kind of oracle or by force to a node operator.

Yes, this is usually how it's done. Business logic is not a legal authority.

jMylesOP4y ago

This is a strange statement. It's like saying that a forloop isn't authoritative because it hasn't been approved by a court.

"Legal authority" isn't a well-defined object in the evaluation of smart contracts. It is certainly not an authority in the sense that the EVM (or, for other blockchains, corresponding VM) code is.

Is this really a surprise? Nodes don't evaluate common law, they evaluate smart contracts.

That's one of the reasons for enthusiasm for blockchain tech. Not everyone believes in the legitimacy of the state, let alone that the legal system is somehow the proper authority for evaluation of disambigous source code.

wins327674y ago

>Not everyone believes in the legitimacy of the state, let alone that the legal system is somehow the proper authority for evaluation of disambigous source code.

This is something that I haven't been able to figure out about blockchain enthusiasts. Assuming the blockchain is wildly successful, it poses an inherent threat to the ability of the modern state to collect taxes. Why do blockchain enthusiasts, who already don't think the state is legitimate, not take the logical next step. A potentially existential threat illegitimate parties that have large militaries will end well for the blockchain how? To put it more glibly, how many divisions has bitcoin?

3 more replies

rebolek4y ago

Not believing in the legitimacy of the state is like not believing in the gravity.

ineedasername4y ago

Parties to a contract exist in jurisdictions that do not see things this way, and even block chains are rooted in some form on physical media in legal jurisdictions.

In the case if IRON, the 0.75 in actual money exists somewhere, a bank presumably. Wherever that is, the jurisdiction might be friendly for IRON, or not, but there is in a very real sense no pure native environment for smart contracts. At a minimum, the parties involved will always exist in a physical legal sovereign jurisdiction that regards it's own authority as higher than the smart contract and has some ability-- perhaps limited, perhaps extensive-- to enforce that authority.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse