= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ChristianKl comments on Are smart contracts AI-complete? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (46)
The law cannot compell you not to murder either, but does that mean you can go out an do it freely? No.
The law doesnt need to compell the computer code, it can force people to do things, it can force the code to be rewritten, it can shut down servers that run the code, it can confiscate the money used in the processes.
These are not some magical anonymous items that are above the law and inviolate. While it is true that they have not been litigated yet, that time is quickly coming, and they still rely on outside individuals to complete the contracts, and are still governed by all the same laws that everything else is.
The idea of the blockchain is that there no single server that runs the code and that could be attacked that way.
A lot of de jure illegal transactions happened on the bitcoin blockchain without a court confiscating the transactions. When MtGox was hacked they couldn't simply ask a court to confiscate the Bitcoins that the hacker stole.
There are a lot of drugs sold via Bitcoin and the courts also don't confiscate those.
If people make a bet in Augur that the US government doesn't like, the US government can't shut down Augur. At least that's the idea on which Ethereum and Augur are build.
Augur can trade a market about whether a certain drug will get FDA approval and the market participants are anonymous. That means they can use insider information. It's impossible to backup that anonymous transaction with standard contracts but smart contracts can.