Re:Chasing the DAO Attacker’s Wake – A second exploit
by tylervigen on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @02:44PM
(#11948272)
In case anyone hasn't read it, the NASA coding process is extremely interesting: http://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-stuff
Re:Chasing the DAO Attacker’s Wake – A second exploit
by sandworm101 on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @02:41PM
(#11948247)
Five pages? I thought these things were meant to be shorter than plain-English contracts. I draft and review contracts daily and five pages is long for basic things (employment, NDAs, IP transfer etc).
Re:Chasing the DAO Attacker’s Wake – A second exploit
by DennisP on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @03:02PM
(#11948450)
It's software, not really comparable to an English-language contract. Most software is much bigger than that.
Five pages is an outside estimate, for something like a currency exchange. My crowdfunding contract is about two pages, and the vault is one.
Re:Chasing the DAO Attacker’s Wake – A second exploit
by dragonwriter on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @03:14PM
(#11948570)
> It's software, not really comparable to an English-language contract.
If the point is to be an alternative to normal, "dumb" contracts, than that is exactly what it needs to be comparable to.
Re:Chasing the DAO Attacker’s Wake – A second exploit
by sandworm101 on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @03:23PM
(#11948650)
He is correct in stating that it is code v. english, apples v. oranges. But I was under the impression that the whole point of using code was to explain something in more concrete and definitive terms. If doing so takes more words, more abstract word, with more oppertunity for bugs and loopholes, then what is the point?
Re:Chasing the DAO Attacker’s Wake – A second exploit
by DennisP on Wednesday June 22, 2016 @09:46AM
(#11953826)
Smart contracts are not an alternative for things like employment, NDAs, and IP transfer. But how long would your contract be if you were setting up a currency exchange?
And how much software would you have to write in addition to that? On Ethereum the back-end software and the "contract" are the same thing, since the software enforces the terms.
Re:Chasing the DAO Attacker’s Wake – A second exploit
by aminok on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @11:30PM
(#11951380)
Natural languages like English imply much more through context, and trade precision for succinctness. This is less true for legalese but still the case. Computer programs need to be explicitly defined and precise because there is no intelligent interpretation.
Re:Chasing the DAO Attacker’s Wake – A second exploit
by reddytowns on Wednesday June 22, 2016 @01:35AM
(#11951780)
Yes,
but,
English
is
not
commonly
written
with
conventional
programming
whitespace and indentation
practices.
People are realizing that this needs to be developed like safety-critical software, not like fast-moving startup websites. But I would say it's not as scary as, say, developing software for aerospace or medical applications.
And what really helps is that you can do a lot with very little code. I think all of my contracts are under five pages. I don't think we're ready for big complicated contracts, but there's a lot we can do with simple little contracts.