News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A hacker stole $31M of Ether – how it happened, and what it means for Ethereum. Parent comment

Re:A hacker stole $31M of Ether – how it happened, and what ... by jacquesm on Friday July 21, 2017 @06:59AM (#14819453)
This all assumes that you know your counterparty, which isn't necessarily the case.

You could simply reduce your argument to 'in situations where you use a smart contract where a normal contract would suffice a judge has their usual powers'.

But that wasn't the point I was making. Smart contracts will most likely be used in all kinds of situations where a judge does not have their normal powers, hence the reliance on a smart contract to begin with.

If you can rely on the courts you don't need a smart contract.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A hacker stole $31M of Ether – how it happened, and what ... by yorwba on Friday July 21, 2017 @08:57AM (#14820077)
Even if you can rely on the courts, smart contracts could still make themselves useful, since the costs for enforcement are lower. Until your interpretation of the contract and its implementation disagree, which is when you start your costly litigation spree, assuming you have an idea of who to sue.
[ Parent | on HN ]