Re:Cryptocurrency Bear?
by hellow0rldz on Monday June 07, 2021 @02:48PM
(#27426486)
What you wrote is an invention. Code is law came from, let's say, "techno utopians" that really believed you can programatically organize this way. See the concept of DAO for example.
So, code is law came from programmers that thought code is law. It's not a misunderstanding.
The ETH fork was caused about the difference wrt code is law.
Do you have a source? First I've heard of this angle
Re:Cryptocurrency Bear?
by jbverschoor on Monday June 07, 2021 @05:07PM
(#27426941)
It's just my observation. I've seen many presentations about smart contracts, what not in the past, but it's frustrating..
But these things happen over and over again. It's super annoying when there's a conceptional mismatch.
Naming and definitions matter. In fact, wasn't naming one of the three hardest things about programming? :-D
Within programming, you have contracts, i.e. function definitions. This is taken by the non-tech people, blew up and got the attention of all people have 1) no idea how code works, 2) have no idea how the law works.
While great for spreading the word, it also spread the WRONG word. This is one of the reasons why "nobody understands blockchain". It's because the communication is plain wrong.