![]() Even though experts who care deeply about the broader DLT project are blowing every possible whistle and waving every possible flag to warn DLT principals of an imminent collision over the misuse of contract and law terminology, everyone seems content to sail full steam ahead. Want to know how to tell that nobody really read Orcutt’s finely distilled argument? Because the term “smart contract” is still in use. But in today’s TL DR mindscape, titles and headlines are all that many people read, unfortunately. It’s brilliant because it captures the essence of the argument within. ![]() States that are passing laws to govern “smart contracts” have no idea what they’re doing: legislation meant to clarify things for blockchain developers could end up hurting innovation ![]() The title gives a nice flavor of what’s inside: Writing for the MIT Technology Review a few months ago, Mike Orcutt wrote a brilliant piece. Stop Reading Headlines & Listen to Experts! Instead of cheering at the fact that The Jets are starting to “give propers” to The Sharks, maybe the DLT community should slow its roll a bit, and consider whether these legislative/regulatory interventions are just nice ways of keeping friends close, but enemies even closer. You choose with which I will destroy your brother.” - CleanApp (photo by Clem Onojeghuo) “Crypto regulation in one fist crypto legislation in the other. We get it: legislative approbation and validation feels really good. On a serious note, these types of legislative interventions serve many positive legitimating functions: (1) they give a budding technology greater visibility and credibility within mainstream economic and policymaking institutions (2) legislation serves an important educational function, raising awareness about the risks and benefits of a new technology like SCs (3) legislation can help channel parties away from disparate sites of contestation towards known dispute resolution mechanisms like courts (4) etc.Īny time a legislative or regulatory body adopts some rule that gives any sort of acknowledgement or nod in the direction of “crypto” - the DLT community, by and large, goes positively wild. Q: Ya’ know, it ain’t altogether clear if these so-called ‘smart contract’ thingies are all legal, so why don’t we pass a law to make ’em legal! Whadya say, Senator?Ī: Well, I do declare I’ve always liked my contracts like I like my interns, nice and smart. Legislative authorities all over the world continue to be studying these curious creatures, and the momentum is building for even more legislation to do the same thing that Arizona and Tennessee did: “Those Ethereum & EOS and other crypto folks keep saying they’re building ‘self-sustaining legal systems.’ What do you say we show them who’s boss, Senator?” - CleanApp (photo by Kyle Glenn) In the U.S., at least two states (Arizona & our home jurisdiction of Tennessee) have recently passed legislation recognizing the legal validity of “smart contracts.” ![]() On the one hand, everything seems to be going well for SCs. ![]() The problems with SCs have to do with myriad conceptual contradictions between how developers understand these creatures, how lawyers understand these creatures, and how the public is being educated about these mythical creatures. Today, “Smart Contracts” Are Dumbīigger picture, however, so-called “smart contracts” (“SCs”) are in trouble. It’s edgy, contrastive and highly-prescriptive: if you’re not hip to “smart contracts,” well, then, maybe you’re just not … smart. It has been instrumental as an adoption driver. The “smart contract” banner is a very catchy marketing ploy. As Marketing Fodder, It’s GoldĮven though we are against the continuing usage of the term “smart contract” to describe these various on-chain processes, we have to start by giving the devil her due. It is not clear who first coined the term “smart contract” for self-executing transactional processes and logics that play out on Blockchain/DLT platforms, but we applaud that decision. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |