Main > General Discussion
DAC Power for Offline Businesses
progmac:
--- Quote from: bytemaster on February 25, 2014, 01:37:06 am ---Having had contracts and arbitration decisions overturned in court I have learned to have no respect at all for contracts. Instead assume the people you are doing business with are independent nations with their own courts and assume that if they back out of a deal there is nothing you can do about it *except* share the information with others.
--- End quote ---
Does this mean that a company would be completely reliant on its reputation? In normal contract negotiations, two honest parties can have disagreements about what it is they originally agreed to. It isn't as simple as people or companies being 'good' or 'bad.'
Like if I contract with you to rebuild a wall and I assume you know that I want the wall to be brick, but you come in and rebuild the wall with stone, because you assumed that I wanted stone. I'm pissed that I have a stone wall instead of brick but you aren't going to redo all of your work. We both proceeded in good faith from the start, but here we are, pissed at each other and ready to shred each others reputation.
luckybit:
--- Quote from: donkeypong on February 25, 2014, 03:49:29 am ---Thank you. Bytemaster, I am honored by your response. Even though this is my first series of posts here, I'm a big supporter of what you are doing at Invictus + I'm an investor in PTS and Bitshares. Power to you for what you guys are trying to do; I love the transparency, the profit focus, the lack of reliance on mining. Between NXT, Mastercoin, Ethereum, etc., you guys have the best chance and you are doing it right.
For better or for worse, I am also a licensed attorney (purely private, don't worry; not with any part of the government and not the kind who files lawsuits!). Sadly, I cannot disagree with what you said about contracts and (dis)trusting the government with enforcement. It is an inexact science, especially when you are blazing new trails like this. Invictus is right to stick to real digital DACs for now. But I don't think business will stop there.
Nevertheless, I need to respond to a point you made. You mentioned that DACs will be the future of business. I agree that they can be. But when you are talking about business, most commerce involves trading goods and services that cannot be totally encrypted into the blockchain. There is plenty of money to be made in futures contracts, hedging, gambling, crowdfunding, and financial transactions that do not involve regulated or licensed fields. But what about the future for the rest of the economy and the rest of the people who are still bound to serve greedy corporations? I believe we can "Napster" P2P a lot of things while securing them with the blockchain. It would spread the equity out and allow for more profit sharing, less waste and needless costs into the pockets of the elites.
I guess I see that coming, whether Invictus ever moves beyond the digital DAC concept or not. If DACs work, someone will harness their power for offline business. It's too good a concept to limit it to only the digital sector of the economy. But I totally understand where you are coming from. Better to be safe and get this right first. I'm rooting for you all the way.
--- End quote ---
There are Open Value Networks which basically do what a DAC does in a lot of ways but does it more in the offline business world. I suggest you Google that.
luckybit:
--- Quote from: bytemaster on February 25, 2014, 01:37:06 am ---I think the key to DACs and the future of all business is what I call the post-contract economy. What is at the HEART of a contract? If you really boil it down the conclusion is... "do what you said you would or I will go tell big brother and he will make you do it at gun point."
This poses an interesting problem because it assumes that you can alienate your will in the future. It presupposes that today you can say something that will make you a slave tomorrow.
If the goal is to make governments unnecessary and irrelevant to doing business, then obviously we cannot depend upon the use of force to BACK contracts. I recognize that not everyone agrees with my philosophy here, but from an economic perspective contracts are terribly inefficient when relied upon as anything other than a record between honest people about what they agreed to.
Having had contracts and arbitration decisions overturned in court I have learned to have no respect at all for contracts. Instead assume the people you are doing business with are independent nations with their own courts and assume that if they back out of a deal there is nothing you can do about it *except* share the information with others.
DACs cannot rely upon contracts and this is what makes them beyond reach of any government.
--- End quote ---
Some people have no honor and wont keep their word. For those people force may be necessary to make them stay true to their word. The government shouldn't be the first group of people that everyone runs to but some people would exploit the whole "no contract" idea.
donkeypong:
Thank you. Bytemaster, I am honored by your response. Even though this is my first series of posts here, I'm a big supporter of what you are doing at Invictus + I'm an investor in PTS and Bitshares. Power to you for what you guys are trying to do; I love the transparency, the profit focus, the lack of reliance on mining. Between NXT, Mastercoin, Ethereum, etc., you guys have the best chance and you are doing it right.
For better or for worse, I am also a licensed attorney (purely private, don't worry; not with any part of the government and not the kind who files lawsuits!). Sadly, I cannot disagree with what you said about contracts and (dis)trusting the government with enforcement. It is an inexact science, especially when you are blazing new trails like this. Invictus is right to stick to real digital DACs for now. But I don't think business will stop there.
Nevertheless, I need to respond to a point you made. You mentioned that DACs will be the future of business. I agree that they can be. But when you are talking about business, most commerce involves trading goods and services that cannot be totally encrypted into the blockchain. There is plenty of money to be made in futures contracts, hedging, gambling, crowdfunding, and financial transactions that do not involve regulated or licensed fields. But what about the future for the rest of the economy and the rest of the people who are still bound to serve greedy corporations? I believe we can "Napster" P2P a lot of things while securing them with the blockchain. It would spread the equity out and allow for more profit sharing, less waste and needless costs into the pockets of the elites.
I guess I see that coming, whether Invictus ever moves beyond the digital DAC concept or not. If DACs work, someone will harness their power for offline business. It's too good a concept to limit it to only the digital sector of the economy. But I totally understand where you are coming from. Better to be safe and get this right first. I'm rooting for you all the way.
bytemaster:
I think the key to DACs and the future of all business is what I call the post-contract economy. What is at the HEART of a contract? If you really boil it down the conclusion is... "do what you said you would or I will go tell big brother and he will make you do it at gun point."
This poses an interesting problem because it assumes that you can alienate your will in the future. It presupposes that today you can say something that will make you a slave tomorrow.
If the goal is to make governments unnecessary and irrelevant to doing business, then obviously we cannot depend upon the use of force to BACK contracts. I recognize that not everyone agrees with my philosophy here, but from an economic perspective contracts are terribly inefficient when relied upon as anything other than a record between honest people about what they agreed to.
Having had contracts and arbitration decisions overturned in court I have learned to have no respect at all for contracts. Instead assume the people you are doing business with are independent nations with their own courts and assume that if they back out of a deal there is nothing you can do about it *except* share the information with others.
DACs cannot rely upon contracts and this is what makes them beyond reach of any government.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version