2326
General Discussion / Re: DAC Power for Offline Businesses
« 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.
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.