Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by libertymcateer 3274 days ago
"Ellcrys" is a word that is likely subject to trademark and owned by Del Rey.

Its unauthorized use, is, at best, 'iffy.'

This aside, I've already written on HN about how I am deeply skeptical of self-executing contracts. Contracts can fit roughly into two types of categories:

1. Those with easily measured standards - which have largely already been automated without having to invent new technologies (e.g., turning on autopay on your cellphone).

2. Those with hard to measure standards - such as a "material advertise condition" - which do not lend themselves to automation without human intervention. In contracts of any sort of substantial complexity there will be myriad conditions that are intentionally vague - written this way because the circumstances are hard to predict, as catch-alls, and also to allow for some leeway to maneuver in the future. Or, to be more cynical, to allow your lawyers to argue over the definition in the future. This vagueness is a feature, not a bug, and even if we could implement AI technology to make these decisions with high degrees of precision, business people still not want to implement them because it is ceding control to an unknown third party. In other words, if you are selling a business, you are simply not going to have it be done through a self executing contract. It is not going to happen - it is just too nuts.

Then again, I do enjoy being proven wrong. So only time will tell. I am sure that more and more contracts will become the self-executing type, but I am also fairly sure that self-executing contracts will only ever amount to a small percentage of the contracts that are used 'in business.'

Source: corporate lawyer / former developer.

1 comments

> "Ellcrys" is a word that is likely subject to trademark and owned by Del Rey.

umm, I will be looking into this. Thanks for the heads up.

I understand that there is a lot of debate about what a smart contract is, its legal scope and functions. However, we are not only building to host legal contracts but contract applications that are user-facing or API-based, owned and maintainer by teams or communities. These are the kind of contracts I believe will be most useful and practical today

Thanks for taking the time to check us out :)

Very happy to see you responding!

Let me be totally clear about something: you have built something interesting and you should run with it. You will hear a ton of criticism, including on this forum, telling you to pack it up and take it home. That is bullshit. It is easy to criticize and hard to build. I'm often wrong - and I've been in your shoes. It can be hugely discouraging to read a bunch of criticism on hackernews. Don't take it too personally.

Keep on pursuing. At some point, if you do have to call it quits, make sure it is a reasoned decision based on (1) having already made your best efforts and (2) market feedback. Don't base it on the stuff you read from internet strangers.

Best of luck!

(Luck is when preparedness meets opportunity.)

Thank you so much for your kind words and advice. It means a lot to me. I will definitely remember these words as I build on and receive feedback :-)