[throwaway405769]

>who decides? and how

I was talking about Kleros at the beginning of the discussion, but it's just one possible option.

>You can only hire someone for a job if you have the money.

No, you can only hire someone for a job using this specific method if you have the money beforehand. This means that Bob can be 100% sure that his employer is capable of paying him.

>In reality many people hire someone for a job and thanks to their help they'll have the money to repay them in the future.

There can be other smart contracts which allow this. The cool thing about them is that Bob is always fully aware whether his employer has the funds to pay him or it's just an IOU.

>But what if Alice disappeared because she's dead, and Bob id the one who killed her?

This is outside of our threat model. We're designing a smart contract for employing a freelancer, not high value SC where murder would be economically viable. If Bob murders Alice this is handled the same way as any other murder.

[peoplefromibiza]

> I was talking about Kleros

so a private service that need people to invest money in ether to participate...

Is this your idea of justice?

Some faceless arbiter, subject to nobody?

Why I am not surprised that your ideas closely match how authoritarian system (and dystopian cyber punk worlds) work?

> This means that Bob can be 100% sure that his employer is capable of paying him.

But he's not sure he's going to actually pay and he's not even sure who the employer is.

> If Bob murders Alice this is handled the same way as any other murder.

You're avoiding the answer, and I understand you, it's hard to come with an answer when your design have bugs.

But smart contracts are immutable pieces of code that act on their own.

If Alice dies Bob get his money.

There no way to stop it from happening.

the chain is a useless tinsel in this example of yours, it makes things more complex and guarantees no one.

The law already encodes tons of conditions that a smart contract could never comply with.

What if Bob is a minor or the employer is a minor?

That would make the contract void in real life.

Should people publish their personal info on the public blockchain so that the smart contract can exclude them from proposing or accepting a job?

And how do you check that the informations are correct?

What if Bob is an immigrant running from a regime and has no way to prove who he is, but needs the job to survive?

etc etc

you'd need to basically recreate what government do today, without the enforcement of the law capability.

who would trust a system like that, except outlaws and scammers?

[throwaway405769]

>Why I am not surprised that your ideas closely match how authoritarian system (and dystopian cyber punk worlds) work?

Imagine calling P2P voluntary interactions authoritarian...

>You're avoiding the answer, and I understand you, it's hard to come with an answer when your design have bugs.

I'm not avoiding an answer, I gave you it clear and straight.

>If Alice dies Bob get his money.

Correct.

>There no way to stop it from happening.

>What if Bob is a minor or the employer is a minor? >That would make the contract void in real life.

Depends on jurisdiction.

>Should people publish their personal info on the public blockchain so that the smart contract can exclude them from proposing or accepting a job?

They can do whatever they want.

>And how do you check that the informations are correct?

Idk. I wasn't proposing putting public info on the blockchain, it's your problem.

>What if Bob is an immigrant running from a regime and has no way to prove who he is, but needs the job to survive?

Bob would be delighted to know that he can interact with a permissionless network that does not require an ID and get paid for his work without revealing his identity.

>you'd need to basically recreate what government do today, without the enforcement of the law capability.

Nope.

>who would trust a system like that, except outlaws and scammers?

People who like efficiency and don't like intermediaries.

[peoplefromibiza]

> Imagine calling P2P voluntary interactions authoritarian...

many nazis volunteered.

it's funny that people like you, who don't have a clue about what they're talking about, think they are so edgy that have something to teach to the humanity as a whole.

> Bob would be delighted to know that he can interact with a permissionless network that does not require an ID and get paid for his work without revealing his identity.

so basically Bob the pedophile could work with kids and nobody would ever know, until it's too late.

Or Bob the racist could employ black kids from developing country and everyone would be OK with that.

Bit most of all nobody could stop Bob, because nobody knows who he is!

That's a great advancement for society!

Of course bad people of the World would be delighted, I bet they would!

I'm starting to think you're one of them.

> People who like efficiency and don't like intermediaries.

exactly: mobsters, criminals, scammers, etc etc

there is nothing to gain for the common people. they can only lose the few protections they have left.

[throwaway405769]

Crypto is the most anti-authoritarian and anti-nazi technology of 21st century. It empowers the individual and makes them less vulnerable to state violence, like getting their wealth confiscated because of their ethnicity.

You've proven multiple times that you have no idea what you're talking about.

[peoplefromibiza]

> Crypto is the most anti-authoritarian and anti-nazi technology of 21st century

CVD. cargo cult.

how is crypto stopping Nazis?

and who cares if it's true or not, I was merely addressing your reasoning: volunteering and well behaving are orthogonal.

People can both volunteer and do bad.

> It empowers the individual and makes them less vulnerable to state violenc

it also makes them alone and vulnerable to any other kind of violence, and put them outside of the protection of the state and/or the community.

in your example people have to both pay for the justice system through taxes and for a private jury system handled by who knows who, using expensive crypto currency, when they already have a justice system they pay for.

> like getting their wealth confiscated because of their ethnicity

how exactly?

can you show Me an example where this actually happened, outside of your idealistic virtual universe?

like if nobody has ever been scammed in the crypto space.

> You've proven multiple times that you have no idea what you're talking about.

see?

that's what I am talking about: you confuse what you blindly believe with reality.

The world, unfortunately for you, is not what you imagine it to be though...