ALTCOIN should adopt to law and system and be ruled by miners ? in PoW concept.

[barnaba]

should we adopt altcoins or tokens to law and system with all tricks know to the team or avoid any law frames and be as much outside of the core law system as possible ?
There is a lot of issues connected which depends on a approach we choose as creators.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/a-legal-analysis-of-the-dao-exploit-and-possible-investor-rights-1466524659/

There is a lot of special usage for coins and tokens representing something described by law sometimes it is useful sometimes it kills idea.

What are the most regulated and with most rules coins?

[1715489619]

1715489619

[1715489619]

1715489619

[dinofelis]

The notion of a decentralized, trustless system, which is the motivation for bitcoin, and the basis for most of (at least grassroots) crypto, is incompatible with central authority and (hence) law.

This very simple truth is overlooked by almost all people wanting to have some "compliance" with crypto.  Crypto has at its core, an anarchist principle.

Now, one can say that this is bullshit, and that one CAN use crypto in a perfectly legal, law-abiding and state-pleasing way.  And that's true.  But the problem is that crypto is then a clumsy, wasteful, slow, and silly game.  All the difficulty, all the user-unfriendlyness, all the wasted storage, network and computing effort that makes crypto into what it is, is needed to get this (illusionary ?) decentralization and trustlessness.   But IF you comply to law and the central authority of the state (these are two almost identical notions), then you *are* trusting a central authority.  And then you don't NEED to go through all that hassle.  As such, any competing system that *uses* this trust in state and law, will be much more lean, fast, practical, and in the end, safe (as long as state and law are safe) than what crypto can offer, and crypto is, in that scope, a losing proposition.

It is not so much a matter of whether one prefers an anarchist view frame, or a legalist/statist view frame ; it is rather that crypto has the first one at its core, and that it loses most of its sense and competitive edge in the second view frame.  This is like go sailing with an airplane.   An airplane is made to fly, and not to float.  Yes, you can make a sailing floating airplane, but that's not a competitive sailing boat.

[eckmar]

well the whole point is avoiding that. What is the point of making crypto that will abide by anyones law and system even miners. Anyone with lots of hashpower can do whatever they want

[barnaba]

well the whole point is avoiding that. What is the point of making crypto that will abide by anyones law and system even miners. Anyone with lots of hashpower can do whatever they want

? do whatever they want ? Yes and then being sue.
How big companies having lot of hashpower can hide - their presence and locations are in many cases known.

The Bigger issue is that if you change the blockchain against some of the rules there will be some community creating side chain like ETH adn ETC.
The price will drop also. So even you act against the rules as mining pool you don't do it on large scale.

If there is no rules or cash is general in shadow sphere than yes there is a little chance of court solution.

Not fitting in any system leaves you dependent on market reaction backup as only and last backup.

Fitting in some law system is difficult but gives customer and sometimes product owner extra laws.

DAO with rules if hacked then it is theft in 100% in law and social term. DAO without rules has no rules also of exploatation.
ICONOMI did succeed.
DO did almost. maybe they started too soon with to similar IDEA.