Dnia środa, 17 sierpnia 2016 14:01:02 CEST Zenaan Harkness pisze:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:07:59PM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
> > On 08/16/2016 12:09 PM, jim bell wrote:
> >
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > > AP ('Assassination Politics'; https://cryptome.org/ap.htm ) can
> > > be considered to be 'death arbitrage' with a few key differences:
> > > The person who will die isn't part of the agreement, and doesn't
> > > profit when the initial deal is struck, nor later.
> >
> > Ah, but someone with a huge bet on their death could commit suicide, and
> > so their estate would profit. Or is that against AP rules?
>
> "The rules" are the rules formed in the respective contracts, presumably
> - how could it be any other way?
>
> Therefore unsuccessful or "gamed" contracts would be the fodder of
> lessons learnt for future contracts in the competitive market for
> assassination contracts, which is that which AP presupposes...Yeah, because that approach worked so well for The DAO. :) -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
