Your not getting what im trying to say, you jsut keep defending and dont really trying to understand what might happened in the future.
I do perfectly understand what you are talking about and I agree that losing money by accident or hack - sucks. Iām just saying that all your arguments are completely inapplicable in the case of Cardano, by design.
This is where GOVERNANCE voting will enter if community will allow to revert the hack or not. But still IOHK is the one in charge no matter what happened.
Yes. Exactly.
Iām no lawyer, but I have strong doubts that this will hold as valid argument in a court.
IOHK wont have the power to hard-fork, only the community does.
@jon-oh they are not in charge once staking is in place, then the community is in charge. IOHK, cant hard fork, even if they were forced by a court if the community wont adapt the fork.
and I know for sure that IOHK by principle will not try a fork no matter what (unless legally instructed to by a court). Thats why ETC is here.
I will ask you, if you build a robot in your best way that it will not harm people. But the next day it destroy whatever it see. Who do you think will be liable for that? Robot has its own mind.
That is a legal questions that has not been answered, there is no precedence for this. So there is no obvious answer.
If by robot you mean sentient as compared to humans. Not some machine-learning scripted/coded robot.
If it is a coded robot that was following commands then I would assume your intentions come into play, and yeah I could definitely see you be monetarily liable for damages. Sure but, but with Cardano you cant pinpoint the master since they are not the creators, they created the code open source code but we are the distributers of that code. We run that codeā¦ IOHK dontā¦ So technically everyone would be liable equally - and that would just be a legal mess lolā¦
If I create a evil robot codeā¦ But you are the person who uses that codeā¦ Then you are liable, not meā¦
The same goes for IOHK, they dont run the codeā¦ They create the code which is open source, and we take that code (all the nodes) and run it basicallyā¦
But no matter whatā¦ People can sue IOHK, but it wont mean anything to Cardano, because they wont have the power to do anything even if they wanted, if the community doesnāt. Thats the power of decentralization.
IOHK can make a hard-fork, but no one has to accept it that forkā¦
I will ask you a more realistic and relevant question in return: I build a robot that can execute a single command āDeliver moneyā. It works like this - you give the robot some money, and you say who he should deliver it to. And then he delivers it perfectly. One day, you mess up and say wrong name to the robot. Robot delivers money to the person you have named.
Am I the person to be blamed for the fact that you have messed up with the delivery destination? No. Do I have the power to magically return your money from another person? No.
What you asked is a fallacy.
Physically. Yes, you can instruct robot to get and move the money.
Yes, if amazon delivers to wrong person where do you complain?
Physciall its hard to get the money back.
Digitally. Its possible, anything is possible.
This sentence alone is literally perfectly opposite to the philosophy and mindset of a blockchain as I see it. I will be really interested in trying to write an article about it sometime, cuz this is exactly the mindset that we as a community should try to destroy.
But for now I only can give you an advice to read or listen to Andreas Antonopoulos or something like it. Read āInternet of Moneyā. You really just donāt get the whole idea why itās done, and Iām not trying to be cocky. You need to understand the idea behind bit-torrent to get why thereās no one to complaint to if you send money to a wrong address.
I think I cannot contribute anything more to this discussion, my arguments were either ignored or misinterpreted at the core, exactly because of the misalign in our views of the world of the blockchain.
But it was an interesting discussion that led to this realisation that very many work yet to be put into battling this viewpoint. Thank you, @jon-oh, and I hope it will not leave any bad emotions between us, and we will be able to cooperate on the forum, as we are one community still 
I donāt have any bad feelings, would be interesting to see what will happened in the future. Because theres still lots of things that might happened which blockchain cant resolve easily as compared to banks since we are talking currency here.
It seems you do not fully understand how this works and should work and therefore you could not get your head around it.
Thatās OK, because our brain (which is a biological neural network) is wired differently in the childhood based on the individualās gene pool, environment (geo, culture etc) and experiences, moreover we have never, ever had anything like this before, and therefore weāre always trying to justify our logical reasoning unconsciousnessly based on the well known and experienced centralistic thinking (we need someone in charge, centralisation, institutions etc.) and therefore itās very hard to go over on these emotional walls/bocks that stop us to be really open-minded and to see beyond on them.
.
Try to be open-minded to see that centralism (which attracts power, psycho- and sociopaths and lead to positive feedback that generates more power, more *paths etc.) made and still make enormous harm to the humankind by fooling the people all the time. As a species, weāre very immature but very self-confident in our smartness individually (no exceptions).
I am sorry if I seem rude I did not intend to be.
1 Like
i think you are the one who doesnāt fully understand what is decentralised system and with a centralised control than a fully decentralised system which everyone can commit and do changes. I mean literally ANYONE even who doesnt know programming.