191–194 of 194 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ethereum foundations reaction to the DAO hack proved that the "code is the contract" is not true. Which questions the very value of smart contracts on the ethereum blockchain because it's proven that they're immutable now This is a good discussion: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-06-17/blockchai...
Do you mean "mutable", not "immutable"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is asking for a rule. In fact - the conventional use of masculine pronouns that you're enforcing is perhaps the closest thing to a rule that's being imposed, albeit subconsciously. Bro.
I've read enough articles where anonymous or hypothetical actors are given feminine pronouns by female authors that I'd say the convention is to favour the pronoun that represents yourself, not to default to masculine ones. Writers choice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Attempting to expand on context that I think the parent left implicit: - Women are underrepresented — in STEM fields at large and in the cryptocurrency space in particular — relative to a fairer world with less sexism, outmoded notions of gender roles, etc. - This underrepresentation self-perpetuates partly because well-meaning men in these fields don't realize it's happening: it always feels better to believe a happ…
I discovered this article a while ago: Avoiding Sexism in Legal Writing—The Pronoun Problem https://lawyerist.com/49433/avoiding-sexism-in-legal-writing... It has some solid advice, but it also notes that the use of "he" in sex-indeterminate situations was codified by Ann Fisher, "an 18th-Century schoolteacher and the first woman to write an English grammar book." Now, every time I see "he," I think of her.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except no one reserved that right. The majority of the users agreed to basically create a new currency with the same history, minus the theft /unethical taking of money (if you insist on calling it legal).
So "the code is the contract" until enough people decide to unilaterally change the code because they don't like the contract. Which is right back to what I said. There's no way of framing this that preserves the philosophical purity.