Hedge fund manager profited from death arbitrage.

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:42:15AM +0200, rysiek wrote:
> 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. :)

I like comedy as much as you, but a joke does not take away from the
principle of a competitive market for systems, over the long term. The
DAO was not a single contract, nor a series of contracts. It was "a
contract in a competitive market for contracts" in the sense that it was
"a decentralised investment fund/ market maker" in the market for
"decentralized investment funds/ market makers".

But I assume you knew that..