[e-cvs] cvs commit: e/doc/talks/pisa/paper index.html

markm@eros.cs.jhu.edu markm@eros.cs.jhu.edu
Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:57:37 -0500


markm       01/12/27 09:57:37

  Modified:    doc/talks/pisa/paper index.html
  Log:
  more

Revision  Changes    Path
1.9       +360 -143  e/doc/talks/pisa/paper/index.html

Index: index.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/e/doc/talks/pisa/paper/index.html,v
retrieving revision 1.8
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -r1.8 -r1.9
--- index.html	2001/12/27 09:02:07	1.8
+++ index.html	2001/12/27 14:57:37	1.9
@@ -59,12 +59,12 @@
       <p>As Hernando de Soto explains in The Mystery of Capital [<a href="#deSoto00">deSoto00</a>], 
         the poor of the third world (including much of the former communist world) 
         do not suffer from, in his terminology, a lack of <i>assets</i>; rather, 
-        they suffer from a lack of <i>capital</i>. The poor around the world do, 
-        surprisingly enough, have assets. In a simple experiment, in which de 
-        Soto's associates drove around neighborhoods in various poor countries, 
-        assessing the value of buildings which were not formally titled, de Soto 
-        extrapolated that the value of just the informally owned buildings in 
-        the third world amounted to $9.3 trillion -- more than half the combined 
+        they suffer from a lack of <i>capital</i>. Many of the poor around the 
+        world do, surprisingly enough, have assets. In a simple experiment, in 
+        which de Soto's associates drove around neighborhoods in various poor 
+        countries, assessing the value of buildings which were not formally titled, 
+        de Soto extrapolated that the value of just the informally owned buildings 
+        in the third world amounted to $9.3 trillion -- more than half the combined 
         value of all publicly traded U.S. companies.</p>
       <p>De Soto's focus is on the <i>informal</i> sector -- that sphere of economic 
         activity that occurs outside of the official <i>formal</i> legal system. 
@@ -132,9 +132,17 @@
         remove. This thought experiment led directly to seminal work responsible 
         for much of the modern world of interactive systems that we now take for 
         granted.</p>
-      <p align="center"><i>It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup,<br>
-        but not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium.</i></p>
-      <p align="right"><i>--Lech Walesa&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</i></p>
+      <div align="center"> 
+        <table cellpadding="12">
+          <tr> 
+            <td> 
+              <p align="center"><i>It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup,<br>
+                but not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium.</i></p>
+              <p align="right">--Lech Walesa</p>
+            </td>
+          </tr>
+        </table>
+      </div>
       <p>The 20th century performed a similar experiment on a grand scale, tying 
         large bricks to large societies with the best of intentions, but with 
         vastly tragic consequences. Only by learning from this experiment may 
@@ -288,9 +296,9 @@
         the employees and executives of the organization might be.</p>
       <p>Other examples of familiar WTIIs include title companies, insurance, 
         escrow, exchanges and auction houses, underwriters, Consumer Reports, 
-        Roger Ebert, courts and police, etc... The list is endless. </p>
-      <p><img src="images/4-low-trust.gif" width="350" height="218" align="right">From 
-        a simple graph-theoretic point of view [<a href="#Granovetter73">Granovetter73</a>], 
+        Roger Ebert, notaries, arbiters, courts and cops, money, etc... The list 
+        is endless. </p>
+      <p>From a simple graph-theoretic point of view [<a href="#Granovetter73">Granovetter73</a>], 
         we can analyze the Fukiyama low-trust world (in which the fanout from 
         each node is small) and the de Soto missing-WTII world (in which the hubs 
         are absent), and immediately recognize which brick has the greater impact 
@@ -304,22 +312,30 @@
         to each other. The resulting picture resembles both Fukuyama's portrayal 
         of familial trust societies, and de Soto's portrayal of networks of villages 
         of informals.</p>
-      <p align="center"><i>The division of labor is limited by the extent of the 
-        market.</i></p>
-      <p align="right"><i>--Adam Smith&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</i></p>
+      <div align="center"> 
+        <table cellpadding="12">
+          <tr> 
+            <td> 
+              <p align="center"><i>The division of labor is limited by the extent 
+                of the market.</i></p>
+              <p align="right">--Adam Smith</p>
+            </td>
+          </tr>
+        </table>
+      </div>
       <p>The virtual network of Figure 3 forms one large market with great extent, 
         enabling a great division of knowledge and labor. The virtual network 
         of Figure 4 is one of many separate markets, barely connected to each 
         other, and each individually of minor extent.</p>
-      <p>But shouldn't this situation be an ideal growth medium for WTIIs? If 
-        there is great market need for them, then surely there is great demand 
-        and great opportunity. Indeed, this is the situation from which the WTII 
-        backbone grew spontaneously in the west. Absent government oppression 
-        we should indeed expect it to grow here as well. However, Western-style 
-        WTII infrastructures are the result of slow growth processes; they build 
-        slowly over time. These widespread trust needed by these institutions 
-        can be seen as a form of capital that takes a long time to accumulate. 
-      </p>
+      <p><img src="images/4-low-trust.gif" width="350" height="218" align="right">But 
+        shouldn't this situation be an ideal growth medium for WTIIs? If there 
+        is great market need for them, then surely there is great demand and great 
+        opportunity. Indeed, this is the situation from which the WTII backbone 
+        grew spontaneously in the west. Absent government oppression we should 
+        indeed expect it to grow here as well. However, Western-style WTII infrastructures 
+        are the result of slow growth processes; they build slowly over time. 
+        These widespread trust needed by these institutions can be seen as a form 
+        of capital that takes a long time to accumulate. </p>
       <p>One of the depressing features of the pictures painted by both Fukiyama 
         and de Soto is that the only hope they see for these societies is home-grown, 
         with each individual third world nation bootstrapping itself through all 
@@ -388,133 +404,324 @@
         the government must discover and respect the local laws, and work out, 
         at considerable cost in time and effort, a way to integrate those local 
         laws with the national systems.</p>
-      <p> The difficulty comes from an inherent tension between local knowledge 
-        and global credibility -- local knowledge of the idiosyncratic people's 
-        law, conventions, and negotiated arrangements in force in each village, 
-        <i>vs.</i> the need to move the governance of title transfer to WTIIs, 
-        whose wide scope requires them to operate from a more homogenized set 
-        of rules. This tension is acute on the governmental path, because the 
-        homogenized set of rules is not even per title company, but rather the 
-        official legal system itself. Governmental legal systems are not the wonders 
-        of adaptability de Soto's program would seem to require. However, he offers 
-        no alternative. Though difficult, he shows that this path can work, and 
-        he documents that it did work when the U.S. absorbed the wild west.</p>
-      <p>As if this work were not difficult enough, this whole process faces enormous 
+      <p> The difficulty comes from an inherent tension between <i>local knowledge</i> 
+        and <i>global credibility</i> -- local knowledge of the idiosyncratic 
+        people's law, conventions, and negotiated arrangements in force in each 
+        village, <i>vs.</i> the need to move the governance of title transfer 
+        to WTIIs, whose wide scope requires them to operate from a more homogenized 
+        set of rules. This tension is acute on the governmental path, as the homogenized 
+        set of rules is not even per title company, but rather the official legal 
+        system itself. Governmental legal systems are hardly the wonders of adaptability 
+        de Soto's program would seem to require. Even with the best of intentions, 
+        an accommodation between the two must rapidly turn into a Procrustean 
+        bed. However, de Soto offers no alternative. Though difficult, he is successfully 
+        making this path work, and he documents how it did work when formal U.S. 
+        law, slowly and painfully, absorbed the wild informal west.</p>
+      <p>As if this path were not difficult enough, this whole process faces enormous 
         obstacles from many different factions, notably bureaucracies and lawyers 
-        within the national sphere that see this as an assault on their prerogatives. 
-        The process never becomes easy: each village is another major upheaval 
-        in the perceptions and preferences of entrenched groups dedicated to protecting 
-        the status quo. </p>
+        within the national sphere that see this as an assault on their prerogatives, 
+        as de Soto also documents. The process never becomes easy: each step of 
+        progress is another major upheaval in the perceptions and preferences 
+        of entrenched groups dedicated to protecting the status quo.</p>
       <h3><a name="bootstrapping"></a>The Digital Path</h3>
-      <p align="center"><i>National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information 
-        superhighway.</i></p>
-      <p align="right"><i>--Tim May&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</i></p>
+      <div align="center"> 
+        <table cellpadding="12">
+          <tr> 
+            <td> 
+              <p align="center"><i>National borders aren't even speed bumps on 
+                the information superhighway.</i></p>
+              <p align="right"><i>--Tim May</i></p>
+            </td>
+          </tr>
+        </table>
+      </div>
       <p>Can we sidestep this brutally painful process? Perhaps eventually with 
         the Net. </p>
-      <p><font color="#000000"><img src="images/5-bootstrap.gif" width="366" height="214" align="right">For 
-        e-goods and e-services that can be provided purely electronically, due 
-        to the Net, these can now be purchased from across the world as easily 
-        as from next door. The providers and consumers of these e-goods and e-services 
-        have escaped the old limits of geography and jurisdiction. If the functions 
-        provided by various WTIIs, including title and contract enforcement, can 
-        be supplied as purely electronic services, then existing first world trust 
-        hubs could bootstrap the third world on a global scale through the new 
-        medium. (Figure 5)</font></p>
-      <p><font color="#000000">Many first world trust hubs are already trusted 
+      <p><font color="#000000"><img src="images/5-bootstrap.gif" width="366" height="214" align="right">Due 
+        to the Net, purely electronic goods and services can now be purchased 
+        from across the world as easily as from next door. Consumers of these 
+        goods and services have already escaped old limits of geography and jurisdiction. 
+        If the functions provided by various WTIIs were offered by prominent first 
+        world trust hubs as purely electronic services, those in need of such 
+        widely trusted intermediary services could escape as well -- escape from 
+        the crushing assumption that such services can only be provided by institutions 
+        beholden to their own governments. Instead, they could reach across the 
+        Net to use these services, and begin to bootstrap themselves out of their 
+        poverty by participating in the global networks of commerce. (Figure 5) 
+        </font></p>
+      <p>Many first world trust hubs are already widely known and plausibly trusted 
         in the third world because of the frenetic distribution efforts of the 
-        traditional broadcasting media such as television: shows ranging from 
-        CNN to Dallas and Baywatch have granted an aura of respectability to first 
+        western broadcasting media such as television: shows ranging from CNN 
+        to Dallas and Baywatch have granted an aura of respectability to first 
         world organizations that most governments can only envy. (However one 
-        may feel about this process, it is occurring, so it may as well be put 
-        to good use.) Using first world WTIIs, villages on a global scale can 
-        in principle become part of a global trust network. For example, if a 
-        person in village A wants to sell a tractor to a person in village D, 
-        a couple of villages away, they could easily reach across the Net to a 
-        title registry run by Citibank in New York to execute the transfer. In 
-        a similar fashion, the tractor may be securitized, transforming it into 
-        capital. And in a state such as Russia, a title listing with Citibank 
-        would, ironically, have more legitimacy than a title listed by their own 
-        government.</font> </p>
-      <p><font color="#000000">As an additional bonus, once the villages of the 
-        world join this global village, it is much easier to grow local high-trust 
-        hubs as well: an entity becomes widely trusted by consistently and visibly 
-        performing in accordance with the contracts being managed by hubs that 
-        are already widely trusted. A working trust backbone gives highly trustworthy 
-        behavior the visibility it needs to more rapidly accumulate its own reputation-capital. 
-        </font></p>
+        may feel about this process, it is occurring, so we may as well put it 
+        to good use.) Using first world WTIIs, villages on a global scale could 
+        become part of a global trust network. For example, if a person in village 
+        A wants to sell a tractor to a person in village D, a couple of villages 
+        away, they could easily use a title registry run by Citibank in New York 
+        to execute the transfer. In a similar fashion, the tractor may be securitized, 
+        transforming it into capital. And in a state such as Russia, a title listing 
+        with Citibank would, ironically, have more legitimacy than a title listed 
+        by their own government.</p>
+      <p>Although these first-world WTIIs enable their customers to escape the 
+        limitations of jurisdiction, early on they not be so lucky themselves. 
+        However, during bootstrap, this may be a blessing in disguise.Widespread 
+        trust implies widespread vulnerability of others to the WTII, which is 
+        why such trust is hard to accumulate. The possibility of recourse against 
+        the WTIIs is an integral part of the widespread sense that they can be 
+        trusted, as they evolved to become trusted in the context of that environment. 
+      </p>
+      <p><font color="#000000">But once the villages of the world join this global 
+        village, it will be much easier to grow jurisdiction-free high-trust hubs 
+        as well: an entity becomes widely trusted by consistently and visibly 
+        performing in accordance with various contracts -- contracts being managed 
+        by hubs that are already widely trusted. With a working trust backbone, 
+        highly trustworthy behavior gets the visibility it needs to more rapidly 
+        accumulate its own reputation-capital. </font></p>
       <h3><font color="#000000"><a name="smart-contracts"></a>Smart Contracts</font></h3>
-      <p>How might such WTIIs deal with the idiosyncracies of local village tradition, 
-        the idiosyncracies that sabotage traditional governmental attempts to 
-        capitalize village assets? By the use of smart contracts.</p>
+      <p>How might such WTIIs deal with the idiosyncracies of each village's <i>people's 
+        law</i>, the idiosyncracies that sabotage traditional governmental attempts 
+        to capitalize village assets, without taking on the impossible burden 
+        of learning all this local knowledge itself, without imposing the costs 
+        of homogenization? By the use of smart contracts.</p>
       <p><font color="#000000">In smart contracts, the program code is an operational 
-        embodiment of the contract. A drink vending machine is a very primitive 
-        example of a smart contract, being executed on a contract host: it is 
-        the trusted intermediary between the drink manufacturer and the purchaser. 
-        It escrows drinks and money, and performs an exchange of those goods when 
-        both have been presented. There is even a rollback process, in which it 
-        returns the money if the drink manufacturer is unable to delivery the 
-        drink.</font></p>
-      <p><font color="#000000">To the extent possible, the smart contract code 
-        directly enforces the terms of the contract; as in the vending machine 
-        example, it provides an inescapable arrangement rather than a set of penalty 
-        clauses which require separate enforcement after contract breach, as is 
-        typical in traditional contracts [<a href="#Szabo97">Szabo97</a>, <a href="#Miller00">Miller00</a>].</font></p>
-      <p><font color="#000000"><img src="images/6-exchange.gif" width="390" height="247" align="right">The 
-        basic metaphor for the composition of smart contracts is the board game. 
-        When two people negotiate a contract, they are jointly designing the rules 
-        of a game they would both be willing to play. To start the actual play, 
-        they turn the board management over to a contract host and start moving 
-        assets onto the board, where the contract host escrows the assets for 
-        completion. These assets, represented as <i>erights</i> in the electronic 
-        context, are the pieces on the board; the players make the moves, but 
-        the only moves deemed legal by the code, in the context of the current 
-        state of the board, are allowed.</font></p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p><font color="#000000"><img src="images/7-duties.gif" width="297" height="299" align="right">In 
-        the simple example illustrated in Figure X, we have a 5-party game (contract). 
-        Alice wishes to buy stock from Bob. The contract host escrows money from 
-        Alice (managed by the currency issuer) and stock from Bob (managed by 
-        the stock issuer). Once the money and the stock have both been placed 
-        on the board, the contract host transfers title on both assets to the 
-        recipients, and the game is over. </font></p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p><font color="#000000"><img src="images/8-option.gif" width="379" height="235" align="right">Games 
-        such as this can be arbitrarily sophisticated, requiring only more sophisticated 
-        software to embody them. A slightly more sophisticated example is the 
-        covered call option. (see figure).</font></p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>&nbsp;</p>
+        embodiment of the contract [<a href="#Szabo97">Szabo97</a>]. A drink vending 
+        machine is a very primitive example of a smart contract, being executed 
+        on a contract host: it is the partially trusted intermediary between the 
+        drink manufacturer and the purchaser. It escrows drinks and money, and 
+        performs an exchange of those goods when both have been presented. There 
+        is even a rollback process, in which it returns the money if the drink 
+        manufacturer is unable to delivery the drink. Traditional contracts are 
+        understood to be backed by a coercive enforcement system made of courts 
+        and cops. However, the vending machine does not have the option of such 
+        coercive recourse following a breach. In what sense is it a contract?</font></p>
+      <p>The vending-machine-as-contract would indeed require separate enforcement 
+        if it dispensed the drink first and then demanded payment. However, by 
+        escrowing both drinks and payment before dispensing either, it also dispenses 
+        with the need for separate enfocement. Instead of enforcement, the contract 
+        creates an <i>inescapable arrangement</i>. It cannot prevent the customer 
+        from walking away before the game is over, but a customer who walks away 
+        from a contract in progress leaves behind any assets escrowed by the contract 
+        at that point [<font color="#000000"><a href="#Miller00">Miller00</a>]</font>. 
+        The terms of the contract are enforced by the contract itself -- by the 
+        behavior of the contract when executed as a program.</p>
+      <p>Although conventional coercive recourse is still often possible on the 
+        Net, for more and more Net commerce these costs are too great, and the 
+        jurisdictional issues potentially too messy. Instead, Net businesses have 
+        been engaging in rich and rapid experimentation with cooperative arrangements 
+        that require no coercive recourse [<a href="#WhatsHerName"><font color="#FF0000">WhatsHerName</font></a>]. 
+        The most common arrangements involve not actual escrow, but reputation 
+        feedback and credit [<a href="#Steckbeck01">Steckbeck01</a>]. This has 
+        a similar logic, in that a partcipant effectively secures their good performance 
+        with the value of their reputation capital. Such arragements are messier 
+        and less amenable to automation than escrow, but they do substantially 
+        reduce capital costs. Both kinds of arrangements have their place and 
+        will compete in the market. Here, I will explore escrow-based smart contracts, 
+        not because I expect this form to dominate, but because their logic is 
+        vastly easier to explain; because they're easier to build, and so will 
+        occur sooner; and because they apply to participants with no prior reputation, 
+        which helps for bootstrapping the transition. Likewise, for the electronic 
+        systems of title (or <i>issuers</i> below), in this paper I assume systems 
+        that provide for instant settlement [<a href="#e-gold">e-gold</a>]. Although 
+        delayed settlement may substantially reduce capital costs [<a href="#Selgin01" target="_top">Selgin01</a>], 
+        they turn smart contracts into explosions of complexity.</p>
+      <h3><font color="#000000"><img src="images/6-exchange.gif" width="390" height="247" align="right"></font>Contracts 
+        as Games</h3>
+      <p><font color="#000000">The basic metaphor for the composition of smart 
+        contracts is the board game. When two people negotiate a contract, they 
+        are jointly designing the rules of a game they would both be willing to 
+        play. Once they commit to playing this game, the players may them make 
+        moves, but only moves judged legal by the rules given the current board 
+        state. Each move potentially changes the board state, changing which moves 
+        are legal during the next turn.</font></p>
+      <p><font color="#000000">For example, Figure 6 shows the six possible board 
+        states of a simple negotiation and exchange game. Let's say Alice is playing 
+        the left side of the board and Bob the right. The initial board state 
+        is the one shown on the far left, in which neither of the pieces is on 
+        the board. The gold bar, representing money, is off the board on the left, 
+        which portrays its possession by Alice at this time. For concreteness, 
+        let's say the knight represents stock. Bob might offer a certain amount 
+        of stock to Alice by placing it on the left square of the board. This 
+        takes us to the board state that's up and right from the initial state. 
+        Alice might not respond soon enough, in which case Bob may withdraw his 
+        offer by taking back the knight, bringing us back to the initial state. 
+        That's why the first transition arrow is shown as bidirectional.</font></p>
+      <p><font color="#000000">Or Alice may respond to Bob's offer with a certain 
+        amount of money, by placing it on the right square of the board. This 
+        takes us to the upper right board state. At this point, either party may 
+        still decide they're unsatisfied, withdraw their piece, and reenter the 
+        loop of bidirectional arrows. Or, in the upper right board state, Bob 
+        may pick up the money offered by Alice. Bob has accepted Alice's offer. 
+        This is the irreversible commitment step shown by the bold unidirectional 
+        arrow, and takes us to the board state down one. From here, the only possible 
+        move is for Alice to pick up Bob's knight.</font></p>
+      <p>How is this contract self enforcing? What prevents cheating? Who needs 
+        to trust whom with what? To answer these questions, we must start by explaining 
+        what is happening on whose computer. We assume that each player trusts 
+        their own computer (a dangerous assumption, but we cannot proceed without 
+        it). We also assume that player A cannot not trust player B's computer 
+        any more or less than they trust player B. Under these assumptions, we 
+        can treat a computer and its proprietor as a single unit for purposes 
+        of analysis.</p>
+      <p><font color="#000000"><img src="images/7-duties.gif" width="297" height="299" align="right">The 
+        execution of this game actually involves five parties. The two players 
+        of course, Alice and Bob. The contract host serves the same role as our 
+        vending machine -- it is the third party mutually trusted to execute the 
+        contract/program faithfully. The contract can be any program Alice and 
+        Bob mutually agree on, written in a safe language suitable for writing 
+        smart contracts, that functions as the <i>board manager</i> for the game 
+        they have agreed to play. (A <i>board manager</i> for, for example, chess, 
+        is a program that enables two people to play with each other, maintains 
+        the board state, and only allows legal moves. A board manager does not 
+        itself play the game.)</font></p>
+      <p><font color="#000000">Unlike the vending machine, the contract host need 
+        not have any prior knowledge of the contract.</font> Once Alice and Bob 
+        agree on the text of a board manager and on a mutually trusted contract 
+        host, they upload the board manager to the contract host, which then verifies 
+        for them that they've agreed on the same contract, and dispenses to each 
+        the right to play their respective sides of the game, shown as the arrows 
+        pointing at the respective chairs. The contract can embody the knowledge 
+        of acceptable arrangements local to Alice and Bob, local custom, prior 
+        handshakes, etc... If the contract host can be trusted at all, it can 
+        be trusted to run this contract faithfully, despite its ignorance of the 
+        local knowledge that gives it meaning. The tension between local knowledge 
+        and widespread trust is partially resolved.</p>
+      <p>(In the vast majority of cases, one would expect Alice and Bob to select 
+        a &quot;boilerplate&quot; contract/program off the shelf and fill in the 
+        blanks, rather than write a contract/program from scratch. However, the 
+        story of the custom contract better shows the logic by which the system 
+        operates, and may explain how these shelves will come to be stocked.)</p>
+      <p>The &quot;$-Issuer&quot; and the &quot;Stock-Issuer&quot; turns the movement 
+        of the pieces into a transfer of erights. A $-Issuer, or more conventionally 
+        a bank, is effectively a title company for money. For money on record 
+        at the bank, the rights to the money changes hands by the transfer of 
+        quantity between accounts -- shown above as <i>purses</i> within the issuers. 
+        When Alice places the gold bar on the board, her computer, the $-Issuer, 
+        and the contract host engage in a three-way cryptographic transaction 
+        that bring about the transfer of title, at the $-Issuer, of that much 
+        money from Alice to, as far as the $-Issuer is concerned, the contract 
+        host. An honest contract host would consider this money to be only piece 
+        on the board, which can be picked up (transfered to the possession of 
+        a player) only according to whatever may be the rules of the game. We 
+        refer to this as <i>oblivious escrow</i>.</p>
+      <p>A dishonest contract host could abscond with the money instead, which 
+        is why contract hosts needs to be widely trusted. A widely trusted contract 
+        host presumably has a valuable reputation at stake, and this value helps 
+        secure honest behavior. (More sophisticated cryptographic protocols are 
+        possible which further limit the player's vulnerability to a dishonest 
+        contract host or issuer, but these are beyond the scope of this paper.) 
+      </p>
+      <p>In the arrangement shown here, the $-Issuer, the Stock-Issuer, and the 
+        contract host need not have any prior knowledge or trust of any of the 
+        other four players. For the game to be meaningful, Alice and Bob must 
+        have prior knowledge and trust in both issuers and the contract host, 
+        but not in each other. Even if Alice and Bob are both use-once pseudonymous 
+        identities with no apparent physical location [<a href="#Vinge84">Vinge84</a>], 
+        under these conditions, they can transact with each other <i>as if</i> 
+        they fully trust each other.</p>
+      <h3>Assets + Contracts x Time = Capital</h3>
+      <p><font color="#000000"><img src="images/8-option.gif" width="379" height="235" align="right">The 
+        Smart Contracts explained so far, the vending machine and the exchange 
+        game, cannot turn assets into capital. To do so requires contracts that 
+        unfold over time, like a mortgage. To explain how such unfolding creates 
+        ever more abstract forms of property, a good clear example is the <i>covered 
+        call option</i>. (Such instruments are kindergarden finance for many, 
+        so excuse us while we belabor the obvious. Re-explaining the familiar 
+        is often necessary when translating into a different medium.)</font></p>
+      <p><font color="#000000">Alice has an <i>option</i> when she has the right, 
+        but not the obligation, to engage in some action at some agreed price 
+        before some deadline. Alice has a <i>call</i> option when she has the 
+        right to buy some agreed asset, let's say stock, at some agreed price 
+        before the deadline. The option is a <i>covered</i> call option when Alice's 
+        counterparty, Bob, escrows up front the stock Alice may decide to purchase.</font></p>
+      <p>We may visualize this as the game shown in Figure 8. In the initial board 
+        state, shown in the top left, the stock is already on the board. While 
+        in this state, neither Alice nor Bob may pick up the stock. Another &quot;player&quot; 
+        in the game, so to speak, is the game clock. Should the deadline expire 
+        while in this initial state, the clock causes a transition to a state 
+        from which Bob can now pick up his stock and go home.</p>
+      <p>Or, before the deadline expires, Alice may decide to <i>exercise</i> 
+        the option. She may place a gold piece on the left square. Unlike in the 
+        previous game, in this game the acceptable amounts are predetermined by 
+        the rules. The left square only accepts a certain amount of money. If 
+        Alice places this amount of money on the board, this is the irrevocable 
+        commitment step shown as the bold unidirectional arrow. After this move, 
+        the only remaining legal moves are for Alice to pick up the stock, and 
+        for Bob to pick up the money.</p>
+      <p>What is so different about this contract? During the time between when 
+        the game starts (when Alice gets access to her chair) and the time when 
+        the game transitions to a new board state (either by expiration of the 
+        deadline or by exercise of the option), Alice a something valuable. During 
+        this interval, Alice has the option to buy this stock. This is a very 
+        different kind of value to have than the stock or money themselves. The 
+        value of this new right <i>derives</i> from the value of the stock and 
+        the money, but whereas they are very simple literal kinds of rights, this 
+        new right is somehow more abstract. In Wall Street terminology, the new 
+        right is a <i>derivative</i> of the more literal <i>underlying</i> rights. 
+        In de Soto's terminology, if the literal instruments are physical <i>assets</i>, 
+        then abstract rights derived by contracts about these instruments are 
+        <i>capital</i>. </p>
+      <p>But there's something missing from this picture. Through the system so 
+        far depicted, Alice can trade those rights managed by issuers -- money 
+        and stock. The contract host, despite its complete ignorance that it has 
+        done so, has created a new valuable right, owned by Alice. But in the 
+        picture so far, Alice has no ability to trade this new right. This needs 
+        to be repaired, in order for these new rights to truly be capital, and 
+        in order for yet more abstract forms of capital to be derived from them.</p>
+      <h3><img src="images/9-layering.gif" width="324" height="304" align="right">Networks 
+        of Games</h3>
+      <p>What we need, quite simply, is an issuer of this new right Alice holds 
+        -- the right to sit in the left chair, in order to be able to play the 
+        left side of this on-going game. Since the contract host is already managing 
+        access to this chair, it seems natural to have it double as the issuer 
+        for the right to sit in this chair. Just as Alice could tell the $-Issuer 
+        to transfer some of her money from her purse to some else's, we can enable 
+        Alice to tell the contract host to transfer her right to sit in this chair 
+        to someone else. The contract host would then revoke Alice's access to 
+        the chair, and issue fresh access to the new player, much as the $-Issuer 
+        does with Alice's money.</p>
+      <p>With this last step, it seems we have the ability to express the full 
+        range of contract layering used in modern finance. Not that modern finance 
+        is directly relevant to the needs of the poor, but it is a good test of 
+        the generality of our framework. </p>
+      <p>But wait. This structure decouples knowledge in a way quite different 
+        than anything in the financial world. We have the contract host issuing 
+        rights it does not understand, since these rights are produced by games 
+        it runs, but does not understand. The contract host is not in a position 
+        to vouch for any meaningful property of the rights it is issuing, so how 
+        can widespread trust in the contract host translate into credible global 
+        transferability of derived rights? Let's walk through the example depicted 
+        in Figure 9.</p>
+      <p>Alice starts out simply as a player of the original options game, hosted 
+        by contract host #1. While Alice finds herself in the resulting valuable 
+        situation, she manages to find Fred, who would also find this position 
+        valuable. Fred, were he convinced that Alice's chair sitting rights mean 
+        what Alice says they mean, would be willing to play a game on contract 
+        host #3 in which this right, issued by contract host #1, appears as a 
+        movable piece. Unfortunately, having just met, Fred and Alice don't trust 
+        each any more than Alice and Bob do. Fortunately, Fred does have prior 
+        knowledge and trust of contract host #1. Unfortunately, contract host 
+        #1 has no idea if the right to sit in this chair of this game means what 
+        Alice claims it means, or anything else. </p>
+      <p>Fortunately, with Alice's consent, Fred can ask contract host #1 for 
+        the text of the contract/program and the current state of the board. In 
+        theory, this should be sufficient for Fred to figure out what these derived 
+        rights are. Alice, who presumably understands the game she's playing, 
+        can help Fred figure this out, and Fred can accept this help, with any 
+        trust required between Fred and Alice. Should the contract truly be idiosyncratic 
+        to local knowledge shared by Alice and Bob, knowledge to which Fred has 
+        no access, he may not find the derived rights comprehensible at reasonable 
+        cost and move on. More commonly, if the contract is understandable to 
+        some number of others, including some Fred trusts, Fred to turn to them 
+        for advice on the contracts meaning. (Unfortunately, it seems this new 
+        medium will bring about a new form of lawyer, but so it goes.) </p>
+      <p>If this tale seems implausibly complex, please keep in mind that each 
+        of the player is presumed to be participating through a software system 
+        well engineered to hide complexity where it can, and make the issues intuitive 
+        when it can't. Vastly more complex internal architectures have been made 
+        to seem simple to use.</p>
       <p>&nbsp;</p>
       <p>&nbsp;</p>
-      <p>One feature of contract hosts that is particularly important in the context 
-        of idiosyncratic local village property laws is this: embodying the contract 
-        in a smart contract is that the trust is &quot;outsourced&quot; from the 
-        specialized contract knowledge needed in traditional WTIIs: The owners 
-        of the computer that is acting as a smart contract host do not know, and 
-        do not need to know, anything about the nature of the contract. </p>
-      <p><img src="images/9-layering.gif" width="324" height="304" align="right">As 
-        a consequence, the local village's unique definition of property rights 
-        can in principle be embodied in a smart contract, which can be executed 
-        with perfect integrity on a WTII contract server on a different continent, 
-        where no one has ever even heard of the village that created this set 
-        of property rights. Even the most eccentric of contracts will be executed 
-        correctly.</p>
-      <p>This combination, which embodies local knowledge on an outsourced trust 
-        platform, could enable the villagers of the third world to leapfrog the 
-        enormous homogenization costs of integrating with a national body of law. 
-        They would leapfrog into the world of nonjurisdictional coercionless legal 
-        systems made possible by the Web. And they can make this jump at Web speeds.</p>
       <h3><a name="blockbuster"></a>Smart Contracting for the First World</h3>
       <p>Smart Contracting is not just a good idea for the third world. In technological 
         western civilization as well, smart contracts can wring new efficiencies 
@@ -563,12 +770,18 @@
         Chris Peterson, Terry Stanley, Nick Szabo, E-Dean Tribble, Bill Tulloh, 
         Ka-Ping Yee, and the members of the e-lang mailing list.</p>
       <h3><a name="refs"></a>References</h3>
+      <p><a name="WhatsHerName"></a>[<font color="#FF0000">WhatsHerName</font>] 
+        &quot;<font color="#FF0000">some title about law on the internet</font>&quot; 
+        Proceedings of <i><a href="http://panoramix.univ-paris1.fr/AHTEA/colloques.html">Austrian 
+        Perspective on the New Economy</a></i>, 2001.</p>
       <p><a name="Bartley62"></a>[Bartley62] William W. Bartley, III, <i><b>The 
         Retreat to Commitment</b> </i>Open Court Publishing, 1962.</p>
+      <p><a name="Birch"></a>[Birch] Greg Birch, personal communication.</p>
       <p><a name="deSoto89"></a>[deSoto89] Hernando de Soto, &quot;<b>The Other 
         Path</b>&quot;, Harper &amp; Row, 1989.</p>
       <p><a name="deSoto00"></a>[deSoto00] Hernando de Soto, &quot;<b>The Mystery 
         of Capital</b>&quot;, Basic Books, 2000. Chapter 1 online at <a href="http://www.ild.org.pe/tmoc/language.htm">http://www.ild.org.pe/tmoc/language.htm</a>.</p>
+      <p><a name="e-gold"></a>[e-gold] See <a href="http://www.e-gold.com/e-gold.asp?cid=101791">http://www.e-gold.com/e-gold.asp?cid=101791</a>.</p>
       <p><a name="Engelbart62"></a>[Engelbart62] Doug Engelbart &quot;<b>Augmenting 
         Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework</b>&quot;, SRI Project no. 3578, 
         October 1962.</p>
@@ -607,12 +820,14 @@
         of Financial Cryptography 2000, Springer Verlag. Online at <a href="http://www.erights.org/elib/capability/ode/index.html">http://www.erights.org/elib/capability/ode/index.html</a>.</p>
       <p><a name="Rees96"></a>[Rees96] Jonathan Rees, &quot;<b>A Security Kernel 
         Based on the Lambda-Calculus</b>&quot;, (MIT, Cambridge, MA, 1996) MIT 
-        AI Memo No. 1564. http://mumble.net/jar/pubs/ secureos/</p>
+        AI Memo No. 1564. <a href="http://mumble.net/jar/pubs/%20secureos/">http://mumble.net/jar/pubs/ 
+        secureos/</a>.</p>
+      <p><a name="Selgin01"></a>[Selgin01] George Selgin, personal communication.</p>
       <p><a name="Shapiro99"></a>[Shapiro99] Jonathan S. Shapiro, &quot;<b>EROS: 
         A Capability System</b>&quot;, Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 
         1999. Online at <a href="http://www.cis.upenn.edu/%7Eshap/EROS/thesis.ps">http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~shap/EROS/thesis.ps</a></p>
       <p><a name="Steckbeck01"></a>[Steckbeck01] Mark Steckbeck, Peter Boettke, 
-        &quot;<b>Akerlof Problems, Hayek Solutions: Local Knowledge and self-enforcement 
+        &quot;<b>Akerlof Problems, Hayek Solutions: Local knowledge and self-enforcement 
         in E-Commerce</b>&quot;, Proceedings of <i><a href="http://panoramix.univ-paris1.fr/AHTEA/colloques.html">Austrian 
         Perspective on the New Economy</a>, </i>2001.</p>
       <p><a name="Stiegler98"></a>[Stiegler98] Marc Stiegler, &quot;<b>Introduction 
@@ -623,6 +838,8 @@
       <p><a name="Tribble95"></a>[Tribble95] Eric Dean Tribble, Mark S. Miller, 
         Norm Hardy, Dave Krieger, &quot;<b>Joule: Distributed Application Foundations</b>&quot;, 
         http://www.agorics.com/joule.html, 1995.</p>
+      <p><a name="Vinge84"></a>[Vinge84] Vernor Vinge, &quot;True Names&quot;, 
+        Bluejay Books, 1984, Online at <a href="http://progoth.resnet.gatech.edu/truename/truename.htm">http://progoth.resnet.gatech.edu/truename/truename.htm</a></p>
       <p><a name="Walker"></a>[Walker] Miriam Walker, Ka-Ping Yee, &quot;<b>Interaction 
         Design for End-User Security</b>&quot;, in preparation.</p>
       <!-- #EndEditable --></TD>