I believe too much is being made of this clause and an attackers ability to rely on it (see further here). Just because The DAO creators purport to rule out human intent (and leave all who signed up as slaves to the code), doesn't mean a court would take the same view.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
In most parts of the world, a court would also rule a simple send to a wrong address as unintentional...
And that's exactly what I don't like. We had a chance to get away from courts (or other groups) overruling clear agreements. Giving that power up now will open doors for later.
I'm not sure we can get away from courts, unless arbitration is built into these agreements/ Smart Contracts. Even then, courts are usually a weapon of last resort should one side still feel aggrieved after arbitration. The "rule of law" is a key tenant in most countries.
If we live in a nation states, that power is already ceded whether we like it or not (or even attempt to contract out of it).