Several Aspects in the Legal Regulation of Ethereum as the „smart Contracts”
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article reviews the essence of blockchain – the technology of new generation, raised from the computer and internet development. The article also analyses several aspects in legal regulation of one of the most famous cryptocurrencies: Ethereum by using the blockchain technology. Except for that, the article describes steps of computer and internet development and the involvement of blockchain in these steps, as a revolutionary invention. The article analyses the essence of blockchain technology, the steps of its development and also, coming from its high confidentiality, the possibilities of its legal regulation by the states. In this regard, several countries are represented as an example (Great Britain, Vietnam, Canada). Except for blockchain, the article reviews essence and specification of Ethereum, as the cryptocurrency, as well as smart contract, analyses the area of smart contract development and the indispensability of its legal regulation, because they have an ability to detach simple consumer agreements in one of the directions of digital economy – electronic commerce, in the nearest future. In addition to this, the binary nature Ethereum is also analyzed, in particular it can be a method of payment, as well as have a form of a legally binding deal – contract with the high self-fulfillment mechanism and securing parties confidentiality standards.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it