On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Jul 2015, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > In interpreting the functioning of assets, assets should generally
> > be assumed to be indivisible physical objects in the possession of
> > their owners, and that transfers between owners are "in person".
>
> Given that the common sense meaning of "physical object" is almost the
> complete opposite of "legal fiction", and given that Agoran assets would
> certainly be the latter, i don't like this phrasing.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.
Well, it's a legal fiction that it's a physical object, instead of (say)
an abstract value on a real-number line.
