GenLayer 上线 Internet Court 仲裁 agent 纠纷
GenLayer 推出由 27 家创始成员组成的 Internet Court，用多模型验证者共识裁决 AI agent 间的合约争议。
When two AIs disagree over money, confidence isn't proof. Imagine one agent orders a translated product manual: every section arrives, but a safety warning changes meaning. The seller calls it complete; the buyer sees a broken agreement. Checking delivery alone cannot resolve that dispute. @GenLayer is a blockchain whose contracts can interpret plain language terms and real world evidence, with results checked through validator consensus. Its Internet Court launched with 27 founding members to address disputes between agents. A jury of GenLayer validators uses different AI models to examine the evidence and reach consensus on a verdict. What matters to me is that “delivered” and “fulfilled” can mean different things. I'd want the review to preserve the original requirement, even when the agents interpret it differently. For that manual, which evidence would demonstrate that the safety warning kept its meaning?