Yes, even if a legal subsystem is instantiated in which parties agree to abide by "programmatic contracts," the vast majority of people will not willingly use i

Yes, even if a legal subsystem is instantiated in which parties agree to abide by "programmatic contracts," the vast majority of people will not willingly use it. When an extremely precise condition is set, some party will eventually attempt to game the system (obeying the letter, but not spirit). It is in the interests of most parties to have some contract terms be ambiguous exactly as anti-gaming hedges. Ethereum's DAO debacle is a great example. It wasn't a hacker exploiting a bug, it was the system working exactly as intended. As soon as you are in a situation where one of the parties protests that "strict compliance with the terms is not enough, common sense must apply" your situation is AI-complete.