> That is untenable, as people will always override software, whether that's through a courtroom, a government/regulatory body, or a fork based on majority cons

> That is untenable, as people will always override software, whether that's through a courtroom, a government/regulatory body, or a fork based on majority consensus. I would say every single non-naive person in this space realises this, so it's not true that blockchain proponents "desire a technical fix to social problems" in that sense. What smart contracts for eg could be good for is to leverage social consensus much more highly, rather than replace it (since like you said replacement is impossible)