4 ms·
But how does that change anything? I don’t like the output of the smart contract, so I sue accuweather, the smart contract owner, and anyone else involved in th
by ipython 5y ago
But how does that change anything? I don’t like the output of the smart contract, so I sue accuweather, the smart contract owner, and anyone else involved in the transaction. Some “two bit” judge then adjudicates the dispute after all. What if the judge rules that accuweather’s record is incorrect?
All I see is that now I have yet another party to trust: whomever wrote the smart contract. Why should I trust him/her? How do I know that there isn’t an intentional logic issue or unintentional bug that will end up with me losing my money? What’s my recourse then?
- dcolkitt 5y agoThe judge has no say. The smart contract is collateralized ahead of time. Both parties lock sufficient value in the contract to make sure that the payment can be made good. After the value is locked in the contract, there's nothing any fiat judge on Earth can do to reverse the smart contract, short of shutting down the entire blockchain. I agree that you have to trust the software underlying the contract. But it's highly likely that you'll use an open standard that's battle tested across time. Typically it's much easier to develop trust in software than it is institutions. Every day you trust your life, privacy and money to open software standards across a wide variety of contexts.
- ipython 5y agoWhat software do I trust my life and money to which does not give me legal recourse if I encounter an issue?