> the contract writer could be adversarial Fair enough, if you consider that to be counterparty risk. I prefer to think of that as an entirely separate kind o

> the contract writer could be adversarial Fair enough, if you consider that to be counterparty risk. I prefer to think of that as an entirely separate kind of risk ('software risk'). This is partly because these contracts can be written by entirely separate parties having nothing to do with the counterparty (and sometimes provided as public infrastructure, since they don't cost the writer anything beyond the initial deployment cost). I suppose to some extent it depends whether you consider the smart contract itself as a virtual counterparty that could default either through malicious coding or through bugs that allow hackers to steal assets. I also don't see any problem with combining smart contracts and real legal contracts. If someone scams you in the DeFi world, they're scamming you in the real world too. I know that at least the UK Supreme Court has ruled that digital assets are property at common law.