3 ms·
The smart contracts you are seeing now are relatively simple programs and are woefully insufficient for nation-state level use. Imagine a future with multiple
by deweller 5y ago
The smart contracts you are seeing now are relatively simple programs and are woefully insufficient for nation-state level use.
Imagine a future with multiple levels of smart contracts that allow for court intervention and arbitration. It starts to resemble the checks and balances we have in place now, but the rules are public and codified.
- CJefferson 5y agoBut, if there is a "court intervention" clause that just lets you say "Transfer X money from Y to Z", then why bother with full blockchain/crypto? You have effectively central control.
- deweller 5y agoI agree that would be a useless smart contract. If that is your intention, then don't use a smart contract. If, however, there are a limited number of known possible outcomes, then smart contracts offer advantages over court-based settlements.
- CJefferson 5y agoCan you give a concrete example? I can't think of anything where you wouldn't need a fallback "human takes control".
- notamy 5y ago> but the rules are public and codified. You mean like, say, the current system of laws we have? (: Sure, laws are strange and arcane and require expertise to translate them into understandable terms, but any form of code has the exact same problem.
- deweller 5y agoNo. Better than the current system of laws we have. Currently, the current system requires lengthy court intervention with interpretation done after the fact. Smart contracts can allow for a fixed number of resolutions with a timeframe defined up front. Smart contracts won't work for everything, but they might be a better fit for some things.