> Decentralized financial instruments that are implemented via Smart Contracts on a Blockchain.
I know its _now_ fashionable to dunk on crypto, but I really wish the whole "smart contracts" thing would be seen for what it is; neither smart nor a contract.
Contracts only work because there is a higher power to appeal to when something goes wrong. (the law courts) That means that when someone does something wrong, the other side can attempt to get justice.
If a smart contract is wrong, you're fucked. Not only do you have to speak lawyer, you also have to understand obfuscated code. Which means getting it right is expensive as the combined skills are exceptionally rare.
I get the aspiration, but its at best misguided.
The common refrain is that actual contracts are not scaleable, and can't be done in real time. This isn't true. HFTs are basically creating millions of contracts a day. When you buy something from amazon, thats a contract. When you use your credit card, thats a contract as well.
Law needs to be reformed, dont get me wrong, but the blockchain aint the thing to do it.
I agree completely, all of these are just tools that are used to interact with each-other. What we do with those tools is the important part, I do see these advanced cryptography methods having a place in society, but the way people ~Most~ people are using them right now is not exciting and very predictable -> pyramid schemes
This seems to get downvoted a lot, and I don't know why. Regardless of whether you think this is a good/useful idea, it's certainly leveraging technology (and scientific knowledge) that has only become available recently.
It's "cutting edge" in the sense that people are just now getting around to implementing most of the traditional centralized financial systems back again onto popular blockchain technologies.
It's worth calling out specifically because it will not likely last very long in its current state; large, intuitional actors will either jump on it, or it will die an unceremonious death, gobbling up billions of dollars in its wake.
KaiserPro|4 years ago
I know its _now_ fashionable to dunk on crypto, but I really wish the whole "smart contracts" thing would be seen for what it is; neither smart nor a contract.
Contracts only work because there is a higher power to appeal to when something goes wrong. (the law courts) That means that when someone does something wrong, the other side can attempt to get justice.
If a smart contract is wrong, you're fucked. Not only do you have to speak lawyer, you also have to understand obfuscated code. Which means getting it right is expensive as the combined skills are exceptionally rare.
I get the aspiration, but its at best misguided.
The common refrain is that actual contracts are not scaleable, and can't be done in real time. This isn't true. HFTs are basically creating millions of contracts a day. When you buy something from amazon, thats a contract. When you use your credit card, thats a contract as well.
Law needs to be reformed, dont get me wrong, but the blockchain aint the thing to do it.
zapataband1|4 years ago
Bromeo|4 years ago
unknown|4 years ago
[deleted]
dmitriid|4 years ago
TameAntelope|4 years ago
It's worth calling out specifically because it will not likely last very long in its current state; large, intuitional actors will either jump on it, or it will die an unceremonious death, gobbling up billions of dollars in its wake.