Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> The only thing that is rock solid and predictable is contract written in programming code.

The only code that's 'rock solid and predictable' is code that's been formally proven. Are smart contracts doing that?

Further, as described above, even if they were perfectly written every time, they'd still be a poor replacement for human law. We are squishy, imperfect and inconstant, we have legal protections and legal wiggle-room for a lot of reasons.




Formally proven code is not necessarily bug-free or even ' rock solid and predictable'.


Some smart contracts (and underlying VM) are formally proven. My former employer invests heavily in that direction.

And it is very easy to verify "1+1=2" or "amount + amount X 0.12 X number_of_months".

But my point is that meat contracts are very expensive to draft and enforce. It is not worth to sue someone in China over $50.


That suing over legitimate claims is not worth it is an artifact of the legal system, not of the law or contract.


That suing over (tiny) legitimate claims is not worth it is a feature of the legal system, not a bug.


Only because the whole process is a lot of hassle and work for everyone involved, so it can be used with a primary purpose of chicanery rather than actually getting your legitimate claim.

If a lawsuit could be resolved quickly and fairly with little effort on both sides, I'm sure the limit for when it would be worth it would drop. I'd consider that a feature, not a bug.


Are you sure? It seems to me like this disproportionately affects poor people.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: