So what's the deal with smart contracts?

[JollyTrades]

Everyone talks about what can be done with Ethereum et al and the power of decentralized application technology. What I insist not understanding is what makes those applications superior to their centralized counterparts.

I don't claim that Dapps are not important. I just want to learn what's deal with them.

Post Script

Let me clarify my point by giving an answer of the kind I'm looking for.

What will be the exclusive real use cases of the Waves platform?

Fee-free, transparent and secure equity crowdfunding projects, international money transfers and payments in fiat currencies, and a secondary security market.

I am looking for such an answer for Slock.it, or for smart contracts in general.

[Sukovsky]

Nobody really knows. But enjoy the PnD.

[rigel]

Everyone talks about what can be done with Ethereum et al and the power of decentralized application technology. What I insist not understanding is what makes those applications superior to their centralized counterparts.

I don't claim that Dapps are not important. I just want to learn what's deal with them.

Transparency

I can make my centralized app do obscure things, I can modify it at any time without telling you.

Dapps don't need trust instead.

[JollyTrades]

Everyone talks about what can be done with Ethereum et al and the power of decentralized application technology. What I insist not understanding is what makes those applications superior to their centralized counterparts.

I don't claim that Dapps are not important. I just want to learn what's deal with them.

Transparency

I can make my centralized app do obscure things, I can modify it at any time without telling you.

Dapps don't need trust instead.

Thank you! So this could be useful for gambling. A roulette contract may work autonomously without a centralized institution. We may even omit the zero from such a roulette. And what else? I am looking for real-world use cases.

Edit: Cannot open-sourced applications be used to provide the same transparency?

[plorph]

Strength and independence!!!! Your "programs" (contracts) are very unlikely to stop running for any reason other than programmatically intended. Independent in the sense that it is very difficult for ANY group or individual to tamper with the running program. This is like... rise of the machines.

[JollyTrades]

Strength and independence!!!! Your "programs" (contracts) are very unlikely to stop running for any reason other than programmatically intended. Independent in the sense that it is very difficult for ANY group or individual to tamper with the running program. This is like... rise of the machines.

Yes, that is the part everyone knows, but in what real way will this power be utilized?

[Minecache]

Everyone talks about what can be done with Ethereum et al and the power of decentralized application technology. What I insist not understanding is what makes those applications superior to their centralized counterparts.

I don't claim that Dapps are not important. I just want to learn what's deal with them.

Cutting out the middleman. Each contract autonomous. Saving money.

[Minecache]

Strength and independence!!!! Your "programs" (contracts) are very unlikely to stop running for any reason other than programmatically intended. Independent in the sense that it is very difficult for ANY group or individual to tamper with the running program. This is like... rise of the machines.

Yes, that is the part everyone knows, but in what real way will this power be utilized?

No one knows the full power of Dapp's and Dao's as yet. Just like when the Internet first arrived. No one could predict how it would evolve. It took developers to build on the HTML protocol. Just as today developers need to build on the Ethereum blockchain.

[r0ach]

Ethereum is useless and just a pump and dump to scam people.  It doesn't matter what you can do inside of the VM when the system that supports it is not valid:

The Ethereum Paradox

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1361602.0

[Ayers]

i think they are just a new trends, it will fade away when a newer trend will come out, all those coin are there to scam people, some do it in a legal way other in a not-legat way

[JollyTrades]

Your opinions are at extremes, friends. Even if Ethereum may have a limited use, it does by no means mean that it's a pure pump&dump scam. You should know that it's a novel and great thing to achieve at least from a geek's perspective.

On the other hand, the other extreme is to claim that Ethereum will be Web 3.0, or will have as widespread use and functionality as the Internet.

All we need is to think through some real-world use cases. There is a potential in smart contracts; this is the sure part. How this potential can be actualized; this is the question.

[r0ach]

Your opinions are at extremes, friends. Even if Ethereum may have a limited use, it does by no means mean that it's a pure pump&dump scam. You should know that it's a novel and great thing to achieve at least from a geek's perspective.

On the other hand, the other extreme is to claim that Ethereum will be Web 3.0, or will have as widespread use and functionality as the Internet.

All we need is to think through some real-world use cases. There is a potential in smart contracts; this is the sure part. How this potential can be actualized; this is the question.

Sorry, but no, this is not an "extreme".  Closed entropy systems do not even fall under the category of decentralized currencies in the first place.  All recursive systems are permissioned ledgers.  This means the most Eth could possibly hope to be is a shareholder owned company.  It's like someone going public with a stock from their basement without even having a viable product.  Unless they're somehow grandfathered in, the legal system will probably throw all these people in jail once the law catches up to this sector.

Having said that, even if you don't care about the law at all, Eth cannot scale, and scaling is far more important for Eth than for BTC.  Even if you wanted just a shareholder owned company and not a decentralized currency, it is not a valid product because it would struggle to handle the load of financial services for just one large company, let alone integrate many together.  It is 100% a scam.

Even Gmaxwell finally came out of the closet calling it a scam:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1427885.msg14601127#msg14601127

When I said IOTA is a permissioned ledger extortion scheme, I was not kidding about that either.  I'm one of the few people on this forum that doesn't just flat out lie about everything:

Add another refutation concerning the validity of IOTA to the thread:

<bsm117532> r0ach: I wouldn't worry about permissioning, Iota doesn't have any kind of consensus or UTXO set...it's entirely unworkable.

http://bob.mcelrath.org/

[JollyTrades]

r0ach,

Thank you. I think your analysis is valuable, though I'm still not convinced. I need to think about it more. May I ask if you think the same way as for other Blockchain 2.0 initiatives?

Meanwhile I am still in search of good answers as regards what the possible use cases might be for smart contracts, which will prove to be superior to the equivalent centralized applications. Gambling is one of them. But if that is all, it doesn't make smart contracts very revolutionary.

And one more thing. Even if Ethereum et al will not be useful, calling them scam is still an extreme view. In order for them to be scam projects, the developer team should know about the consequences and disguise the hidden worthlessness of their product under embellished promises. As for Ethereum, all they say is that the platform will allow decentralized applications, and this is a fairly good description of what they have already delivered.

[Cyaren]

Ethereum smart contracts AFAIK are used increasingly for not so legal purposes such as the idea of a "legit ponzi". As you mentioned, gambling could also be a good use of it. But the coin that it's based on, that is, a shitcoin, makes it completely not worthwhile to use this system.

[JollyTrades]

Cyaren,

What do you mean the coin which the system is based on makes the system worthless?

[Cyaren]

Cyaren,

What do you mean the coin which the system is based on makes the system worthless?

Ethereum. As many people suggest, I believe too that Ether is too much of a pump & dump scheme for it to work.

Just my opinion.

[JollyTrades]

Cyaren,

What do you mean the coin which the system is based on makes the system worthless?

Ethereum. As many people suggest, I believe too that Ether is too much of a pump & dump scheme for it to work.

Just my opinion.

I don't see any reason why ETH price should be pumped for the Ethereum platform to work. I am not interested in the price of ETH, but in the usability of the platform.

[Come-from-Beyond]

When I said IOTA is a permissioned ledger extortion scheme...

...you still refused to put your money where your mouth is, revealing your real motives.

[r0ach]

May I ask if you think the same way as for other Blockchain 2.0 initiatives?

That's used car salesman marketing speak.  The phrase means literally nothing.  Nobody in altcoins has improved on Bitcoin in any way except maybe anonymity purposes such as ring signatures and zk-snarks (monero and zcash).  I once thought some proof of stake systems like DPoS might have promise, but once you figure out the complete picture in how these systems works, you can walk away with no other conclusion than them being a step BACKWARDS compared to plain Bitcoin.

Although I would not recommend buying any altcoin such as Monero or Zcash until a few months after BTC halving or you will likely get financially raped.  The drawbacks of Zcash also kinda outweigh the pros of increased anonymity set over Monero to me.

[JollyTrades]

May I ask if you think the same way as for other Blockchain 2.0 initiatives?

That's used car salesman marketing speak.  The phrase means literally nothing.  Nobody in altcoins has improved on Bitcoin in any way except maybe anonymity purposes such as ring signatures and zk-snarks (monero and zcash).  I once thought some proof of stake systems like DPoS might have promise, but once you figure out the complete picture in how these systems works, you can walk away with no other conclusion than them being a step BACKWARDS compared to plain Bitcoin.

Although I would not recommend buying any altcoin such as Monero or Zcash until a few months after BTC halving or you will likely get financially raped.  The drawbacks of Zcash also kinda outweigh the pros of increased anonymity set over Monero to me.

Maybe the task is not to improve bitcoin, but to build something different based on the same technology on which bitcoin depends. This is why it is called Blockchain 2.0, and not Bitcoin 2.0. What is improved is not Bitcoin, but the blockchain technology. This is also why your post is not an answer to my question. "Nobody in altcoins has improved on Bitcoin in any way," you say. Should they? Does Localbitcoins.com improve bitcoin? Does Bitfinex improve bitcoin, or let me ask: Does Bitfinex improve Localbitcoins.com?