Are Smart Contracts indeed Smart???

[bttr2d3]

I did some research regarding Smart Contracts and I can say I did not conclude to anything specific.
Do you really believe that Smart Contracts can replace a lawyer?
And has anyone actually tried to have any kind of exchange and used one Smart contract?

Thanks, everyone in advance who will answer! I would love to hear some opinions.
 

[hatshepsut93]

Smart contracts are just small computer programs, and computers programs tend to have bugs or generally be limited. Smart contracts might be useful in cases that allow truly decentralized automation, but I've seen cases when smart contracts require trust or third parties, which is the opposite of what is promised.

Smart contracts will never replace lawyers, and they will never replace traditional contracts. It's better to think about them as a decentralized proxy between service providers and customers.

[DooMAD]

Do you really believe that Smart Contracts can replace a lawyer?

It's a little more nuanced than that.  Blockchains and smart contracts have potential to disrupt the Notary business in particular, but that's generally just a small portion of the "lawyer" repertoire.  There are many functions which lawyers perform that are less simple to reproduce in code.  

Try landing yourself in court and see how far a smart contract gets you in terms of legal representation, for one fairly obvious example.  

[Maestro75]

Is man even smart? I do not think so. Otherwise the Ethereum guy Buteri would not have said he regretted using that word 'smart contract' when he developed ETH.

[jerrison]

what more can be said of an automated system  that functions independently at the initiation of some transactions and responds equally to the programmed description as stated by the developer and meeting all the requirements of the developer as at its stipulated time. it is obviously a smart contract act that has triggered the name as a smart contract

[crwth]

Basically, you are asking how smart a smart contract is? I'm sure that it's for transferring one value to another and definitely, it does its job, especially in Ethereum, giving the ability for developers make their own contracts and also helps them do it. It's used for agreements between clients or users and can also provide service to other contracts.

If a smart contract studies the law, it could be. Having a lawyer and comparing it to smart contracts is not smart.

[elda34b]

I never thought for once that smart contracts were made to replace lawyer. It's just a way to enforce rules that two or several parties agreed, and cooler stuff like making your own asset on the blockchain (token). There is no way smart contract can replace lawyer, it doesn't help you defend your case, it won't help you find evidence if you're alleged for a crime nor it gives you suggestions on how to act in court.

[bones261]

I never thought for once that smart contracts were made to replace lawyer. It's just a way to enforce rules that two or several parties agreed, and cooler stuff like making your own asset on the blockchain (token). There is no way smart contract can replace lawyer, it doesn't help you defend your case, it won't help you find evidence if you're alleged for a crime nor it gives you suggestions on how to act in court.

Furthermore, a smart contract won't advise you if the smart contract is a good contract to get into in the 1st place. I certainly wish the DAO had that feature before I wasted a smidgen of my precious BTC on that shitstorm. 

[DigitalCyberius]

Technically no, as they only perform what they're coded to do and have no brains in of themselves. But also technically yes, because it is pretty smart to be able to automate contracts

That said, on the legal aspects of things I'm not sure at the moment. It would seem (if you want to make sure of things) that both parties would want a simplified explanation of what the code will do, and maybe sign that as legal, and then record what the smart contract does.

Have a great day,
Cyberius

[Abal Abal]

I judge that smart contracts are really smart, because when we use them the case of multiple transactions never happened, that's my judgment. besides that we can store every thing in it very safely.

[MrPeriklis]

Not at all lol. In Ethereum 2.0 we'll be seeing some changes. Currently, they're too tough to write in and are not as effective as we think.

[Yeahpro]

Smart contracts are indeed smart, as it can execute a command which is is programmed to do once predetermined conditions are met.
It can not replace lawyers, nor was it meant to. Its simply an automated system which executes commands.

And was the addition which expanded tge block chain technology. And it can alao be developers in the future to be useful in different situations.

[funchiestz]

This has nothing to do with Bitcoin. Smart contracts are not installed on Bitcoin.

I think you can write, so I can say in the wrong section. Altcoin discussion can be a more convenient place.


I also think you are not using any smart contract. Smart contracts, a mutually functional algorithm product. And very successful. It would be perfect if a few problems were solved for Ethereum.

[DooMAD]

This has nothing to do with Bitcoin. Smart contracts are not installed on Bitcoin.

I think you can write, so I can say in the wrong section. Altcoin discussion can be a more convenient place.

Not everything has to be built into the base protocol to be utilised by Bitcoin.  Things like smart contracts can be built on top.  

Also, arguably, Hashed TimeLock Contracts, or HTLC, are a basic form of Smart Contract and are currently implemented in Bitcoin, so the subject may well be considered on-topic for this board.

[hxtop]

Smart contract instead of a lawyer, this is final aim of the progress but there is a long way to go and we don't where exactly end of this way. As traditional contracts, smart contracts may be needed to legal adviser like an attorney. For a small amount of money and undetailed agreements, to use smart contracts let us save money and time and we must consider them in that frame of business.

[kryptqnick]

I did some research regarding Smart Contracts and I can say I did not conclude to anything specific.
Do you really believe that Smart Contracts can replace a lawyer?
And has anyone actually tried to have any kind of exchange and used one Smart contract?

The idea of smart contracts seems interesting, but the current implementations are far from perfect. Surely, a contract cannot replace a lawyer, because when there are grounds for disputes, we need someone or something that is able to process arguments and context. However, they can replace escrows. I used a smart contract only once on some sport betting website. It was harder than I expected. I had to use Metamask, transfer my money first to a 'wallet' there and then to the casino.. I won, but I didn't see my funds in the Metamask or MEW wallet after that. Other members also reported that issue, but the casino provided a link that was proving that the payments were sent out automatically by the contract.. The bet was worth a couple of dollars, so I didn't bother looking into details and determinng why I couldn't get the money, but the whole thing was complicated and not worth it. If someone manages to make smart contracts really user-friendly, they will become more popular. For now good old trust system with humans seems more convenient.

[LeGaulois]

Artificial intelligence will have more power than smart contracts for a job as a lawyer. But for insurance, it would make sense. Imagine you have home insurance and your house burned in a fire, you would declare your claim and the smart contract would automatically trigger compensation.

I like to simplify smart contract with:
If <event> then <action>

I don't see any use of
If <I'm at the police station> then <call the lawyer> or
If <I'm jailed> then <appeal>

People want to "blockchainize" everything while there is no use in their industry. The same with smart contracts.

[tyz]

No, they are not actually smart.  The name is misleading. "Smart Contracts" are basically a hard-coded rule engine.
"Smart" would mean for me if they made independent decisions that are not predetermined.

[H1N1]

I did some research regarding Smart Contracts and I can say I did not conclude to anything specific.
Do you really believe that Smart Contracts can replace a lawyer?
And has anyone actually tried to have any kind of exchange and used one Smart contract?

Thanks, everyone in advance who will answer! I would love to hear some opinions.
 

I think smart contract doesn't mean it is smart enough to become your lawyer.
Same as your smartphone, it cannot become something like lawyer just because it is smart.
Smart means they can compute or automate anything with their knowledge base in their system.

[bolbau]

smart contract is intelligence that remains limited, that is limited to the use and function of the code they run. whereas if you say that a smart contract can replace a lawyer, in this context it is a human, it will not be possible, ideas and inovation will never die, while the smart contract will continue to be limited to the beginning of its creation, except human beings themselves strive to develop further.