"The point of smart contracts is to have code you can actually trust."

That’s very naive thing to expect from code.

Indeed, very shortly after live smart contracts were introduced, someone exploited a bug to steal a pile of pseudo-money, and the humans in charge decided to fork the blockchain to undo it. So the whole idea of “autonomous” smart contracts was revealed as the nonsense it always was. (Actually IIRC only some of the humans agreed to do that, so the chain was duplicated, and what does that even mean from a currency perspective?)

▲

EGreg 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Indeed, very shortly since digital computers were invented, there was corruption. For years, until the voltage could be controlled better and until IEEE standardized things.

Indeed, very shortly since modems were invented, there was need for error correction. They were slow and clunky. The only reasonable conclusion is that the Internet is a fad and not worth discussing. Same as this newfangled decentralized cryptography stuff.

Indeed, very shortly after the Web came out, regular script kiddies could write php websites with blink tags. Credit card numbers were sent in the clear with http. This “e-commerce” thing was a dangerous joke, only idiots would send their credit cards over the Internet. It would never catch on!

	▲	wrs 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		None of those invalidated the entire premise of the underlying technology, though. (That being: you can’t trust people, but you can trust code.)