I'm seeing more of these "anti-blockchain" criticisms circulating lately. This one makes valid points about problems with the present state of the ecosystem, but the author seems to ignore the fact that these problems are addressable.
His basic criticism of smart contracts is they can have bugs, and they can be costly since they will often involve moving money. Yes, this is a fact. Many potential solutions are out there, but how about these two ideas for starters:
- a crypto-currency where at least accounts for certain transactions can be de-anonymized, so a person can be identified and face consequences when they commit a crime like hacking.
- special transactions with settlement periods in which they can be canceled in the event of a hack, which might be identified by voter consensus.
His basic criticism of smart contracts is they can have bugs, and they can be costly since they will often involve moving money. Yes, this is a fact. Many potential solutions are out there, but how about these two ideas for starters:
- a crypto-currency where at least accounts for certain transactions can be de-anonymized, so a person can be identified and face consequences when they commit a crime like hacking.
- special transactions with settlement periods in which they can be canceled in the event of a hack, which might be identified by voter consensus.